Total Posts:231|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Richard Dawkins is a Televangelist

GrittyWorm
Posts: 1,566
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?
bulproof
Posts: 25,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2015 4:16:55 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?
Atheistic ideology, you are funny, but here it is.
I reject your claim.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
SolonKR
Posts: 4,041
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2015 7:00:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I've never been aware of him trying to scam people with "seed faith" and other egregiously horrendous tricks. That's what I tend to equate televangelists with. If you could show something to the contrary though, that would be interesting.

You could probably make a pretty solid case, though, that he's certainly a "preacher" of sorts, preaching an ideology rather than a religion.
SO to Bailey, the love of my life <3
SolonKR
Posts: 4,041
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2015 7:01:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Still, calling atheism as a whole a "scam" is a very, very big stretch.
SO to Bailey, the love of my life <3
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2015 8:18:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

This is the made who made millions from book sales from his book the God delusion, but when faced with debating William Lane Craig who is arguably one of the worlds leading debaters in Christian apologetics,

Dawkins response was that he had no interest in debating William Lane Craig.

I think Dawkins bank account showed exactly the interest Dawkins has, unless he was afraid to take the main stage lest he get whopped and his ideologies exposed.

Better to keep your mouth shut and considered a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2015 8:43:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 8:18:33 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

This is the made who made millions from book sales from his book the God delusion, but when faced with debating William Lane Craig who is arguably one of the worlds leading debaters in Christian apologetics,

Dawkins response was that he had no interest in debating William Lane Craig.

I think Dawkins bank account showed exactly the interest Dawkins has, unless he was afraid to take the main stage lest he get whopped and his ideologies exposed.


Better to keep your mouth shut and considered a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

Can you back up these claims about Professor Dawkins' bank account, preferably with a slightly more authoritative source than the Landover Baptist Church?
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2015 8:51:23 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 8:43:41 AM, desmac wrote:
At 10/25/2015 8:18:33 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

This is the made who made millions from book sales from his book the God delusion, but when faced with debating William Lane Craig who is arguably one of the worlds leading debaters in Christian apologetics,

Dawkins response was that he had no interest in debating William Lane Craig.

I think Dawkins bank account showed exactly the interest Dawkins has, unless he was afraid to take the main stage lest he get whopped and his ideologies exposed.


Better to keep your mouth shut and considered a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

Can you back up these claims about Professor Dawkins' bank account, preferably with a slightly more authoritative source than the Landover Baptist Church?

I am not here to walk and talk you through life, The God delusion has sold over 2 million copies in English alone, I am sure you can do the rest of the math, or am I?

Sales[edit]

As of January 2010, the English version of The God Delusion had sold over 2 million copies.[9] As of September 2014, it increased to 3 million copies

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Now stop being so lazy and ignorant.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2015 8:55:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 8:51:23 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 10/25/2015 8:43:41 AM, desmac wrote:
At 10/25/2015 8:18:33 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

This is the made who made millions from book sales from his book the God delusion, but when faced with debating William Lane Craig who is arguably one of the worlds leading debaters in Christian apologetics,

Dawkins response was that he had no interest in debating William Lane Craig.

I think Dawkins bank account showed exactly the interest Dawkins has, unless he was afraid to take the main stage lest he get whopped and his ideologies exposed.


Better to keep your mouth shut and considered a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

Can you back up these claims about Professor Dawkins' bank account, preferably with a slightly more authoritative source than the Landover Baptist Church?


I am not here to walk and talk you through life, The God delusion has sold over 2 million copies in English alone, I am sure you can do the rest of the math, or am I?

Sales[edit]

As of January 2010, the English version of The God Delusion had sold over 2 million copies.[9] As of September 2014, it increased to 3 million copies

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Now stop being so lazy and ignorant.

So, just another one of your inventions.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2015 9:00:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 8:55:50 AM, desmac wrote:
At 10/25/2015 8:51:23 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 10/25/2015 8:43:41 AM, desmac wrote:
At 10/25/2015 8:18:33 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

This is the made who made millions from book sales from his book the God delusion, but when faced with debating William Lane Craig who is arguably one of the worlds leading debaters in Christian apologetics,

Dawkins response was that he had no interest in debating William Lane Craig.

