2 edits
. . . last evening at my school. There were about 700 of us in a small auditorium. Now I've always enjoyed his books and submissions to Free Inquiry, but to hear him live is very special indeed.
Three things that I learned about him after meeting him in person:
First, he is much taller than I expected. He's probably about 6' or maybe a bit taller. Second, he is very patient and polite. He showed tremendous courtesy when responding to questions from critics and was just as pleasant when I met him in booksigning; I was near the end of a very long line. Finally, he has an unbelievable grasp on the English language. Those who have read his work have witnessed this in his writing, but let me assure you he can do the same with his speech when he answers questions on the spot!
I must say that the hour we all spent in his presence was nothing short of spiritual, and it was far better than any sermon or revival meeting I attended as a xian.
Originally posted by telerionWhere does he stand on the whole Creation v. Evolution debate?
. . . last evening at my school. There were about 700 of us in a small auditorium. Now I've always enjoyed his books and submissions to Free Inquiry, but to hear him live is very special indeed.
Three things that I learned about him after meeting him in person.
First, he is much taller than I expected. He's probably about 6' or maybe a bi ...[text shortened]... of spiritual, and it was far better than any sermon or revival meeting I attended as a xian.
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesDawkins is a critic of creationism, describing it as a "preposterous, mind-shrinking falsehood". His book The Blind Watchmaker is a critique of the argument from design, and his other popular-science works often touch on the topic. On the advice of his late colleague Stephen Jay Gould, Dawkins refuses to participate in debates with creationists because doing so would give them the "oxygen of respectability" that they want. He argues that creationists "don't mind being beaten in an argument. What matters is that we give them recognition by bothering to argue with them in public." Dawkins did, however, take part in the Oxford Union's 1986 Huxley Memorial Debate, in which he and John Maynard Smith defeated their creationist counterparts by 198 votes to 115.
Where does he stand on the whole Creation v. Evolution debate?
In a December 2004 interview with Bill Moyers, Dawkins stated that "among the things that science does know, evolution is about as certain as anything we know." When Moyers later asked, "Is evolution a theory, not a fact?", Dawkins replied, "Evolution has been observed. It's just that it hasn't been observed while it's happening." Dawkins went on to say, "It is rather like a detective coming on a murder after the scene. And you… the detective hasn't actually seen the murder take place, of course. But what you do see is a massive clue ...Circumstantial evidence, but masses of circumstantial evidence. Huge quantities of circumstantial evidence."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins
Originally posted by XanthosNZHow can this be? Telerion described it as better than any sermon or revival he has attended as a Christian.
Dawkins is a critic of creationism, describing it as a "preposterous, mind-shrinking falsehood". His book The Blind Watchmaker is a critique of the argument from design, and his other popular-science works often touch on the topic. On the advice of his late colleague Stephen Jay Gould, Dawkins refuses to participate in debates with creationists because doi ...[text shortened]... of circumstantial evidence."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins
Originally posted by telerionI am jealous - although I heard he turned up to a public lecture at Sheffield Uni in the UK in a gold plated Rolls Royse. That did diminish my respect for him a bit. I am glad to hear that he was so pleasant.
. . . last evening at my school. There were about 700 of us in a small auditorium. Now I've always enjoyed his books and submissions to Free Inquiry, but to hear him live is very special indeed.
Three things that I learned about him after meeting him in person.
First, he is much taller than I expected. He's probably about 6' or maybe a bi ...[text shortened]... of spiritual, and it was far better than any sermon or revival meeting I attended as a xian.
Originally posted by telerionWired's November issue lists Dick as one of the main writers in the cause of the new atheism. Even though the author of the article is sympathetic to the cause, Dick comes off as a rabid evangelist with an axe to grind.
. . . last evening at my school. There were about 700 of us in a small auditorium. Now I've always enjoyed his books and submissions to Free Inquiry, but to hear him live is very special indeed.
Three things that I learned about him after meeting him in person:
First, he is much taller than I expected. He's probably about 6' or maybe a bi ...[text shortened]... of spiritual, and it was far better than any sermon or revival meeting I attended as a xian.
Were his gripe only against religion, I'd be right beside him at the wheel. However, when he lumps all beliefs into the same bin, I must take exception at his characterizations and self-delusion.
Originally posted by FreakyKBH😴
Wired's November issue lists Dick as one of the main writers in the cause of the new atheism. Even though the author of the article is sympathetic to the cause, Dick comes off as a rabid evangelist with an axe to grind.
Were his gripe only against religion, I'd be right beside him at the wheel. However, when he lumps all beliefs into the same bin, I must take exception at his characterizations and self-delusion.
Same tired old crazies.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI can understand why you would disagree with him, and he is certainly unapologetic about his position. I can tell you though that no matter how you feel about his opinion toward faith, you (particularly) would be impressed with his amazing eloquence and sharp intellect. He could insult every one of your female relatives, and your first response would be, "Damn! That was incredible."
Wired's November issue lists Dick as one of the main writers in the cause of the new atheism. Even though the author of the article is sympathetic to the cause, Dick comes off as a rabid evangelist with an axe to grind.
Were his gripe only against religion, I'd be right beside him at the wheel. However, when he lumps all beliefs into the same bin, I must take exception at his characterizations and self-delusion.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHHe is a bit rabid. But it's the sort of rabidness that appeals to reason rather than sentiment.
Wired's November issue lists Dick as one of the main writers in the cause of the new atheism. Even though the author of the article is sympathetic to the cause, Dick comes off as a rabid evangelist with an axe to grind.
Were his gripe only against religion, I'd be right beside him at the wheel. However, when he lumps all beliefs into the same bin, I must take exception at his characterizations and self-delusion.
Originally posted by telerionPlease tell us you showed a little restraint and did not throw your underware on stage.
. . . last evening at my school. There were about 700 of us in a small auditorium. Now I've always enjoyed his books and submissions to Free Inquiry, but to hear him live is very special indeed.
Three things that I learned about him after meeting him in person:
First, he is much taller than I expected. He's probably about 6' or maybe a bi ...[text shortened]... of spiritual, and it was far better than any sermon or revival meeting I attended as a xian.
Originally posted by scottishinnzThe man has to have something to counter balance the vanity and emptiness he must feel within. Maybe his followers will actually think he's enjoying life.
I am jealous - although I heard he turned up to a public lecture at Sheffield Uni in the UK in a gold plated Rolls Royse. That did diminish my respect for him a bit. I am glad to hear that he was so pleasant.