It’s like I’ve always said: I wouldn’t want to meet that militant atheist Richard Dawkins in a dark alley.
Click image to enlarge!
(via Unorthodox Atheism)
😆 Now that is funny.
I’m waiting to see how Dawkins fits epigenetics into his version of would be Darwinian fundamentalism. He’ll have to now that Nova has done a full hour on it and some of his fans might put one and one together. Maybe he’ll use it to breath some life into memes.
You know, for the entire time Dawkins has been promoting “the public understanding of science” creationism has been gaining strength. I don’t understand why people think he’s good for the acceptance of evolution when the evidence wouldn’t tend to support that contention.
Regardless of the success or failure rate of Dawkin’s particular style of Atheism promotion, and I think that is very much in the eye of the beholder, that’s a funny cartoon! Thanks, Hemant!
Michael W. Jones, I didn’t address his success in Atheism promotion but in the promotion of “the public understanding of science”. Your answer implies that you think science is the property of atheists, which seems to be a common enough mistake in neo-atheist circles. Science never was and is not the exclusive property of atheists.
You do know that Dawkins’ alleged area of current professional expertise is in the public understanding of science, it’s what his day job is entitled. How he holds it while having a record of destroying the public acceptance of science shows how little his university values that important role. I expect Oxford will be giving James Watson a combined chair in the promotion of careers in science for those of African ancestry and women any day now.
Stepping away from olvlzl’s naysaying for a bit, but did anyone else find it interesting that Dawkins in riding a bycicle? I mean, no attack helicopters or even a motorcyle? Is his position really that underfunded?
King Aardvark, naysaying? And here I held back from mentioning that the cartoonist gave Dawkins more crotch padding than the Marlboro man got airbrushed in. And that’s nothing compared to the phony message of the cartoon. Dawkins is a failure at educating the public in the understanding of science.
What’s wrong with riding a bicycle? That wouldn’t mean he’s underfunded…it would mean he’s fit! Survival of the fittest, you know 😉
Oh, look, I Love Zuul (There is no Dana, only Zuul) is trolling again.
I like the bike too. Hurrah for car-free Dawkins! Whats good enough for Einstein is good enough for him, I should think.
I also agree that the education methods presented in the cartoon are both pedagogically unsound and an excellent spoof of Dawkins’ approach. One doesnt have to be ollie to think that Dawkins is not the best ambassador to people afraid of science.