Richard Dawkins Has Small Stroke

Richard Dawkins stroke forces delay of Australia and New Zealand tour:

Management for the 74-year-old author of The God Delusion said he had suffered a “minor stroke” in the UK last Saturday but had already returned home from hospital.

The health scare has caused him to postpone his tour, his management said in a message passed on to ticket holders on Friday.

“On Saturday night Richard suffered a minor stroke, however he is expected in time to make a full or near full recovery,” the statement said. “He is already at home recuperating.

I'm not praying for him.

Richard Dawkins And The Supersitions Of Feminism

Atheist Civil War: Angry Feminists Get Richard Dawkins Disinvited from Skeptics’ Conference:

If Dawkins were to focus his finely-tuned intellect on the superstitions of feminism and progressivism, as he has done in the past, he may find he has more allies in the cultural libertarian movement than the increasingly dogmatic regressive left.

What are the "superstitions of feminism"?

Superstition:

Superstition is the belief in supernatural causality—that one event causes another without any natural process linking the two events—such as astrology and certain aspects linked to religion, like omens, witchcraft and prophecies, that contradict natural science.

The word superstition is generally used to refer to the religion not practiced by the majority of a given society – such as Christianity in Western culture – regardless of whether the prevailing religion contains superstitions. It is also commonly applied to beliefs and practices surrounding luck, prophecy, and certain spiritual beings, particularly the belief that future events can be foretold by specific (apparently) unrelated prior events.

Perhaps the author really meant to ask "What are the falsehoods of feminism?"

Falsehood:

Falsity (from Latin falsitas) or falsehood is a perversion of truth originating in the deceitfulness of one party, and culminating in the damage of another party. Falsity is also a measure of the quality or extent of the falseness of something, while a falsehood may also mean simply an incorrect (false) statement, independent of any intention to deceive.

On second thought, I think the author meant what he wrote and is guilty of falsity, and is simply trying to equate feminists with witches.

CFI And Dawkins Are Merging

Atheists Form Super Group, Name Woman To Top Leadership Role:

It’s like a royal wedding in the small world of atheist organizations: The Center for Inquiry and the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science are merging to form the largest reason-based organization in the U.S.

The new organization will retain the Center for Inquiry name, while giving a seat on its board to Richard Dawkins, the British evolutionary biologist who is a superstar in the atheist community for his best-selling books on atheism and science and his outspoken talks against religion.

As part of the merger, Ron Lindsay, a lawyer who has headed CFI since 2008 — and shepherded the Amherst, N.Y.-based organization through a difficult and controversial transition from its founder, humanist philosopher Paul Kurtz — will step down. Taking his spot will be Robyn Blumner, the Dawkins Foundation’s executive director for the past two years.

Professional Idiots At Breitbart.com

Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity ‘Bulwark Against Something Worse’:

In a text that is coursing about on social media, professional God-slayer Richard Dawkins begrudgingly admitted that Christianity may actually be our best defense against aberrant forms of religion that threaten the world.

“There are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings,” Dawkins said. “I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death.”

In a rare moment of candor, Dawkins reluctantly accepted that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not lead to a world of terror, whereas followers of radical Islam perpetrate the very atrocities that he laments.

There are three irksome phrases that jump out at me and piss me off. Can you spot them?

Apologies

In the 17th century the Catholic Church didn’t much like Galileo Galilei. It took until 1992 for the Catholic Church to acknowledge that the Earth was not stationary and express regret for how the Galileo affair was handled.

Charles Darwin died in 1882. Creationists still hate him today. Thanks to The Rev. Malcolm Brown perhaps there is some hope that more will see the light of truth and science.

From Cleric: Church owes Darwin an apology:

The Church of England owes Charles Darwin an apology for its hostile 19th-century reaction to the naturalist's theory of evolution, a cleric wrote on an Anglican Web site launched Monday.

The Rev. Malcolm Brown, who heads the church's public affairs department, issued the statement to mark Darwin's bicentenary and the 150th anniversary of the seminal work "On the Origin of Species," both of which fall next year.

Brown said the Church of England should say it is sorry for misunderstanding him at the time he released his findings and, "by getting our first reaction wrong, encouraging others to misunderstand (Darwin) still."

The Church of England said Brown's statement reflected its position on Darwin but did not constitute an official apology.