I think Dawkins bank account showed exactly the interest Dawkins has, unless he was afraid to take the main stage lest he get whopped and his ideologies exposed.


Better to keep your mouth shut and considered a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

Can you back up these claims about Professor Dawkins' bank account, preferably with a slightly more authoritative source than the Landover Baptist Church?


I am not here to walk and talk you through life, The God delusion has sold over 2 million copies in English alone, I am sure you can do the rest of the math, or am I?

Sales[edit]

As of January 2010, the English version of The God Delusion had sold over 2 million copies.[9] As of September 2014, it increased to 3 million copies

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Now stop being so lazy and ignorant.

So, just another one of your inventions.
Is that the best you can come up with, with is no surprise considering you live in denial anyway.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2015 9:01:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 9:00:33 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 10/25/2015 8:55:50 AM, desmac wrote:
At 10/25/2015 8:51:23 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 10/25/2015 8:43:41 AM, desmac wrote:
At 10/25/2015 8:18:33 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

This is the made who made millions from book sales from his book the God delusion, but when faced with debating William Lane Craig who is arguably one of the worlds leading debaters in Christian apologetics,

Dawkins response was that he had no interest in debating William Lane Craig.

I think Dawkins bank account showed exactly the interest Dawkins has, unless he was afraid to take the main stage lest he get whopped and his ideologies exposed.


Better to keep your mouth shut and considered a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

Can you back up these claims about Professor Dawkins' bank account, preferably with a slightly more authoritative source than the Landover Baptist Church?


I am not here to walk and talk you through life, The God delusion has sold over 2 million copies in English alone, I am sure you can do the rest of the math, or am I?

Sales[edit]

As of January 2010, the English version of The God Delusion had sold over 2 million copies.[9] As of September 2014, it increased to 3 million copies

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Now stop being so lazy and ignorant.

So, just another one of your inventions.
Is that the best you can come up with, with is no surprise considering you live in denial anyway.

Keep making it up.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 8:19:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 11:15:36 PM, GrittyWorm wrote:
http://www.therichest.com...

Net worth: $135 million

Thankyou, Gritty.
Can you now tell me the net worth of the catholic church, and the church of latter day saints. Thanks in advance.
Hitchian
Posts: 764
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 8:56:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

The level of your apologetics is on its way down. Ad hominiem and a handful of nothing. You do not know what religion is, what atheism stands for, what Richard Dawkins does. I also detect a note of resentment towards someone who has enjoyed tremendous success by virtue of people enjoying what he does and voluntarily exchanging money for a hard copy of one of his books.

Dully noted.
Hitchian
Posts: 764
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 9:06:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 8:18:33 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

This is the made who made millions from book sales from his book the God delusion, but when faced with debating William Lane Craig who is arguably one of the worlds leading debaters in Christian apologetics,

Dawkins response was that he had no interest in debating William Lane Craig.

I think Dawkins bank account showed exactly the interest Dawkins has, unless he was afraid to take the main stage lest he get whopped and his ideologies exposed.


Better to keep your mouth shut and considered a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

So you do not know why Richard Dawkins refused to debate William Craig, the high profile Christian apologetic whom I've witnessed loosing every single debate he had with an atheist counterpart?

It's because of his despicable Divine Command theory, when applied to the genocide of children of Israel's neighbouring nations. That much was reported by Krauss, who is a dear friend of Dawkins. Richard, and rightly so, finds Divine Command theory nauseating.

You also seem to begrudge the tremendous success Dawkins had enjoyed. Tell you what, you attempt to write a book, attempt to persuade a publisher, attempt to have an audience. Let's see how that goes.

Comparing your style and substance to Richard's I have a definite mental image how that is going to go.
pakicetus
Posts: 66
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 9:09:56 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science.

Examples for the bolded section?

Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology,

Source? He definitely hasn't made hundreds of millions, his net worth is around 135m - at the very least you could support the assertion that his wealth is due to atheism.

It's "what sells books"?
"What sounds good to my audience".

