“Richard Dawkins” – like you’ve never seen him before (parody)

5 Comments

1. Sam Winiata
   Posted December 10, 2009 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

   What is the purpose of this video?
   Richard Dawkins isn’t present here?
   This sad if you’re simply trying to give Dawkins a bad name with this (false)interview.
   That’s a low swoop.

2. admin
   Posted December 10, 2009 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

   Hi Sam,

   It is a parody / humour video but with a serious element. There are serious issues involved in the video and the point is to show the inconsistencies in Dawkin’s worldview.

   Regards,

   Rob

3. Sam Winiata
   Posted December 12, 2009 at 11:32 am | Permalink

   I wouldn’t say it is very humourous. I feel as though this is an unfair depiction and Dawkins may have a few inconsistences but who doesn’t? Christians should be last to point at inconsistences, with all 44,000 denominations I find it hard to see much unity or consistency. There is nothing wrong with a good ol’ argument, but is simply stupid and unnecessary.

   Thanks,

   Sam

4. admin
   Posted December 12, 2009 at 1:03 pm | Permalink

   Sam, with due respect, I am not going to get into a discussion with you that is riddled with emotion and scant on substance.

   You don’t like/understand the humor on display? Get over it, move on. There are more important issues at stake than your subjective opinion about humor.

   You “feel” it is an unfair depiction of Dawkins? Really. I wonder how consistent you are? Have you also harshly criticized Dawkins for his disrespectful (actually downright nasty) depiction of God.

   Your next argument re denominations is irrational. Most Christians agree on most doctrine. Yet many atheists disagree with Dawkins (e.g. Dr. Michael Ruse who said Dawkin’s book made him embarrassed to be an atheist!). So what? Does this mean atheism is false? Of course not.

   What do you mean “nothing wrong”? Given atheism, all (including you and me) are just atoms and molecules, so what on earth are you meaning by “wrong”. Your argument does not make sense.

   Regards,

   Rob

5. Sam Winiata
   Posted December 12, 2009 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

   Rob, how do you mean, “riddled with emotion and scant on substance”? All I was wanting to get at is that this particular video isn’t a help. Most of the videos you guys post are greatly enjoyable to watch, I just thought, in my humble opinion, that If you wanted to show Dawkins’ inconsistences why not post the official videos rather than a parody?

   Why are you attacking me with comments like, “Really. I wonder how consistent you are?”. I strive to be consistent, but at the end of the day we are all humans and it’s okay to get things wrong aslong as we can be open to new ideas and realisations. And I am open to constructive criticism.

   “You don’t like/understand the humor on display? Get over it, move on. There are more important issues at stake than your subjective opinion about humor.”

   Correct.

   “You “feel” it is an unfair depiction of Dawkins? Really. I wonder how consistent you are? Have you also harshly criticized Dawkins for his disrespectful (actually downright nasty) depiction of God.”

   Blasphemy is a victimless crime. The Old Testament God, again, in my humble opinion, is a disrespectful depiction of “God”. God(EVERYTHING) is much more beautiful. I’m not an athiest, by the way, just Sam.

   “Your next argument re denominations is irrational. Most Christians agree on most doctrine. Yet many atheists disagree with Dawkins (e.g. Dr. Michael Ruse who said Dawkin’s book made him embarrassed to be an atheist!). So what? Does this mean atheism is false? Of course not.”

   The first sentence is a conclusion with no premise. Most christians agree on most doctrine is a fair call(most being anything above half(50 percent)), although it’s often fundamental things that are disagreed upon. Atheism does not require complete agreeance on everything, as does christianity. Jesus is the only way to the father. And so obviously, this does not mean atheism is false. Of course not. durr.

   “What do you mean “nothing wrong”? Given atheism, all (including you and me) are just atoms and molecules, so what on earth are you meaning by “wrong”. Your argument does not make sense.”

   I said, “There is nothing wrong with a good ol’ argument”. I could reword that as, “A well rounded argument is enjoyable”, if that would be more pleasing. Given quantom mechanics, all is mysterious, all is wonderful(full of wonder). Morality can exist without the existence of a higher-law giving deity. Surely we can agree on that? Had you of read my argument correctly you may have been able to find it sensible.

   Spirituality is always a tough discussion(especially through text rather than face to face conversation). It’s a personal thing, so you can only advocate your point of view so far. I am a seeker of truth and if you have the truth I will get to it eventually but if you are in possesion of the truth why have you attempted to disprove my thoughts on this rather than enlightening me?

   Sincerly,

   Sam