The parallel is really quite fascinating.

Because Richard Dawkins declined an offer to debate the existence of God with William Lane Craig, Premier Christian Radio is putting his (Dawkins’s, that is) name on buses:

The new advert reads: “There’s probably no Dawkins. Now stop worrying and enjoy Oct 25th at the Sheldonian Theatre.”

This, of course, is a paraphrase of the 2009 atheist advertising campaign, which put “There’s probably no God” on bus sides. Where the heathens put “God,” PCR puts, “Dawkins.” Hmm. Interesting. Of course I realize the context is different, but…you do know how this looks, right, PCR? It’s kind of like you think we worship Prof. Dawkins, or something. We don’t even always agree with him.

The reason why Prof. Dawkins is uninterested in debating is basically that the event would look good on their resume, not so much on his. Meanwhile,

Prof Craig said the poster campaign “leaves a shred of hope that he may turn up”.

He thinks Prof. Dawkins will change his mind because they’re using his name to advertise the event? Yeah, I don’t think so.

I made it happen!

The tickets all disappeared in, like, two days, but the UMD Society for Inquiry set up an overflow room in a nearby building with a live video feed, and I SAW RICHARD DAWKINS GIVE AN INTERVIEW TONIGHT. I was hoping to get my copy of The Greatest Show On Earth signed, and that didn’t happen because crowd control sucked and THE LINE WAS NOT MOVING, so I got the heck out of there before my bladder took its vengeance. But, I got to see Richard Dawkins tonight! (I made it there with plenty of time, managed to grab a snack beforehand so I wouldn’t suffer a panic attack halfway through the talk, and didn’t even have to pay for visitor parking!) There should be video online tomorrow. It was almost entirely about biology and evolution; very little to do with religion and atheism, which is fine. We get a bit more material on skepticism, cosmology and social changes in the Q&A session afterwards.

Do religious apologists have a repressed man-crush on Richard Dawkins?

If you want people to read your article about religion, atheism and/or science, you know what you need to do? Start it with a nice picture of Richard Dawkins’s face. Love him or hate him, the man sells papers.

Seriously, though, I’m having a hard time grasping how Christianity’s appeal to the “intellectually and educationally excluded” should be a point of pride. Sticking up for the little guys, great. Choosing the side of “little children” in opposition to the “learned and wise”? Really? That’s where you want to plant your flag? If you expect the rest of us to join you in equating anti-intellectualism with moral integrity, don’t hold your breath.

Why I love to read Dawkins

An example:

Here, it seems to me, lies the best answer to those petty-minded scrooges who are always asking what is the use of science. In one of those mythic remarks of uncertain authorship, Michael Faraday is alleged to have been asked what was the use of science. ‘Sir,’ Faraday replied. ‘Of what use is a new-born child?’

Continue reading