Can you share why ?
Every interview I've seen with Dawkins seems difficult, not an easily liked fellow.
Caleb's Hat wrote:
https://americanhumanist.org/news/american-humanist-association-board-statement-withdrawing-honor-from-richard-dawkins/
Politics trumps science.
Lol the irony of someone being cancelled by the self-proclaimed "Freethinkers" you really cant make this sh!t up. I don't think anyone considers an award from the "American Humanist Association" an "honor" anyway.
I want to be angry but I need more information on why I’m outraged.
pretend lawyers on lrc wrote:
I want to be angry but I need more information on why I’m outraged.
No need. Neither Dawkins nor the Humanist Association matter.
pretend lawyers on lrc wrote:
I want to be angry but I need more information on why I’m outraged.
He compared (on Twitter) trans people to those fake black rights activists with afros who are really 100% white.
Humanism is a religion and it always has been. Progressive leftists are turning it into a particularly nonsense one.
Armstronglivs wrote:
pretend lawyers on lrc wrote:
I want to be angry but I need more information on why I’m outraged.
No need. Neither Dawkins nor the Humanist Association matter.
I’m surprised. I would have bet the resident race-baiter and anti-America agitator was a card carrying member of the Humanist Association.
Dawkins is a fraud. Everything he says about this topic is pseudo-scientific yet he claims to be making scientific statements. He has never written any peer reviewed papers on his favorite topic for which he is famous. All his statements are dead wrong. Science cannot prove whether God exists or doesn't exist. The idea that evolution or the big bang theory proves that God doesn't exist is nonsense.
the media is corrupt wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
No need. Neither Dawkins nor the Humanist Association matter.
I’m surprised. I would have bet the resident race-baiter and anti-America agitator was a card carrying member of the Humanist Association.
But as you always show, you understand nothing.
Machado wrote:
Dawkins is a fraud. Everything he says about this topic is pseudo-scientific yet he claims to be making scientific statements. He has never written any peer reviewed papers on his favorite topic for which he is famous. All his statements are dead wrong. Science cannot prove whether God exists or doesn't exist. The idea that evolution or the big bang theory proves that God doesn't exist is nonsense.
Well science can't prove or disprove the existence of something that can't be proven either way - which is how the believers have couched it. But nothing in science so far establishes the existence of God - so Dawkins (as well as Hawking and Einstein on this) is more right than wrong. Belief in the existence of God may be little different than a belief in unicorns; both possibly may exist but nothing so far shows they do.
Machado wrote:
The idea that evolution or the big bang theory proves that God doesn't exist is nonsense.
This misunderstands the situation, god claims require positive evidence in their favour. Of all the many thousands of gods created by mankind, do any have any hard evidence that we can point to? Evidence is not fairy tales in old books by anonymous authors.
Some pointed study of religious history / human belief would go a long way towards "proving" it. An easy one is to go read some various "creation" stories from various religions, both ancient and current. Maybe it sounds reasonable to you that the world was created from the skull of the giant Ymir, and maybe it doesn't...but people believed it at one point.
Machado wrote:
Dawkins is a fraud. Everything he says about this topic is pseudo-scientific yet he claims to be making scientific statements. He has never written any peer reviewed papers on his favorite topic for which he is famous. All his statements are dead wrong. Science cannot prove whether God exists or doesn't exist. The idea that evolution or the big bang theory proves that God doesn't exist is nonsense.
He has never said that. He, and other atheists says that the burden of proof is always on those who claim that something existes. Atheists don´t say that they have proven that god doesn´t exists. They say that the most likely hypothesis is that god doesn´t exist. If believers can prove the existence of god fine, then the atheists will chance their minds, just like scientists do when the are presented with new data. So far, however, no one, in the entire history of mankind, has been able to provide a shred of evidence that god exists.
That's a non-position. Steven Crowder has shown that "change my mind" is a flawed rhetorical device. It is fine to not believe in God until you have evidence that convinces you, but don't expect a medal or a book deal because of it.
If Dawkins is dumb enough to say something so dumb, he doesn't deserve whatever stupid award the OP is talking about.
Oh Please wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Well science can't prove or disprove the existence of something that can't be proven either way - which is how the believers have couched it. But nothing in science so far establishes the existence of God - so Dawkins (as well as Hawking and Einstein on this) is more right than wrong. Belief in the existence of God may be little different than a belief in unicorns; both possibly may exist but nothing so far shows they do.
Some pointed study of religious history / human belief would go a long way towards "proving" it. An easy one is to go read some various "creation" stories from various religions, both ancient and current. Maybe it sounds reasonable to you that the world was created from the skull of the giant Ymir, and maybe it doesn't...but people believed it at one point.
The prevalence of Creation myths is not proof of their truth or of the existence of God - only of our willingness to believe.
Machado wrote:
Science cannot prove whether God exists or doesn't exist. The idea that evolution or the big bang theory proves that God doesn't exist is nonsense.
Figure out what science is before posting garbage
Science works by disproving hypotheses.
No one has seen any of the thousands (n) of Gods, each of whom proclaimed by believers to be the only one. So we know n minus 1 are non existent.
We hypothesise that the remaining one doesn't exist either (no evidence of such so far).
This has not, nor will it ever be , falsified
And Dawkins has a valid point. Even as a person that has been subjected to racism ( a much bigger issue), transgenderism to me is fake.
You are born a certain race, colour, looks etc, and especially one of two sexes, providing you don't have a sexual disability. You cannot choose this outcome.
Many people are not happy with their options given, tough luck you got bad genes hey. Many people are given psychological help with those acceptance issues. Many people commit suicide over their unhappiness with fitting in.
But when it comes to gender, we say, 'hey its ok, we feel so sorry you are not happy in a man's or woman's body' . Go and dress as a woman, we will call you 'she', go into the female toilet and hey, even play sport with them. Its ok, we will give you some testosterone.
Testosterone obviously for a woman...
Curious since the majority of people on this site seem to be fairly well-educated reasonable people that believe in evidence based reasoning about reality
Why does let's run always delete any questioning of religion? Any questioning of the Republican Party? Just curious are you guys aware that they continually delete threads that are progressive and represent the perspective of the naturalist community
And why are you on this board then if it has such a bias? I'm just curious I like the running discussion but I've noticed that who's ever running this site has a ridiculous biased against Atheism and Science and naturalism