The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins

[columbusdude82]

I read this AMAZING book over the course of the past week. I've been wanting to read it for months, but school got in the way.

It expands on the documentary "Root of All Evil?" that Dawkins made for British television. I highly recommend the documentary as well. Unfortunately it is no longer available on Youtube, but it is still on Google video. (Just search for Dawkins, it is bound to turn up in the first few results!)

Dawkins doesn't use the stinging rhetoric of Christopher Hitchens (See my other thread), but he does include a lot more science, from the origin of the universe, to the origins of life, to evolution and natural selection, to the grand, unifying theory of biology (namely, Darwinism).

Some (but by no means all) the points he raises, and especially ones that have given me much food for thought, are:

1. Religion is treated with such deference and respect. Why is that? Why are we supposed to defer to the opinions and prejudices of men (never women) whose only schooling is in ancient books written in the deserts of Judea and Arabia? Why, in the name of 'multiculturalism,' do Muslim religious leaders, unelected so-called 'community leaders,' get to speak for their communities on all matters?

2. Religion cannot, does not, and ought not to dictate our morality. Letting religion completely overwhelm our own innate sense of right and wrong leads to such sickening evil as suicide bombers.

3. Religion cannot explain to us the origins of the universe, the origins of life, the evolution of life, or the fate of the universe. To sneak religion into life science classes (under the guise of creationism, or that misnomer 'intelligent design') is madness, like teaching alchemy in chemistry class, or astrology instead of proper astronomy.

4. Religion requires the suspension of reason. What else can lead millions of poor people to send every last cent to millionaires who go on TV and ask everyone to send them their money? And what else can lead otherwise sane, sometimes educated individuals to commit carnage, particularly suicide bombings?

There's much, much more. Read the book. Whatever your stance on the issue, you'll be glad you did!

[The Coach]

Your obviously in denial about the existance of God.......nice try anyway!

[columbusdude82]

Ah yes, way to argue an intellectual point... by resorting to thinly-veiled ad hominem...

And I think you meant to write "you're" and "existence."

[beatmaster]

i'm gonna have to try to find that book............ thats exactly the way i'm thinking (right way)

i don't get it, why they keep saying it was creation when they have absolutely no proof!
we have scientific proof, evidences (damn, from 10 000s of years) and they keep saying that we are wrong... i guess all the dinosaurs was a hoax 

[columbusdude82]

According to people like "The Coach," dinosaur fossils are hoaxed perpetrated by no less a figure than God Almighty Himself: He planted them in nature to test our faith.

What a cruel trickster. Surely that great, true deity, our Lord, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, would never do such a thing.

May He bless you all with His noodly Appendage. RAmen.

[beatmaster]

so all the comets and asteroids that comes to visit us every 10,000 years or so (that alone prove that the earth is older than 10,000 years old) and the one that kill all the dinausors are hoaxes.
damn    just realised, adam & eve did it so noe will have more room for all the animals.......

don't tell me that god planted that too  ..... of course the response will be something like that from all the big time religious people..... no open mind!, no other way, it's gotta be god.

[Colossus_500]

I read this AMAZING book over the course of the past week. I've been wanting to read it for months, but school got in the way.

It expands on the documentary "Root of All Evil?" that Dawkins made for British television. I highly recommend the documentary as well. Unfortunately it is no longer available on Youtube, but it is still on Google video. (Just search for Dawkins, it is bound to turn up in the first few results!)

Dawkins doesn't use the stinging rhetoric of Christopher Hitchens (See my other thread), but he does include a lot more science, from the origin of the universe, to the origins of life, to evolution and natural selection, to the grand, unifying theory of biology (namely, Darwinism).

Some (but by no means all) the points he raises, and especially ones that have given me much food for thought, are:

1. Religion is treated with such deference and respect. Why is that? Why are we supposed to defer to the opinions and prejudices of men (never women) whose only schooling is in ancient books written in the deserts of Judea and Arabia? Why, in the name of 'multiculturalism,' do Muslim religious leaders, unelected so-called 'community leaders,' get to speak for their communities on all matters?

2. Religion cannot, does not, and ought not to dictate our morality. Letting religion completely overwhelm our own innate sense of right and wrong leads to such sickening evil as suicide bombers.

3. Religion cannot explain to us the origins of the universe, the origins of life, the evolution of life, or the fate of the universe. To sneak religion into life science classes (under the guise of creationism, or that misnomer 'intelligent design') is madness, like teaching alchemy in chemistry class, or astrology instead of proper astronomy.

4. Religion requires the suspension of reason. What else can lead millions of poor people to send every last cent to millionaires who go on TV and ask everyone to send them their money? And what else can lead otherwise sane, sometimes educated individuals to commit carnage, particularly suicide bombings?

There's much, much more. Read the book. Whatever your stance on the issue, you'll be glad you did!

[Colossus_500]

Now you gotta read the "Dawkins Delusion" by Alister McGrath

[columbusdude82]

It's on my queue of books I want to read, but there's several books before it. I might not get to it for a few months.

[Colossus_500]

It's on my queue of books I want to read, but there's several books before it. I might not get to it for a few months.

There's some good short articles debating those like Dawkins, check out rzim.org

[columbusdude82]

I looked around that site, C. There's not much on the issue, and at any rate it is a bit hard to navigate. I searched for "Dawkins" in their search engine, and only 19 results showed, almost all just mention Dawkins in passing. So I don't think it is immediately related to the issue. Is it?

[Colossus_500]

I looked around that site, C. There's not much on the issue, and at any rate it is a bit hard to navigate. I searched for "Dawkins" in their search engine, and only 19 results showed, almost all just mention Dawkins in passing. So I don't think it is immediately related to the issue. Is it?

Did you go to the resources section?  There's a link to an actual debate between Dawkins and McGrath under the audio-visual section of the page. 

www.rzim.org/resources/

[columbusdude82]

Thanks for the links. But it sounds to me that Dawkins is kicking ass!

[Colossus_500]

Thanks for the links. But it sounds to me that Dawkins is kicking ass!

But can you admit that you're listening from a biased standpoint?  It's like listening to a debate between an Ohio State Alum vs. a Michigan alum, right?   You're pulling for the OSU alum right out the gates, no matter where he sides on the issue, right?   

[columbusdude82]

Not at all! I actually find the other guy quite sympathetic and nice to listen to!

He just argues for a 'space' (Read: magisterium) for religion, and that's fine if that's what he wants. He cannot counter points like 1-3 in my first post in this thread, and he actually agrees with Dawkins on most of them!

[Colossus_500]

Not at all! I actually find the other guy quite sympathetic and nice to listen to!

He just argues for a 'space' (Read: magisterium) for religion, and that's fine if that's what he wants. He cannot counter points like 1-3 in my first post in this thread, and he actually agrees with Dawkins on most of them!

But from a different perspective. 

[columbusdude82]

BUMP for Richard Dawkins...

And before anyone asks, I haven't read any of the fleas...

[Dos Equis]

All of you are all delusional if you think that the creationest point of view is religious and your way of thinking isn't. They are both religious.

Thank you.  I've tried to make this point many times.  Faith is required regardless of which theory you believe in. 

[columbusdude82]

Yes, modern science and "the talking-snake theory" are both religious and both require faith... sure.......

Please do yourself a favor and get a scientific education...

[Colossus_500]

All of you are all delusional if you think that the creationest point of view is religious and your way of thinking isn't. They are both religious. you believe there is proof that the earth is old when every single dating method is wrong. carbon dating has shown a bone to be 15 000 years old and another bone from the same structure to be 60 000 years old, actually this happens all the time.

 potassium argon is barely considered circumstantial evidence and most scientist wouldn't even use this method.

The geological column is by far the most common way of measuring age and all this is a bunch of made up layers by man "say lets make this layer 20 000 years and this layer 50 000 year oh and this lets say 100 000 years" ; ya very accurate.

so please tell me how the hell is there proof that things are old is there other methods we don't know about because the methods I just mentioned can be riped apart by a freshman law student.

Well said, bro. 

[loco]

Yes, modern science and "the talking-snake theory" are both religious and both require faith... sure.......

Please do yourself a favor and get a scientific education...

columbusdude82,
Why not address the points instead of insulting the poster's education?  Did you not bump these old threads to encourage discussion?  Well, you go it.

I have a bachelors degree in science and math, and I'm sure that many, if not all, Christians on the board have a scientific education too.

columbusdude82,
What about this guy?  Does he need a scientific education too?

The Radiometric Dating Game
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating.html#Why%20methods%20in%20general%20are%20inaccurate

What about these Christians, do they need a scientific education?

American Scientific Affiliation
http://www.asa3.org/

Discovery Institute
http://www.discovery.org/

[columbusdude82]

Ah yes, the Discovery Institute... Michael Behe, of Dover trial fame... He has been thoroughly humiliated in the scientific community.

Of course, if you had read Dawkins' book, you would know that

So let's keep this thread on topic. Back to Dawkins' book!

[loco]

Ah yes, the Discovery Institute... Michael Behe, of Dover trial fame... He has been thoroughly humiliated in the scientific community.

Of course, if you had read Dawkins' book, you would know that

So let's keep this thread on topic. Back to Dawkins' book!

What about

The Radiometric Dating Game
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating.html#Why%20methods%20in%20general%20are%20inaccurate

What about these Christians, do they need a scientific education?

American Scientific Affiliation
http://www.asa3.org/

[columbusdude82]

Similar replies to both. For the first, his credibility as an impartial source is destroyed when he says, for example,

The reliability of creationist sources is often questioned because those who write them are not always experts in the areas they write about. But I believe that their message is true, namely, God created the universe, the earth, and all that is in it, God created life on earth recently, and the earth since then has experienced a major catastrophe.

Would you still agree with that page if it had said, instead:

The reliability of Pastafarian creationist sources is often questioned because those who write them are not always experts in the areas they write about. But I believe that their message is true, namely, The Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe, the earth, and all that is in it, The Flying Spaghetti Monster created life on earth recently, and the earth since then has experienced a major catastrophe. 

As for asa3, I don't know what kind of research they conduct, but I sure hope it's better than Behe and the so-called Discovery Institute. At any rate, they have an agenda to push: just as I wouldn't trust the research results of tobacco companies on the effects of smoking, I wouldn't rely on anything asa3 say about Darwinism.

[columbusdude82]

OK now for real let's get this thread get back on topic. We have lots of other threads on here that run off topic.