The church's stance sets it apart from fundamentalist Christians, who believe evolutionary theory is incompatible with the biblical story of the Earth's creation.

Read the rest here.

It is 2008. Nearly all religious people seem to hate Richard Dawkins. Perhaps one day in the future, apologies will appear in the news from all the major religious leaders saying that Dawkins was right all along, and maybe they had gotten that God thing wrong.

Richard Dawkins On Abraham And Isaac

From the book The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins:

God ordered Abraham to make a burnt offering of his longed-for son. Abraham built an altar, put firewood upon it, and trussed Isaac up on top of the wood. His murdering knife was already in his hand when an angel dramatically intervened with the news of a last-minute change of plan: God was only joking after all, ‘tempting’ Abraham, and testing his faith. A modern moralist cannot help but wonder how a child could ever recover from such psychological trauma. By the standards of modern morality, this disgraceful story is an example simultaneously of child abuse, bullying in two asymmetrical power relationships, and the first recorded use of the Nuremberg defence: ‘I was only obeying orders.’ Yet the legend is one of the great foundational myths of all three monotheistic religions.

Even though God stopped him from murder, isn’t Abraham more than a little like this guy?

Fundamentalists Irritate Me Too

From a comment written by Teresa Nielsen Hayden:

Fundamentalists irritate me. They believe in an all-powerful deity who can do anything -- except, apparently, employ the properties and mechanisms of the natural universe. Not one of them has the sense to say, "God made Richard Dawkins, and we have to trust that He had His reasons."

Too bad the Dawkins video is no longer available.

The Best They've Got

Once upon a time some atheists wrote some books. Some religious people don’t like these books. So some of them wrote some books too. They also wrote articles, columns, and blog posts, too.

All the responses to the books that the hallowed atheists have written that I have read have one thing in common. Lies. They are full of lies and misrepresentations.

Norris Burkes has written something called Turn a deaf ear to whispers of hatred. Even the title is despicable. I’ll come back to why this is so a little later.

Norris Burkes is a civilian hospital chaplain and an Air Force Guard chaplain. He of all people should not be lying to other people. But he does.

Here is lie number one:

But more often than not, people ignore the whisper of hate, which is where we get our word “ignore-ance.”

I have googled the etymology of the word ignorance. Nothing I found says what Burkes claims. If someone finds something which proves what he has written is true, please let me know, and I will correct this.

Burkes then goes on and claims that the big three of book-writing atheists are “infectious carriers” of hatred.

In the world of religion, I’ve yet to see more infectious carriers than I’ve seen in the likes of Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. These evangelical atheists would have you believe that all our problems stem from all forms of religious faith.

In his Dec. 3, 2006, New York Times op-ed piece, columnist Nicholas Kristof pleads for a “Truce on Religion.”

Criticizing what he calls “an increasingly assertive, often obnoxious atheist offensive,” Kristof identifies Dawkins, author of “The God Delusion,” as leading the “Charge of the Atheist Brigade.”

“It’s a militant, in-your-face brand of atheism,” Kristof writes. “Such discrimination on the basis of (non) belief is insidious and intolerant, and undermines our ability to have far-reaching discussions about faith and politics.”

Now, let’s go back and look at the title that Burkes chose. Turn a deaf ear to whispers of hatred. What kind of discussion can you have about faith and politics when one side refuses to even listen to the other?

“These evangelical atheists would have you believe that all our problems stem from all forms of religious faith.” This is an outright lie. Hitchens, Harris and Dawkins claim that some of our problems come from religious faith, not all of them.

I can’t speak for all atheists, but I can speak for myself. This atheist is “on the offensive” because I’m tired of being lied to by hypocrites. The hypocrites who aren’t supposed to lie. The hypocrites who resort to calling other people names when they lie. Let’s be clear about something here. Religion is by its definition and practice “insidious and intolerant.” I would not describe atheists as insidious, but we can be intolerant of religion and religious people. So what? Each side can be intolerant of the other. It goes with the territory. Get used to it.

Burkes quotes Nicholas Kristof:

“Every time I travel in the poorest parts of Africa, I see missionary hospitals ... churches (that) galvanize their members to support soup kitchens, homeless shelters and clinics that otherwise would not exist. Religious constituencies have pushed for more action on AIDS, malaria, sex trafficking and Darfur’s genocide, and believers often give large proportions of their incomes to charities that are a lifeline to the neediest.”