Atheism certainly isn't appealing if you're trying to reach as broad an audience as possible (http://www.pewforum.org...).
janesix
Posts: 3,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 7:10:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

Hundreds of millions of dollars?
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 9:41:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propaganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science.

Actually, the science is pretty good, Gritty. It's certainly more transparent, more accountable, more precise, more accurately predictive, and better evidenced than any religious dogma. And a lot of it was produced by people of religious faith. Darwin was Unitarian when he first started investigating evolution; Planck was raised Lutheran, but was technically Deist; Einstein was Deist. There are still people of faith in the sciences today, and they have no problems with the scientific findings typically contested by religious fundamentalists outside the sciences.

There is some money to be made from selling antitheistic books -- at the top end, anyway. Dawkins has made about $183M from his book sales. But such niches are transient; the top end can't have too many occupants; and other than making nontheism more acceptable in places where it's reviled (the US being a good example), all it can really do is make public existing discussions.

And atheism itself has extensive experience of the religion it rejects. Some 75% of atheists today were once people of religious belief. So if you think a book or two can topple their faith, that perhaps says more about faith itself than it does about the books. Moreover, in the US at least, there's far more money to be made from religious literature -- Christian fiction has its own literary category, for example. Atheist fiction has no such category.

What you're calling "lack of belief" has another name, anyway: critical thought. That's thought which allows you to reject outrageous, unevidenced, opaque, evasive and dishonest claims -- such as those created by religious dogma.

It's not just atheists who do this -- many people of faith reject the dogmas of their own religious traditions too.

Critical thought has been with us since the earliest philosophy. it requires no particular dogma -- just an ethical adherence to honesty, accountability, transparency and curiosity. And religion has been generally opposed to it for all that time. Religion claims exceptionalism and special pleading for its unevidenced and outrageous claims, it has persecuted skepticism, and labeled intellectual honesty a heresy, and has created its own rhetorical discipline called apologetics whose sole purpose seems to be to lull, undermine and refute critical thought,

I think you're blaming the media for creating religious rejection, Gritty, when that rejection was already happening. Western Europe was post-Christian long before the so-called New Atheist movement (more a publishing category than a political movement) capitalised on it.

You'd rather blame media than accept that the social trends have other causes, but the roots of modern irreligion and rejection of religious dogma go back centuries, to the Enlightenment. And it's not just atheists rejecting religious dogma -- in the developed world, faiths themselves are rejecting their own dogma too.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 9:43:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 8:18:33 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

This is the made who made millions from book sales from his book the God delusion, but when faced with debating William Lane Craig who is arguably one of the worlds leading debaters in Christian apologetics,

Dawkins response was that he had no interest in debating William Lane Craig.

I think Dawkins bank account showed exactly the interest Dawkins has, unless he was afraid to take the main stage lest he get whopped and his ideologies exposed.


Better to keep your mouth shut and considered a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

Good advice. A word to the wise is sufficient, don't you think?
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 10:02:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/26/2015 9:41:41 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
There is some money to be made from selling antitheistic books -- at the top end, anyway. Dawkins has made about $183M from his book sales.

My error. I looked this up some days ago, and thought I could remember it accurately still. News media generally accept estimates of over >$100M for Dawkin's net worth, but I don't have a reference higher than Gritty's earlier quote of $135M.
Hitchian
Posts: 764
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 10:12:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/26/2015 10:02:43 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 10/26/2015 9:41:41 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
There is some money to be made from selling antitheistic books -- at the top end, anyway. Dawkins has made about $183M from his book sales.

My error. I looked this up some days ago, and thought I could remember it accurately still. News media generally accept estimates of over >$100M for Dawkin's net worth, but I don't have a reference higher than Gritty's earlier quote of $135M.

One would have to overlook the whole Christian televangelism phenomenon to be able to make the claim that somehow Atheism is a cultural industry while Christianity is not. For goodness sake, just recall the number of creationist ministries selling their books and audiotapes, their Ark replicas and creation museum entrance fees, plus the fees some Christian apologists such as William Craig charge for public talks. The list does go on.

The point remains. This an attempt in a long line of attempts at character assassination. Even if Dawkins were this diabolic Machiavellian character, that wouldn't have the slightest bearing on the validity of his points. People making ad hominins need to get this through their head.

Sadly, they won't.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 10:12:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/26/2015 10:02:43 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 10/26/2015 9:41:41 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
There is some money to be made from selling antitheistic books -- at the top end, anyway. Dawkins has made about $183M from his book sales.

My error. I looked this up some days ago, and thought I could remember it accurately still. News media generally accept estimates of over >$100M for Dawkin's net worth, but I don't have a reference higher than Gritty's earlier quote of $135M.

The bulk of his money came from his atheist readers who found the bible out of their scope. What good is the money when he cannot take it with him where he is going?
Fly
Posts: 2,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 10:23:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

It is rather pathetically ironic-- the OP is trying to tar the reputation of an author who got rich off of selling verifiable facts and educated insight by labeling him with a word exclusively associated with men who have gotten rich off of selling tall tales as fact.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 10:30:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/26/2015 10:23:42 PM, Fly wrote:
At 10/25/2015 3:23:36 AM, GrittyWorm wrote:
The basis of the "lack of belief" is based off of politically fueled propoganda, findings influenced by money, unproven theories, and bad science. So the lack of belief has been sold to Atheists under false pretenses. Atheism is a bught scam. Richard Dawkins, for example, has made hundreds of millions of dollars by using Atheistic ideology, therefore every statement he makes is fueled on some level by what "is working", by what foots the bill at the end of the day. He is not so much different than a false televangelist. They both are selling ideology to make millions whether they believe it deeply or even care or not. It's "what sells books"? "What sounds good to my audience". "What protects my interests"?

It is rather pathetically ironic-- the OP is trying to tar the reputation of an author who got rich off of selling verifiable facts and educated insight by labeling him with a word exclusively associated with men who have gotten rich off of selling tall tales as fact.

He made money criticizing God as opposed to those who made money praising God....same difference. But he did not reduce the suicide rate among atheists. He just added to their desperation.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 11:28:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/26/2015 10:12:13 PM, Hitchian wrote:
One would have to overlook the whole Christian televangelism phenomenon to be able to make the claim that somehow Atheism is a cultural industry while Christianity is not.

Indeed, Hitch. It's farcical. Atheism doesn't actually offer you anything, or purport to do so. As an atheist, I wouldn't even join an atheists' club. What would I do there?

Holding religious ideas and institutions to account is a matter of civic concern, and it shouldn't be tribalised or dogmatised. It should be as important to Catholics that the Pope doesn't lie to them about clerical child abuse as to Evangelicals that leading pastors aren't lying about evolution.

Dawkins' aren't views you have to take as a whole. A Christian can agree that the Old Testament god is loathesome, and an appalling moral example for humanity, while still believing in a benevolent god. Muslims can agree that Islam has at times been cynical, brutal and intolerant, while still feeling that there are good ways to progress the faith.

As an atheist, I don't agree with all of Dawkins' views either. I've never bought any of his books, never refer to them in formulating my own views or arguments on religion, and have no plans to.

So this in itself is distinct from televangelism. When a televangelist preaches, he wants you to sign up to the whole deal; to take action; to act as he wants you to act.

What action does Dawkins want anyone to perform? To read more widely? Question more? Think more?

Is that some dogmatic atheistic position or just basic intellectual honesty?

And what's so scary about that to people of faith anyway? Surely, if religious dogma were all that solid, it'd withstand independent critical scrutiny.
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2015 11:44:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Dawkins started in the 70s, writing a series of popular science books on genetics and evolution. There is nothing anti-religious in his early books, which describe the relevant science in clear, easily understood language. He had a career as a minor Oxford don and it appears that he was more or less content to keep on being one.

However because his books - particularly Blind watchmaker - were so accessible they were perceived as a threat by the religious establishment - not because they attacked religion but because they made the secular case so well.

The media picked up on the stir, and a relatively obscure academic became the public face of secularism, appearing on chat shoes with clerhmen of all shades and so on. I would not say Dawkins was reluctant to become the worlds first 'professional atheist', but I do think it was rather thrust on him rather than him seeking it early on.

