Trigger warning:

This site may, in fact always will contain images and information likely to cause consternation, conniptions, distress, along with moderate to severe bedwetting among statists, wimps, wusses, politicians, lefties, green fascists, and creatures of the state who can't bear the thought of anything that disagrees with their jaded view of the world.

Aug 10, 2013

Richard Dawkins hits the PC barrier

Prominent atheist, biologist, writer, and a number of other things, Richard Dawkins has run foul of the PC crowd over his comments on Twitter. 
Dawkins, who tends to be scathing about all religions, apparently made the mistake of thinking that given his across the board disbelief in all faith based thinking, it was OK to criticise the religion of peace: 
RICHARD Dawkins has sparked a backlash on Twitter after he claimed the world's Muslims have won fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge, but added: "They did great things in the Middle Ages, though". 
The outspoken author went on to defend the remarks which sparked fury on the social network where he was accused of disguising his "bigotry" as atheism. 
A series of high-profile Twitter users weighed in to condemn the comments prompting Professor Dawkins to question what Muslims had achieved since the Dark Ages.
The row broke out after he observed: "All the world's Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge.” 
He responded to the barrage of ensuing criticism by telling his followers: "A statement of simple fact is not bigotry. And science by Muslims was great in the distant past.” In a further posting he wrote: "Where would we be without alchemy? Dark Age achievements undoubted. But since then?” 
He sought to justify the controversial observation by adding: "Why mention Muslim Nobels rather than any other group? Because we so often hear boasts about (a) their total numbers and (b) their science.” 
One angry Twitter user hit out at the remarks telling the author: "You absolutely disgust me.” Writer Caitlin Moran added: "Think it's time someone turned Richard Dawkins off and then on again", while Channel 4 News economics editor Faisal Islam questioned Prof Dawkins' "spurious use of data". 
Writer and commentator Owen Jones told Prof Dawkins: "How dare you dress your bigotry up as atheism. You are now beyond an embarrassment.” ...
It appears, that while it is perfectly fine to knock the Bible, dispute Judaism, criticise Buddhism, Taoism, and all but one of the rest, Islam must be given a pass, even among atheists.
There appear to be ten Muslim recipients of the Nobel Prize, although six of these have received the largely discredited, or at least, devalued Peace Prize.  Two have won the literature prize, one, Physics and another, chemistry.
Trinity College has 32.


  1. What little childish rant. Richard Dawkins followers are notoriously obtuse and yes, immune to both evidence and reason. Keep crying political correctness forever; it doesn't conceal the fact that it's really your kind that is the heir of PC victimist culture.

  2. Immune to evidence and reason?

    Who are you trying to kid, us or yourself?

    It is religious people who are immune to evidence and reason. Religion is politics dressed up in metaphysical bullshit so as to claim it is the correct way of life, because it's not just someone's theory: it's the law as handed down by God, so we'd all better obey it.

    Muslims should be criticised on this basis, in particular as most of them do not come from societies with secular ideals (even Turkey is turning away from secularism).

    As soon as anyone does criticise Muslims for their absolutist political agenda, the left start bleating "Racist!", because most Muslims aren't white.

    Of course, any criticism of their politics / religion must be thinly veiled racism.

    Yes, you're right ... I wouldn't criticise Islam if its adherents were mostly white.

  3. Thanks Brian; I meant to get back to this one but was too busy, and it seemed too incoherent to be bothered with anyway.

    To me it doesn't matter a toss whether people follow a religion or not, they are welcome to any belief system they like, be it Christian, Jewish, Muslim, some of the more exotic Asian ones, Norse ancient Greek, Roman, Byzantine, or even the Great Green Arkleseizure, just as long as they leave me out of it.

    The fact that religion is an unquestioning belief system, while disturbing, is not a problem. But when the adherents of such a belief system start insisting that their beliefs need to be applied to others against their own rational judgement is.

    Dawkins, with his confrontational style causes howls of outrage from all religions though most accept his right to criticise even if they don't like it. There is no rational reason why Muslims should be excluded from his right to speak as he sees fit unless he is advocating coercion against them, which he is not.

    The fact that they will get upset and kill some people if they are criticised is not a valid reason to block rational debate, and is a strike against them. The imagined word of an illusionary sky fairy is not a valid reason for the abrogation of our rights.