As far as I know, no atheist is denying the good things that religious people have done. We just don’t think that doing good and charitable work requires a belief in a god. Simple as that. So the Kristof quote is totally irrelevant to the point that Burkes is trying to make. Which I see as another lie from Burkes.

Here is more from Burkes:

Kristof concludes, “We’ve suffered enough from religious intolerance that the last thing the world needs is irreligious intolerance.”

Amen, Kristof. We can’t allow intolerance of either kind. We must allow room for the conversation.

This is a typically arrogant viewpoint that atheists must deal with when faced with those of faith. Absolutely no empathy with the other side. How rude can you be? The thought of showing tolerance toward the atheist never, ever enters their small, closed minds. “We must allow room for the conversation.” Again, I remind you of the title: Turn a deaf ear to whispers of hatred. The only conversation that Burkes will tolerate is a one-sided one. He gets to talk. Don’t ever listen to those goddamned atheists.

Burkes does at least have some awareness:

Fortunately, I have friends and readers who are the kind of atheists who put the human in “humanist.” When I ask them what they want from the faithful, they tell me two things. First, they are tired of people making the assumption that an atheist can’t possibly be a moral, upstanding, civic-minded person and not believe in God.

It is a myth that atheists have no morals. It is a good thing that Burkes is aware of this.

Burkes closes with something else I agree with. A call to end all the hate. Perhaps Mr. Burkes could start with himself. First, he could stop hating atheists. Second, he could encourage others to stop hating atheists. Try to love your enemies. Love for Hitchens! Love for Harris! Love for Dawkins!

Yes, let’s try to end all the hate. However, before we can do that, we need to end all the lies.

I doubt that people like Burkes will do that. Lies are the best they’ve got.

Do You Believe In The Talking Snake?

Bill Maher interviews Richard Dawkins:

Whoopee! My First Negative Comment

First off, let me say that I take my blog seriously, and put a lot of effort into it. I’m very new to this blogging thing and I haven’t received many comments from readers so far. However, today Jed Rothwell sent me my very first negative comment. So I thought I would honor Mr. Rothwell with this post.

I’m probably opening up a can of worms, Pandora’s Box, and even more when I say that I want my blog to be open to all opinions from all people. I don’t believe in censorship, but I hate trolls. Therefore, if you choose to comment, I only ask that you back your opinions with facts and logic. I would also hope for some courtesy and civility.

That said, here is the comment from Mr. Rothwell:

Cold fusion was not a flop. The cold fusion effect was replicated by hundreds of world class laboratories such as Los Alamos, and these replications were published in mainstream, peer-reviewed journals. I suggest you review the literature before commenting on the research. You should not repeat ignorant, unfounded nonsense from the internet without checking original sources.

You will find a bibliography and hundreds of full text papers here:

http://lenr-canr.org

- Jed Rothwell
Librarian, LENR-CANR.org
March 24, 2008 9:47 AM

This email is in response to my post entitled Easter And Cold Fusion. There seems to be great debate over whether cold fusion was a flop. If you check out the website that Mr. Rothwell recommends you will find a section containing news articles. If you check out some of these articles you will find that many of them are about this debate. If you check out Wikipedia’s entry for cold fusion you will find that it is locked to “editing until disputes are resolved.” So much for the blanket statement “Cold fusion was not a flop.” Some say it is, and some say it isn’t. I didn’t say anything about cold fusion myself. I really don’t consider myself to be qualified. I just linked to PZ Myers, a blogger who is also a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris. He is also friends with Richard Dawkins. Remember the old saying: "You can tell a lot about someone by the company he keeps." I don’t think that PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins (published author and a professor at Oxford University, for christsake) contribute much “ignorant, unfounded nonsense” to the internet. Or to anything else for that matter.

So, Mr. Rothwell, I will post whatever I want to on MY blog, and you telling me I shouldn’t is not going to stop me.

One last thing, Mr Rothwell. Do you work the day shift? Are you firing off angry emails to poor hapless bloggers like me when you really should be working?

UPDATE - Tuesday, March 25, 2008: Mr Rothwell, has any scientist ever named an asteroid after YOU?

Science Is Interesting And Not All Scientists Are Dull

At the Beyond Belief event, Richard Dawkins responds to Neil deGrasse Tyson: