• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Epic Fail of Richard Dawkins

epix

Banned
E
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
3,123
The failure got nothing to do with Dawkin's epic battle with the literal creationists. As one of his friends remarked, Richie is not a trained psychiatrist to start the battle, not to mention winning it. The failure in the title refers to something that Dawkins had really hard time to swallow -- he was shot in the back, so to speak.

Thinking about the evil of religion, Dawkins came to the conclusion that, as an atheists, he should contribute to its neutralization the best he could to make the future of mankind appear in brighter colors. So he decided to teach. His strategy was as rationally conceived as rationality can reach; he realized that the rigor of science can make this superior method of figuring stuff out difficult for some folks to follow and as a result they would accept religion as an alternative to acquire the truth. But the concept and the general methods of science are not that difficult to grasp. Astronomy or cosmology, for example, can be very demanding disciplines, but Carl Sagan's rendition of them became very popular.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmos:_A_Personal_Voyage

And so Richard Dawkins decided to adopt Carl Sagan's proven approach and became Professor for Public Understanding of Science at the Oxford University -- a position created especially for him. Did his 1995 - 2008 tenure accomplish what Dawkins thought it would? You be the judge:

A Regius Professor of Divinity is due to be appointed by Her Majesty the Queen at the University of Oxford, with effect from 1st October 2011, or as soon as possible thereafter.

The professor will hold a canonry at Christ Church. The person appointed will either be ordained in Priest's Orders in the Church of England or in an Episcopal Church in communion with the Church of England, or be eligible for and prepared to accept ordination.
Click to expand...
http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/global/ww...herparticularsforprofessorships/wd92-0610.pdf


(...And one for the road: LOL.)
 
...what the absolute **** does that have to do with Dawkins?
 
umno.jpg
 
There's a fail here, its an Epix one, but it isn't Dawkin's.
 
epix said:
The failure got nothing to do with Dawkin's epic battle with the literal creationists. As one of his friends remarked, Richie is not a trained psychiatrist to start the battle, not to mention winning it. The failure in the title refers to something that Dawkins had really hard time to swallow -- he was shot in the back, so to speak.

Thinking about the evil of religion, Dawkins came to the conclusion that, as an atheists, he should contribute to its neutralization the best he could to make the future of mankind appear in brighter colors. So he decided to teach. His strategy was as rationally conceived as rationality can reach; he realized that the rigor of science can make this superior method of figuring stuff out difficult for some folks to follow and as a result they would accept religion as an alternative to acquire the truth. But the concept and the general methods of science are not that difficult to grasp. Astronomy or cosmology, for example, can be very demanding disciplines, but Carl Sagan's rendition of them became very popular.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmos:_A_Personal_Voyage

And so Richard Dawkins decided to adopt Carl Sagan's proven approach and became Professor for Public Understanding of Science at the Oxford University -- a position created especially for him. Did his 1995 - 2008 tenure accomplish what Dawkins thought it would? You be the judge:


http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/global/ww...herparticularsforprofessorships/wd92-0610.pdf


(...And one for the road: LOL.)
Click to expand...



What the **** are you talking about?

You were close with the title of the thread, though. Yet another epix fail. But you're getting good at those.
 
I don't agree with Dawkins' approach on many things and i feel he went overboard, but Just remember that every time you point a finger, three are pointing back at you.
 
Maybe Epix thinks that Oxford University has never had a Regius Professor of Divinity before...
 
Brainache said:
Maybe Epix thinks that Oxford University has never had a Regius Professor of Divinity before...
Click to expand...


I think that epix thinks Dawkins saw his mission when appointed Professor for Public Understanding of Science as the elimination of religious belief in the UK, and that, since a Regius Professor of Divinity is to be appointed, Dawkins failed.

If that's what epix thinks, he has little understanding of reality.
 
Last edited:
It's almost like that patter text people add to web pages to make them look better to search engines, where the sentences are just syntactically correct but meaningless constructions pumped and assembled out of a database.


I *think* he's suggesting there's Fail in that Dawkins has failed to have a big enough effect for the Queen to abandon appointing to an ancient, historical, but nevertheless religious post at Oxford.
 
Last edited:
Beerina said:
It's almost like that patter text people add to web pages to make them look better to search engines, where the sentences are just syntactically correct but meaningless constructions pumped and assembled out of a database.
Click to expand...


That's as good a description of epix's posts as any I've seen.

Maybe they make sense in his own mind... Scary.
 
Last edited:
...and in other news, I used the beard trimmer on the electric shaver to trim the hair over my ears, but slipped. My hair now looks a little odd....
 
AdMan said:
You beat me to it. While you were writing that I was editing my post to add "scary". :D
Click to expand...

I noticed that, haha.

I guess we must be on the same wavelength... now that's really scary.
 
Last edited:
Beerina said:
It's almost like that patter text people add to web pages to make them look better to search engines, where the sentences are just syntactically correct but meaningless constructions pumped and assembled out of a database.
Click to expand...
Thank you, I knew there was a reason epix's posts always looked so familiar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom