Skepchick Warring with Dawkins Again

[Ayaan]

IIRC, a couple of folks blogged about those events (Peter Harris and Jerome, I think) and most who read them at the time said they were extremely accurate accounts of events. I don't have the links right at hand, but could probably find them if I felt like searching right now.

[Bella Fortuna]

IIRC, a couple of folks blogged about those events (Peter Harris and Jerome, I think) and most who read them at the time said they were extremely accurate accounts of events. I don't have the links right at hand, but could probably find them if I felt like searching right now.

That's correct.

[Ayaan]

Thanks, Bella. Nice to know that although the rest of me is falling apart, my memory still works. Still to lazy to search right now, however.

[DaveD]

Peter Harrison's blog: http://realityismyreligion.me/2010/02/2 ... open-soon/

[Robert_S]

That whole period is assuming mythological proportions as it recedes into the past. Soon, no-one will be able to remember what really happened.

SOMETHING HAPPENED?!??

"There were giants in the earth in those days ..."
- Genesis 6:4

IIRC, a couple of folks blogged about those events (Peter Harris and Jerome, I think) and most who read them at the time said they were extremely accurate accounts of events. I don't have the links right at hand, but could probably find them if I felt like searching right now.

Dig for the bones, put them in a museum, we'll take pics!

There are not going to be any more giants for a while it seems. Something went horribly wrong with the climate.

But anyway: I was making the point that while footing the bill entitles you to some respect, it doesn't buy you a moral/ethical pass.

[DaveD]

Jerome's blog: http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/02/2 ... -to-close/

[klr]

Peter Harrison's blog: http://realityismyreligion.me/2010/02/2 ... open-soon/

Jerome's blog: http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/02/2 ... -to-close/

Ah yes, it's all coming back to me now. But that wasn't the first "event", and nor was it the last, even if it was the most publicised. My memory goes back to the the prehistoric days.

...

But anyway: I was making the point that while footing the bill entitles you to some respect, it doesn't buy you a moral/ethical pass.

Can't argue with that.

[Ayaan]

Thanks, DaveD.

[Cormac]

Copyright devloped from counterfeiting which has been around as long as currency,it was taken so seriously it could carry the death penalty ( I think it still does in China), the fact that counterfeiting in modern times produced perfect copies isnt particuarly important the principle is the same

At one time, Isaac Newton had the jobs of Warden and Master of the Mint, to resolve the problem of debasement of the currency.

[Cormac]

For a number of reasons - not all of which I want to go into here - I am not all that surprised at this.

But on another level, I would not be too hard on RD. Anyone in the public eye as much as he is, with such a busy public schedule, is going to get a bit ratty from time to time.

Watson and her brigades have spent the last few years taking every opportunity to attack and smear Dawkins - and he is supposed to ignore that?

Fuck Watson. She is a despicable arsehole. I'd have done precisely the same thing as Dawkins. There's absolutely no way that I'd share stage with a venomous toad like Watson after what had happened, so I'd have withdrawn if they'd gone ahead with her. Their choice.

[Cormac]

I'm sorry all the 'famous' atheists she dealt with weren't perfect and full of rational thoughts and actions 100% of the time. Geez, it's like she wasn't expected to be dealing with living, breathing human beings.

It is oddly as if she is expecting him to act like a perfect Daddy figure, with infinite tolerance and forgiveness, and not a human being.

[Cormac]

LOL -- Love the bit about being so shocked that a speaker could use his position to keep someone else off the lineup. Doesn't the Skepchick crowd try to do that all the time? They've said before that they won't appear at places if someone is there or something isn't done. They've called for boycotts. They're using their power to effect the results they want. What? Others can't do it?

If I were Dawkins, I'd do the same thing. I wouldn't want her on the same stage with me. All she'd do is start spouting off her usual claptrap and she'd turn a "Reason Rally" into an endless discussion of etiquette and "how to treat a lady."

Not to mention that you'd not be able to ask someone if they'd like a coffee, or perhaps a little more wine...

[Cormac]

LOL -- Love the bit about being so shocked that a speaker could use his position to keep someone else off the lineup. Doesn't the Skepchick crowd try to do that all the time? They've said before that they won't appear at places if someone is there or something isn't done. They've called for boycotts. They're using their power to effect the results they want. What? Others can't do it?

If I were Dawkins, I'd do the same thing. I wouldn't want her on the same stage with me. All she'd do is start spouting off her usual claptrap and she'd turn a "Reason Rally" into an endless discussion of etiquette and "how to treat a lady."

The bit I found funny is how she appears to have some reverence towards Watson, like she's somehow significant.

Almost as if she is some kind of idealised human being, on some kind of...pedestal...

[Cormac]

Hmmm. Beccypoos wants people to boycott Dawkins and his products, totes OK. P Z fuckwit refuses to attend any conference in which Abbie Smith attends, totes OK (despite power differential.) Richard Dawkins may not have wanted to be at the same event as some lowlife fuckwitted drama queen (truth yet to be established) OMG OMG OMG, EBIL EBIL DAWKINS. Will someone please explain why eugenics is a bad idea again because I'm just not seeing it.

[Cormac]

As far as I'm concerned, they are pushing a big lie.
Dawkins didn't stop anyone speaking. He just exercised his right to choose who he shared a platform with.

Also, Dawkin's main interests lie in evolution and atheism. If he doesn't like the idea of those interests being hijacked by those pushing feminism and social justice, he has the right to back out of speaking. I don't blame him one bit.

Watson wants public exposure off the back of people who are famous because they've DONE something. I can see why Dawkins had no inclination to help her in that mission.

It's up to others what they do about it.

Rebecca Watson is a nobody, in the scientific world. I'm not surprised they chose to go with Dawkins.
Watson is free to talk to anyone if they want to listen, but to share a platform with someone, she needs them to agree to it.