doogie:
so be it. (not all atheists worship dawkins, ya know. )
All true atheists do!
Qcmbr:
1/ Several broad brush statements (from the title of the documentary to things like 100million something Americans believe that the world is less than 10000 years old or something like that - extrapolated from Southern Baptists.)
His figures are consistent with several polls I've seen on the subject. See http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm
2/ The failure to point out that aethiesm can be dangerous - at one point I really thought he was glorifying a supposedly 'underground' movement of 'free thinkers' in the bible belt. Extremism on any level is dangerous and he kinda embraced anyone not ensnared by religion as somehow on his side. Maybe just my view.
I'm not sure how atheism in itself can be dangerous. Dawkins consistently pointed out that belief based on something other than evidence is what's dangerous. This could also apply to particular atheistic philosophies, although not atheism itself which is merely a lack of belief.
3/ Some silly statements - couldn't see how the world could continue with such religious division and conflict as though religion and conflict was new to humanity and the greatest threat.
It's not new, but religious fanatics now have the wherewithal to obtain nuclear weapons - one man who believes he is in direct communion with God is in control of the world's largest arsenal.
4/ He quite quickly lost his patience in the face of religious dogmatism. Seemed like they had to keep cutting it short as he clearly got upset.
I can relate to that. It's very difficult not to get frustrated when arguing with people who have proudly abandoned reason. I thought he did an excellent job of controlling himself in the face of such rabid and irrational dogmatism.
5/ Cr*p analogies with 'cosmic teapot' and 'mount improbable' (someone else can explain it - I though it was pretty weak.)
Neither analogy was explained particularly well. I think that was due to the format of the programme rather than faults in the analogies themselves. The "cosmic teapot" is simply intended to show the absurdity of believing something simply because it cannot be disproven. I thought it was overdone a little.
"Mount Improbable" is Dawkins' own analogy. Opponents of evolution often claim that evolution would have to make huge impossible leaps to produce what we see today. Dawkins' argument is that huge leaps would not be necessary. Populations could improve fitness by a series of small steps, eventually reaching a peak of maximum fitness. The subject is covered in detail, with numerous examples, in his book Climbing Mount Improbable.