Many people who read and appreciated 'Selfish Gene' and 'Watchmaker' 20 or more years ago have ambivalent feeling towards Dawkins today. Early Dawkins just made the science easy to understand. There was no proselytising for new Atheism or side-swipes at religion. If you wanted to draw an anti-religious message from his books, you had to do it youself. The God Delusion was - for early Dawkins afficionados - a bit of a shock, and not a very nice one. Gone was the donnish and meticulous presentation of facts. Instead it was an out-and-out polemic, seemingly written to be deliberately shocking for effect. It was as if Lassie had caught rabies - and remember I am a Dawkin fan and an atheist. I have to say that Dawkins did go for the money and sales with God Delusion - it's nowhere near his best work, but no doubt he was crying all the way to the bank about my complaint!

It is a shame that to an extent the atheism/theism debate has become a media circus, complete with superstars with egos to match and sound-bites dominating over argument, and Dawkins is caught up in it. The fact this thread exists is proof that the debate has degenerated into personalities not issues.

I don't know if Dawkins was right to sell out, but he was dead right about one thing - there is no god.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 12:43:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/26/2015 10:12:48 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 10/26/2015 10:02:43 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 10/26/2015 9:41:41 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
There is some money to be made from selling antitheistic books -- at the top end, anyway. Dawkins has made about $183M from his book sales.

My error. I looked this up some days ago, and thought I could remember it accurately still. News media generally accept estimates of over >$100M for Dawkin's net worth, but I don't have a reference higher than Gritty's earlier quote of $135M.

The bulk of his money came from his atheist readers who found the bible out of their scope. What good is the money when he cannot take it with him where he is going?

Hari, I think you need some data to support your characteristically malignant bare assertions.

What are the religious beliefs of people buying Dawkins' books? Are they atheist? Agnostic? Religiou but doubtings? Devout? Or some mix? And what is their knowledge of religious history and religious thought?

Absent reliable data, should the forum treat your fanciful conjectures as authoritative, or is everyone free to concoct their own?

Regarding what Dawkins does with his wealth, whom should that concern?

Finally... all that malignant reflection is unactionable anyway. What do you believe atheists should do and why?
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 10:27:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
If you are interested in the history and philosophy of atheism I would recommend this BBC documentary by another great British atheist - Jonathan Miller.
https://www.youtube.com...
Harikrish
Posts: 11,010
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 2:29:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/27/2015 12:43:50 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 10/26/2015 10:12:48 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 10/26/2015 10:02:43 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 10/26/2015 9:41:41 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
There is some money to be made from selling antitheistic books -- at the top end, anyway. Dawkins has made about $183M from his book sales.

My error. I looked this up some days ago, and thought I could remember it accurately still. News media generally accept estimates of over >$100M for Dawkin's net worth, but I don't have a reference higher than Gritty's earlier quote of $135M.

The bulk of his money came from his atheist readers who found the bible out of their scope. What good is the money when he cannot take it with him where he is going?

Hari, I think you need some data to support your characteristically malignant bare assertions.

What are the religious beliefs of people buying Dawkins' books? Are they atheist? Agnostic? Religiou but doubtings? Devout? Or some mix? And what is their knowledge of religious history and religious thought?

Absent reliable data, should the forum treat your fanciful conjectures as authoritative, or is everyone free to concoct their own?

Regarding what Dawkins does with his wealth, whom should that concern?

Finally... all that malignant reflection is unactionable anyway. What do you believe atheists should do and why?

Dawkins was asked: "Religion is widespread, does religion confer an evolution advantage to its followers?"
Darwin agrees. "Anything that is wide spread in a species has an evolutionary advantage. It wouldn't be there if it didn't."
So why does he have a grudge against religion? He just cannot get the monkey off his back.
Dawkins is a zoologist an evolutionary biologist. He has no theological credentials or qualified to speak about the psychological state of religious believers. Yet he conflates his zoology with religion in his books that is read mostly by skeptical and atheists who are enamoured by an amoebas evolutionary journey from single cell to tree swinging monkeys which they identify as their common ancestors. To believe in a higher purpose is to be the "God delusion."
Between Darwin and Dawkins we have raised several generations of monkey believers who are also self proclaimed atheists.
25% of Australians can trace their ancestry to a convict listed in the UK Convict Registry. How does it help them to read Dawkins/Darwin who traces their ancestry further back to tree swinging monkeys? It doesn't.......,!!!
Hitchian
Posts: 764
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 3:26:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/27/2015 2:29:26 PM, Harikrish wrote:
It's been a while since so many imprecisions, let's put it that way, have been crammed in a single psot.

Dawkins was asked: "Religion is widespread, does religion confer an evolution advantage to its followers?"
Darwin agrees. "Anything that is wide spread in a species has an evolutionary advantage. It wouldn't be there if it didn't."
So why does he have a grudge against religion? He just cannot get the monkey off his back.

He doesn't have a grudge.
The fight for truth is self-evidently virtuous. Yet it seems that this has to be explained to you.

Dawkins is a zoologist an evolutionary biologist. He has no theological credentials or qualified to speak about the psychological state of religious believers.

Ridiculous statement.
For example, The Bible, supposedly, was a letter from God to mankind. Not a letter from God to the clergy. Anyone can attempt to interpret it. I realize that's what all the Christian denominations have been doing to this day without being able to reach an absolute consensus on a single pint of doctrine. That, however, doesn't preclude atheists from having a go.

Yet he conflates his zoology with religion in his books that is read mostly by skeptical and atheists who are enamoured by an amoebas evolutionary journey from single cell to tree swinging monkeys which they identify as their common ancestors. To believe in a higher purpose is to be the "God delusion."

You're making a number of claims here, including pretending to intimately know the deep thoughts and motivations of all atheists. Evidence? Source?

Between Darwin and Dawkins we have raised several generations of monkey believers who are also self proclaimed atheists.

Monkey believers?
The stupidity of that meme is baffling.

25% of Australians can trace their ancestry to a convict listed in the UK Convict Registry. How does it help them to read Dawkins/Darwin who traces their ancestry further back to tree swinging monkeys? It doesn't.......,!!!

You really outdid yourself there.
Nonsense. Evolution does not state tree swinging monkeys are our ancestors. You seem to acknowledge that basic notion on and off, intermittently, which leads me to believe a post-it note glued to your screen might prevent future embarrassment.

Truth is its own reward.
Fly
Posts: 2,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 3:37:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/27/2015 3:26:21 PM, Hitchian wrote:
At 10/27/2015 2:29:26 PM, Harikrish wrote:
It's been a while since so many imprecisions, let's put it that way, have been crammed in a single psot.

Dawkins was asked: "Religion is widespread, does religion confer an evolution advantage to its followers?"
Darwin agrees. "Anything that is wide spread in a species has an evolutionary advantage. It wouldn't be there if it didn't."
So why does he have a grudge against religion? He just cannot get the monkey off his back.

He doesn't have a grudge.
The fight for truth is self-evidently virtuous. Yet it seems that this has to be explained to you.

Dawkins is a zoologist an evolutionary biologist. He has no theological credentials or qualified to speak about the psychological state of religious believers.

Ridiculous statement.
For example, The Bible, supposedly, was a letter from God to mankind. Not a letter from God to the clergy. Anyone can attempt to interpret it. I realize that's what all the Christian denominations have been doing to this day without being able to reach an absolute consensus on a single pint of doctrine. That, however, doesn't preclude atheists from having a go.


Yet he conflates his zoology with religion in his books that is read mostly by skeptical and atheists who are enamoured by an amoebas evolutionary journey from single cell to tree swinging monkeys which they identify as their common ancestors. To believe in a higher purpose is to be the "God delusion."

You're making a number of claims here, including pretending to intimately know the deep thoughts and motivations of all atheists. Evidence? Source?

Between Darwin and Dawkins we have raised several generations of monkey believers who are also self proclaimed atheists.

Monkey believers?
The stupidity of that meme is baffling.

Well, there was a song in the 60's named "I'm a Believer" and it was performed by The Monkees. But I don't think that has anything to do with Dawkins' body of work, no. Best just to pat Hari on the head and smile.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz