Enquiring Mind - sorry if I misunderstood you. But as I said, your comment contained "many a true word". Dawkins concentrates on the Christian faith, whilst basically criticizing all belief in the supernatural, whatever the religion. - I'm happy that the new atheism debate has shown people that there's an alternative to religion. (When I was a child I thought there must be something wrong with me. Was I the only one not to believe in God?) - I (and Dawkins too, I suspect) don't imagine that freeing people from religion would automatically lead to world peace. But fundamentalistic religious fanaticism would no longer be a reason for persecution and wars. The same applies to pseudo-religious belief-systems such as Stalinism, Nazism, Maoism. - Overcoming all belief-systems would lead to a more rational and humane approach to the problems of today's world. We surely can't leave this to the efforts of one man.

alan, cologne,

alan, cologne - Actually, no I wasn't trying to be funny. I was kind of hoping my questions might be answered. I have not said that I am a believer or non-believer, but since he is eager to liberate Americans from the tyranny of their faith in God, I would assume he would naturally want to do the same for those in other nations who believe in a god or gods, etc. Am I correct in assuming that he believes this would lead to world peace? And who else but Mr. Dawkins would be brave enough to go into some of these nations & preach against any and all gods or religions? This has to be a very important and firmly held conviction of his to warrant book writing, travel, etc., and it takes strength of conviction to go up against what could be great danger in some of these places. Wouldn't that make him the right person for the job?

Enquiring Mind, Lawrencetown,

Greg Lorriman: "But why? After all you don't know that God doesn't exist: no one can prove it. Since you claim lack of belief rather than disbelief it is unreasonable for you withhold the benefit of the doubt."

Would you expect the same if I was presented with someone who claimed they were the reincarnation of Napoleon? I cannot prove that they aren't although I can make it look pretty unlikely by testing expectation and behaviour. For all practical purposes, I disbelief in the proposition that they're the reincarnation of Napoleon and I continue to have a general unbelief in reincarnation as a phenomenon until sufficient evidence is presented to rationally support a belief. Do you see how it works now? I do the same with the religious who claim to be in touch with a god. I know it's hard for some religious people to accept this level of scepticism, especially if they are living in a state of belief (which is not a conscious choice), but that's the way rational processing works.

David Jones, Loughborough, UK

David Jones:"I actually think people who claim a personal contact involving knowledge transfer with a deity are delusional,"

But why? After all you don't know that God doesn't exist: no one can prove it. Since you claim lack of belief rather than disbelief it is unreasonable for you withhold the benefit of the doubt. It only works if you really believe that God doesn't exist: an unjust presumption, since you have no proof, that is also stopping you from asking God himself.

As for mutually exclusive religions: at least Catholics have come, in time, to recognise that other religions have much of truth in them. Pope JPII said that Muslims worship the same God. Perhaps the others will too. But long development is a mark of this existence. However the Catholic Church still claims that only She has the fullness of truth.

As for the Trinity : In Genesis God says "Let us create Man in our own image". There are many examples like this. It was a matter of confirmation, not modification.

Greg Lorriman, Leatherhead, UK

"But it is mute point : you've already admitted a rational basis for faith,"

I have? I actually think people who claim a personal contact involving knowledge transfer with a deity are delusional, people who claim to feel the presence of a deity are unrational and probably delusional, and people who believe in a deity without either are irrational. I mean that as an unemotional statement, rather than as an attempt to be rude.

As for this alleged inclusiveness in the Body for other faiths, I really can't take that seriously. The major religions have survived, I'm sure, because they have adapted to suit the challenges of the age. However, the trinitarian modifications made to early Christianity are too central now to shift the concept to include the other religions. In reality, you're caught on the horns of a dilemma where holding to one religion implicitly denies the authenticity of the religious experiences of other equally devout and sincere people. And vice versa.

David Jones, Loughborough, UK

David Jones:"This implies that this alleged contact does not involve explicit knowledge transfer about the nature of god"

Why not? Religions often agree on essentials, but differ in lesser details. It isn't unreasonable that God might respect lineage and history: after all He set it up that way. In anycase much is answered by "To whom much is given much will be expected".

But it is mute point : you've already admitted a rational basis for faith, God or no god: an almighty being proving his own existence. That it isn't scientifically testable doesn't matter as it satisfies reason, and is testable on personal - the ultimate - basis: to persevere in (conditionally) asking God.

As to the mechanism : it is in the nature of baptism.

But I suspect your real stumbling blocks are such matters as creationism, rough bible stories, inquisitions, sexual oppression etc. Each can be addressed (ie. creationism is a minority Christian idea) but it is useless to do so to the closed mind.

Greg Lorriman, Leatherhead, UK

Greg Lorriman: "As a Catholic I understand that one can only be saved through Jesus Christ, but that it need not be explicit [...] That means there are many Hindus, Muslims, Pagans, etc whose hearts lean to God and are defacto members of his Body "

Now this is interesting (and very convenient, of course) if this is actually an attempt at an answer as to why different religions have devout adherents who have certainty of belief and sometimes claim subjective revelation and ongoing relationships with the divine. This implies that this alleged contact does not involve explicit knowledge transfer about the nature of god or indeed correction of misunderstandings given that all those different religions have quite different views about the divine. Of course, one alternative explanation is that all these people are unconsciously answering their own desires and fulfilling their own expectations. This would, of course, also account for different moral behaviour too.

David Jones, Loughborough, UK

Enquiring mind - am I right in assuming that you're trying to be funny? If so, then all I can say is: Many a true word is spoken in jest. The need for enlightenment is urgent. Someone should take on the task, though not necessarily Dawkins. Perhaps HYS sites on the internet could help.

alan, cologne,

"Having My Say" in more of a question re Mr. Dawkins' upcoming tour/crusade for atheism: Will he be touring in other nations as well? As a lightbearer of freedom from the tyranny of religion or any god, will he also be traveling to other parts of the world with other religions to enlighten these folks too? Christians refer to an almighty God, but some areas of the world are subservient to a whole host of gods, or to different named gods than Christians. Who will help these people to be set free from their beliefs in these places; such as the African continent, Mid-East, Oriental Nations, etc.? I hope he will show the same concern for these people as well and will soon be preaching in Saudi Arabia, China, etc. Is this in his plans for the near future? There may be closet atheists in other parts of the world who need him as well.

Enquiring Mind, Lawrencetown,

David, L : "Of course, you're indulging in circular reasoning. "

No I'm not, I just miss-worded my statement. You folks are too quick to see circular arguments. Here it re-done : A hypothetical god who is almighty and yet unable to prove his existence satisfactorily (re: the problem of subjectivity) is a contradiction in terms. By definition an almighty God could prove his own existence overcoming the problem of subjectivity. Indeed it is the nature of baptism.

As for other religions : some Christians are exclusivists. As a Catholic I understand that one can only be saved through Jesus Christ, but that it need not be explicit (or visible): saved through The Church, not the *visible* Church. That means there are many Hindus, Muslims, Pagans, etc whose hearts lean to God and are defacto members of his Body.

Mother Theresa isn't a saint yet. If her doubt was real, rather than the subtler temptation to doubt, then she had no faith. That 'miracle' was a bad sign.

Greg Lorriman, Leatherhead, UK

Greg Lorriman: "If an almighty God exists then it is silly to say He wouldn't have the ability to prove his own existence, overcoming the problem of subjectivity. Indeed the nature of Christian baptism addresses this. You just don't know the mechanism, and presume there isn't one: a pattern?"

If it exists as defined. Of course, you're indulging in circular reasoning. You're also presuming non-Christian mysticism doesn't exist despite the similar claim of its adherents to yours.

If 'faith' is only required to make the initial contact then people like Mother Theresa clearly have had no initial contact for most of their lives and are therefore deluded. If 'faith' is still required after initial contact then it's hardly the proof you claim.

Of course, most people understand that the mind is not always reliable. Indeed, we can generate a new and lasting state of mind simplying by wishing it and training for it as most students of neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) will attest.

David Jones, Loughborough, UK

Chris, Epsom: "David Jones, what about the plethora of stories of gained faith then? Many people have experienced God that way, and are surely not all deluded?"

John, you've missed the point. If a god proving itself 'subjectively' to an individual has the quality of a proof then why do plenty of people reject it later down the line? I am comfortable with the idea that people can develop a belief in god without proof, that's irrational but understandable, and doesn't really fall into the category of delusion.

The Catholic church is fast-tracking Mother Theresa to sainthood by looking for alleged miracles to show she has the power of intercession with her god and that her god can cure illness for those who appeal to her. If a god can and does intervene in our world in this way, curing self-limiting diseases as a proof of her status then why doesn't it ever cure amputees? Why just restrict itself to subjective revelation and rare medical cures of just self-limiting diseases?

David Jones, Loughborough, UK

Greg Lorriman: "And when you come to experience grievous suffering, as most do, the absence of God will make the suffering unbearably pointless. And that of your loved ones: think of that."

You're projecting. Most of my immediate family have died, including my mother of bowel cancer. Contrary to your assertions, the absence of a belief in a god has been a great comfort. As to my own suffering, I'm quite comfortable with my place in the universe and my lack of ultimate purpose. That's something the religious just don't seem to be able to understand. Possibly it's a genertic predisposition thing.

As Richard Dawkins points out, there's an underlying glee to be heard from some of the more strident Christians about the prospect of the non-religious suffering, which ought to be totally at odds with the Christian message. I'm hearing that in the tone of your message at the end there.

David Jones, Loughborough, UK

David Jones, what about the plethora of stories of gained faith then? Many people have experienced God that way, and are surely not all deluded?

Chris, Epsom,

David Jones :"You have no way of knowing if the creator of the universe is actually contacting you in your own mind. "

If an almighty God exists then it is silly to say He wouldn't have the ability to prove his own existence, overcoming the problem of subjectivity. Indeed the nature of Christian baptism addresses this. You just don't know the mechanism, and presume there isn't one: a pattern?

Granted that the true believer and the deluded believer may be indistinguishable to the outsider, but that is beside the point :which is whether God can prove his existence to the individual.

Whether God exists or not also concerns itself with the question of life after death. If you don't care about that then you are a fool, even more so if you have loved ones.

And when you come to experience grievous suffering, as most do, the absence of God will make the suffering unbearably pointless. And that of your loved ones: think of that.

Bad luck. But you deserve it for being so arrogant

Greg Lorriman, Leatherhead, UK

Dave,

So for pointing out that all of our logic maths and science is based on external, assumed knowledge that can't be proved, I am obfuscating? Is anything that contradicts your argument 'obfuscation'.

Do you deny that Godel proved that our logic and maths are based on external axioms? Do you deny that his proofs were generic and apply to all formal systems?

If not can you tell me why we should reject external axioms from any other system...such as any moral framework we attempt to construct?

And fairies wouldn't really be something I'd consider, being as they are silly, factual knowledge based images. Obviously something caused our creation and our conciousness..constantly alluding to daft and mocking images won't make that less of a fact.

You are capable of ignoring the evidence of creation/creator through an extremely limited knowledge of scientific method, which you've elevated beyond your natural capacity for rational thought. I don't say this as an insult..just fact.

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

Stuart: "Their logic is since they cannot prove, believe or accept the proof he exist, its means he doesn't."

No. Most of us reject the propositions of a particular god or gods. There's insufficient evidence to hold a belief and they're so detailed and human-centric that the likelihood is so small it's negligible for all practical purposes. The explanations for why people put forward such detailed god hypotheses are many orders of magnitude more plausible.

Atheism doesn't have anything to say about why our universe was created or, if it's reasonable to talk about time<0, what preceded it. For myself, I don't actually care as it's not relevant information for living my life. There could be a creative intelligence and the intelligence could be interested or not in humans. The creation could just as well be the result of an accidental process. There could be multiple universes. Nobody, including the religious, knows. Atheists just accept that.

David Jones, Loughborough, UK

Greg Lorriman: "Is that a fact? If by 'shown' you mean 'proven' then the problem is solved if God proves his own existence, which is what Christianity claims."

You have no way of knowing if the creator of the universe is actually contacting you in your own mind. It could be anything doing the contacting, including an alien species. Or nothing except your own delusion!

Afterall, Mother Theresa had severe doubts for a large part of her life, which would be quite unexpeced if it was as obvious a contact as you claim. Moreover, I've heard many differing accounts from Christians of the content and form of their alleged contact. There is also a plethora of stories of lost faith when Christians encounter significant adversity in real life.

Finally, Mohammed claimed personal revelation from his god too and his god is, for Muslims, the god of the Jews and Christians only without all the graven imagery or trinitarian enhancements. Many of those are prepared to die for it too!

David Jones, Loughborough, UK

Dave, Cardiff : "the fact that supernatural beings have never been shown to exist "

Is that a fact? If by "shown" you mean 'proven' then the problem is solved if God proves his own existence, which is what Christianity claims. If by "shown" you mean evidence then why do 40% of physicists think that there is an intelligent creator, and much of human history is obsessed with divine beings. My uncle was a nuclear physicist and said "In my work the finger prints of God are everywhere."

There is plenty of evidence of God's existence: the only people who deny it are atheists. And because of that evidence it is our duty to make an approach "Oh God, if you do exist, please reveal yourself". Persist, and He'll answer.

But instead of asking that question the arrogant atheists sits in his armchair, browsing the internet for porn, and just expects God to make an appearance. Fat chance.

Deny the body in order to prepare the spirit for God's Word. Otherwise it will be most painful.

Greg Lorriman, Leatherhead, UK

John Its very simple and all the obfuscation in the world will not change the fact that supernatural beings have never been shown to exist - anyone reasoning from the point of view that they do is simply doomed to fail no matter how many times they irrelevently mention Godel who as far as I am aware did not prove the existence of fairies, gods or the Loch Ness Monster.

Dave, Cardiff,

"Kidd Garrett"
You can engage me on my arguments if you like. Just no more misquotes or lies, please.

Dave -

You talk about reasoning, but I don't think you really get what the history of human reasoning is really based on. You seem to think that reasoning=scientific method.
It doesn't.

Scientific method is derived from rational thought.
Scientific method by definition applies to what is tangible and measurable..if not it remains in an abstract domain.

Yes I use this reasoning everyday. So did Einstein and Newton. Without this reasoning no scientific progress would have been made.

I find it interesting that physicists tend towards a much less certain and classically mechanistic vision of existence than biologists do...precisely because of the awareness of where our understanding is rooted, and the implications of that.

But those with a more self-enclosed or superficial view of scientific method can have unshakable belief in dead end ideas.

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

Dave, Cardiff: "Statements which are basically of the form "god exists therefore god must exist" is some kind of logical argument"

I was responding to your assertion that God springs out of nowhere, for no logical reason. That God is existence itself solves that problem. As for us knowing that God exists....

It's not that God-is-existence-itself that we know he exists, rather because God reveals himself and proves his own existence to each chosen individual. His condition is a sincere seeker asking persistently. The arrogance of the Huxlien agnostic is that he asserts that we can not know that God exists without bothering to ask God. After all, if God might exist why not ask him : "Oh God, if you exist, please tell us whether we can know you, and how".

In any case evidence is not enough for belief, only for an opinion. For belief you need proof. No one has proven that God does not exist, while theoretically God could prove his own existence. Belief without proof is irrational.

Greg Lorriman, Leatherhead, UK

J McD,

Once again you appear to be under the delusion that you are explaining things. You aren't, you know. What you are doing is making assertions and backing them up with rather bizarre and obscure phrases culled from your reading of the ephemera of the philosophy of science. To explain:

"To make plain, manifest, or intelligible; to clear of obscurity."

What you appear to be doing is attempting to bury opposition to your superstition in high-faluting tosh.

Attempting to be patronising is not the same as explaining, clouding the issue is not the same as explaining, getting on a Goedelian high horse is not the same as explaining.

If you actually had a point to make, it might be explainable, sadly you are in a position where you are attempting to share your delusion with people who can think quite clearly.

As Dave pointed out below, you are not at home to Mr Logic, strangely, your riposte was even more garbled than the non sequitur which prompted his first comment.

Kidd Garrett, Bristol, UK

Greg Lorriman, Leatherhead
Stuart, London,
John McD, San Francisco
Kevin, London,

I wouldn't allow any of you to sit on a jury as you seem to be saying that
Evidence is irrelevant or exactly the same thing as anything that can be imagined as long as it tallies with your beliefs.
Statements which are basically of the form "god exists therefore god must exist" is some kind of logical argument.
If we don't know the exact cause for something right now then the cause must be magic or there is no cause. If there is no cause then the cause must be god.

Do you use this kind of reasoning in your everyday lives?

Dave, Cardiff,

Let there be no doubt, faith and belief in GOD exists because of proofs and evidences by the people he have chosen, past or present he works through them. Its GOD 's prerogative not to reveal himself to all, even I a human have the prerogative not to reveal myself, yet I existed. Does it means that if I dont reveal myself I dont exist, Oh well you can see my writings as a proof but Its up to you to believe or not. The Bible written a thousand years ago contains many proof also, but again its up to the person to believe any writings or not. While atheism has no proof whatsoever other than their own belief of non-existence. Their logic is since they cannot prove, believe or accept the proof he exist, its means he doesn't.

Stuart, London,

DC, Glasgow,

"gun-toting, small minded simpletons"?
hmm....One common example of natural selection is the Special Brew toting Glaswegians pan handling on my high street everday.

Aint small minded bigotry a wonderful thing.

Charlotte, Penrith, UK

Dave,

You're halfway there.

As I explained to you previously, we do know for a fact that there will always be a gap in our knowledge that manifests itself in very profound ways. We have Godelian proofs for that. The greatest mathematician of the twentieth century proved what most people (although not yourself) intuitively see.

If you were to investigate the history of maths, logic and rational thought, you would see how all our progress would have been stymied by stubborn insistence of materialist dogma. We profoundly depend upon assumed knowledge and the Platonic realm.

Explaining consciousness is not something that neuroscientists are getting around to. We are missing much more than mere factual knowledge on this score.

The God of the gaps argument is a red herring here because of the TYPE and NATURE of the knowledge we are discussing.

Existentially, consciousness is no indicator of God if you have created a risible cartoon image of such a thing, as Dawkins likes to do.

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

Dave,

Your inability to differentiate factual from conceptual knowledge, and the ludicrous from the plausible...is preventing you from understanding our arguments, and would also prevent you from understanding what scientific method is (if you were to investigate).

The Flying Spaghetti Monster is a construct based on your factual knowledge. You've eaten spaghetti before, seen birds fly, witnessed hidiousness wherever. And it's silly.

But the notions of the perfect circle, or of God as Love...these are entirely conceptual. Conceptual and real. Neither can be conventionally proven with video footage, but both give us access to tremendous progress.

As I pointed out previously, logic and maths (and hence science) are predicated on external knowledge (axioms).
Why would you have us reject external axioms in our moral and spiritual lives? A self-enclosed moral framework would, as Godel proved, be incorrect.

I suggest God as Love as a good external axiom to accept.

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

Chris - Epsom : pose the question
"Are all athiests so narrow-minded that they think all religious people are idiots? "

No, atheists are so narrow-minded that they require something called "evidence" - courts of law are identically "narrow-minded". Once you start believing things despite no evidence existing then you have to take all possible statements as equally valid. This is the entire reason for the phenomenon known as The Flying Spaghetti Monster, I find it inconceivable that an intelligent individual can assert that this imaginary being is any less valid than your imaginary gods.

Dave, Cardiff,

Dave, Cardiff : "almost any explanation is more credible than "A supremely powerful being appeared from nowhere and did it"

Perhaps you've been reading too much Dawkins since this is complete nonsense. God is existence itself (as well as causality itself). It is absurd to even discuss the existence of God because it is to discuss the existence of existence. The default is existence. He didn't spring out of nowhere: He has always existed. He only springs out of nowhere for the atheist since the atheist is presuming that he does not exist (presuming because it is impossible to prove the non-existence of God). For the religious the only non-existence is sin: the absence of good, not even a thing. As God said to Adam :"Where have you been?": to an unknowable place since he had sinned. And as Jesus says to the damned : "I do not know you", because self-deceivers are not knowable.

You try to think in terms of non-existence, but there is no such as non-existence: only existence.

Greg Lorriman, Leatherhead, UK

Dave, Cardiff,

You are arguing with a straw man there. Are you saying that you believe that the universe has a cause or not?

Kevin, London,

Whenever the subject about the existence of God comes up one can expect an avalanche of passionate comments from the two camps namely the believers and the non believers. To me it seems so ridiculous that people are still debating this pointless and meaningless subject because the argument has been going on since time immemorial. The only reason I am writing this comment is to make people come to their senses(yes my ego is as big as Dawkins but not as big as God because He created the entire universe of his own accord he then expects us all to thank him for His moment of madness!) and stop people wasting their time and effort trying to convince each other about whether God exists or not. First of all it is impossible to prove the negative. By that I mean no body can say for certain that pigs cannot fly. The only way to prove this statement is to gather all pigs on earth and throw them out of a plane in mid air, even then we cannot be positive about the result because perhaps those that could fly may have suicidal tendency. Even there was a God he does not deserve our respect or worship because He is all knowing and almighty it would have taken Him no time or effort to create a PERFECT universe yet he had deliberately chosen to create one with plenty of imperfections and problems in order to 'test' our moral strength. He is the only ONE WHO can dictate about how the universe works in others words He is having fun at our expense. Therefore no body should ever be bothered about God and the last thing we should do is to get upset over HIM! By the way a true paradise is somewhere with no crimes, hatred, disappointment, sorrows, pains, diseases, wars and all sorts of disasters natural or man made. Such a state existed BEFORE the universe came into being!

Wing, Poole, UK

John McD : So to summarise
1. We can't explain consciousness currently (although history shows the foolishness of predicting what cannot be discovered or explained by the scientific method)

2. Our existence may be related to this (suggesting rather neatly that all animals also share consciousness as they too exist and are living)

3. This is some indication of god (sorry totally lost me there, you could just as easily claim that it is some indication of Gazpacho soup as the logical chain of inferences would be just as sound)

We're not at home to Mr Logic

Dave, Cardiff,

Julie,

Have my postings been raving and emotional and irrational?

As opposed to say, your unstubstantiated, aggressive and offensive assertion?

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

Dave, Cardiff,

It is not at all a stretch to recognise that our own consciousness has a special quality that cannot be explained by our current scope of scientific understanding (and may be impossible for us ever to measure).

Neither is it a stretch to think that the nature of our existence may be intrinsically related to and based upon this quality.

Such a concept lends itself towards the direction of God, and not the random nihilism of atheism.

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

You obviously haven't read all the posts then Julie from Frankfurt. Like Andrew from London. Michael from Melbourne, on the other hand, rants nonsensically about the end being nigh.

Are all athiests so narrow-minded that they think all religious people are idiots? That's the message that's coming across here.

Chris, Epsom,

I have come to veiw most religious dogma as a sort of chain letter. "Believe this or die and burn forever/ Send ten people this e-mail or you will sufferer grave consequences."

Athiest are treated horribly in the US, and people of faith should have the good manners to treat folks with respect.

However, calling all fellow athiest "brights" and going on tour smacks of self righteousness. Personal or community wide experiences of sprituality need expression and tradition, even if minimal, to channel them positively. No one should be forces or coerced either way.

The god or no-god argument is a waste of time. All of us should strive toward a better life, community, and world. So much time wasted on an unsolvable social and intellectual puzzle when there are sick to tend, poor to heal and employ, and children to educate.

SScape, Durham, US

Nice to see so many of my fellow Southerners here with such good attitudes. And someone from Jacksonville? I thought my family was alone here. I am definitely hoping Richard Dawkins makes his way near Jacksonville. I admire his bravery.

I bought my husband an Evolve fish sticker for his car this Xmas. He's almost afraid to put it on the car, for fear that the local Fish People will key the car.

Michelline, Jacksonville, FL , USA

Yes, Of course we need a Brit to show us what a "backward" and "simpleton" country we are. Thank you Britain for your help. Please send us all your most enlightened ones. I suggest your Bishop of Canterbury. If he cannot make atheists of us, no one can.

M, Milwaukee, USA

So revealing that the religious nuts writing here are barely comprehensible in their feverish nonsensical rantings in comparison to the calm rational contributions of Dawkins' adherents. It says it all really...

Julie, Frankfurt,

As an athiest, I resent Christians preaching their word to me to try and change my mind. Not sure how I feel about this. Is he trying to get people to come out of the closet or is he looking for converts? Seems to me if he's looking for converts, he's just as bad as the bible thumpers.

Loved the God Delusion, though

Teri, San Francisco, USA

Kevin, London : It is totally fallacious reasoning to claim as you seem to that when we don't know the answer to something then the answer must be magic. Has this principle ever been demonstrated to be true?
M-Theory is an idea about how the universe may have started but however you look at it, almost any explanation is more credible than "A supremely powerful being appeared from nowhere and did it"
Can't you see the logical fallacy there ? That is so far from being the simplest and most likely explanation that its chances of being correct are virtually nil.

Dave, Cardiff,

People with commited belief in things that are evidenced by "faith", are by definition delusional. Either there is something missing in thier lives they feel the need to replace with this nonsense, or they have been brain washed into believing it.
The man in the nut house 100% believes he IS Napolean, this dosent actually make him Napolean.

Mike, Southport, England

If you look at the cornucopia of religions around the world, it seems the range of utter nonsense you can believe in is endless. But it's a very successful business and I'm surprised the various churches don't float themselves on the stock market. They must already be worth billions. Funny hats, crazy costumes, ridiculous rules - people just love it! Much better than fairies! Who cares about evidence!

Phil, Singapore,

Nice to see that British comedy is being exported to the US - I hope they have as many laughs from Dawkins ridiculous polemics as us Britsh have had. Lets just hope they dont think we are all as foolish as he.

It really does say rather a lot that atheists now feel under pressure to 'rebrand'.; alothough I do rather agree with the term 'fact fighters' - I've met few so willing to fight the unblinkered, hard truth as atheists.

Simon, Birmingham, UK

Anyone who actually believes what is written in the Bible, the Koran or any other religious book is so devoid of logical reasoning and sense of perspective that it is not worth even trying to reason with them. In the case of the Bible belt, it is actually downright dangerous even to try.
Best to leave those gun toting, small minded simpletons to their ignorant ways. In 50 or 100 years, they will have endured such a prolonged period of self-imposed ignorance; they will be backward to the extent that they will have no influencial weight in the world - natural selection will strike again!

DC, Glasgow,

The Church in America should welcome Richard with open arms. The greatest enemy to faith is apathy. The idea that belief in God is an irrelevace in today's society is the real weapon for those seeking to challenge the Christian faith. Richard, along with his friends Sam and Christopher, have encouraged many to revisit their core beliefs and to ensure that their foundations are built on rock and not on sand. My faith is a lot stronger having read and considered their works alongside that of C S Lewis, Alistair McGrath and Ravi Zacharias. I thank God for the gift of reason.

Bradley Salisbury, Wells, UK

One may question the veracity of a particular religious revelation or assertion, but atheism is completely off the field.

The People of Reason(TM) claim logic and science as their own proprietary standards, yet atheism states that the universe has no cause whatsoever.

So while an evolutionist, for example, IS keen to attempt to explain genetic similarities between humans and apes - i.e. to seek the cause of such similarities - when faced with the contingency of all material things, the atheist hangs up his thinking cap and takes a chill pill. At this arbitrary point, apparently, endeth all reason.

Kevin, London,

Dawkins must be off his trolley.does he know the Southern states?Whilst not agreeing with his somewhat arrogant book,I did enjoy it.John Cornwall's "Darwin's Angel" was a superb rebuttal.
He must be aware that he will be lucky to survive the trip!I do pray that he does.

EDWARD SYNGE, TISBURY, wilts

Ian Hughes,

I'm sorry you don't think there is an discussion to engage in.

Whilst I don't expect you to believe in the flying spaghetti monster, I do expect you to understand that human perception, and what we are able to scientifically measure, is inherently limited.

Until you accept this you are putting science on a pedestal and proclaiming it powers that it simply does not have.

Even for the mathematics and logic we use, to have real practical power we are forced to assume unprovable starting rules.

Dawkins abrogates his duty to correct his audience on these matters (I assume he understands them himself).

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

John McD - there aren't arguments to be had, I simply cannot entertain any supernatural propositions whatever as there is simply no evidence for them. There is no getting past this point sorry, all the mysticism in the world doesn't help here.
Take the Randi $1 Million challenge, prove that the supernatural is real, then we can talk.

Ian Hughes, Manchester,

The Dawkins brand of atheist, prominent on these message boards, appear to have an over-inflated view of what science is and means. That certainly qualifies as superstitious faith as far as I'm concerned.

Furthermore, believing that there is zero or negligible chance of the existence of God is by definition belief. A dog or a cat doesn't think that way....they could be considered to be without belief. Not the militant atheists voicing off on here.

These arguments don't seem to evolve past the mindless parroting of a synopses of a random chapter of Dawkin's book.

There are real arguments to be had, but apparently not here.

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

Mr. Mitchell--you certainly don't know the Bible Belt very well, do you? Universal public education and colleges exist there, as well as the Internet.

Christianity is not a religion based on unreason. You might disagree with its premises, but the faith is based on sound logic. To assume the only reason people believe is ignorance is a faulty premise.

Gregory Baker, Odenton, Maryland, USA

Ian Hughes :"the tired, old "no religion is a religion" - i that case bald is a hair colour and not collecting stamps is a hobby"

It is a matter of belief and the actions that follow. You atheists/agnostics have decided that religious belief is irrational, despite being entirely rational based on God's revelation/proof of himself to the individual, and argue that religious instruction to kids is brainwashing and in any case religion "should be a private" matter, and may ban us from giving our own children the truth. We are rapidly heading that way, with Dawkins raucous noise the most irritating.

In that case your ideology of absence takes on religious and political dimensions. Instead of giving the benefit of the truth, as one who lacks belief must, you try to encourage us to betray God and our kids. Probably you are a true atheist "One who denies the gods/God" as the OED has it. And your "unbelief" bogus, since an agnostic would not condemn religious belief as delusion.

Greg Lorriman, Leatherhead, UK

Ah - the tired, old "no religion is a religion" - i that case bald is a hair colour and not collecting stamps is a hobby, its the same recurring theme of religious people continually trying to frame the debate in their narrow dogmas. Similarly the "hope" thing, this is the essence of the delusion that Dawkins refers to - why does belief in things that aren't true give hope ? To a rationalist this is the logic of children.

Ian Hughes, Manchester,

I believe in Father Christmas why because I've seen him and he keeps his promises, I can't think of one Christmas where I haven't got a present whereas I've lost count of the times I've prayed to God for something only to be disappointed.

Actions speak louder than words and my monies on Father Christmas :-)

Ajer, Reading, Uk

Dogtown, society certainly needs SOMETHING to motivate the masses. I'm hoping that Mr Dawkins is successful in replacing gut reaction religion with something more thoughtful. And can people please try to understand that religion is NOT necessary in order to lead a moral life ....

Janet, Cumbria,

I'm really not at all sure why Mr Dawkins is continuously and stridently proclaiming the non-existence of whatever he considers to be 'God'? Obviously he has made money from his book. Most people have their own thoughts, views, theories, beliefs or not as the case may be, and most people keep these to themselves and seem happy to do so.
Is Mr Dawkins trying to create some kind of 'non-religion' to counteract what he considers to be 'religion'? And if so, why? Very strange indeed! '... Me thinks thou does't protest too much!"

Tarni, London, UK

Why doesn't Dawkins take his 'crusade' to the Islamics? After all, if there is no Christan god then there is no islamic one either and they are more in need of freedom from religious persecution than any non believer in the US bible belt.. Money is quite clearly Dawkin's 'God' and he knows he can make more money out of stirring up controversy in the good ole Christian USA. All he would get in the Islamic world is a fatwa and a bullet.

Viv, London, England

I hope Mr Dawkins invests in some bodyguards, since there are many religious zealots in the US (and elsewhere) who might happily do him harm. I think he is very brave to visit such a hotbed of ignorance across the pond.

Mike Mitchell, Spalding, England

Successful society needs religion to motivate the masses. It is not coincidence that the US was the most successful society of the 20th century. Be careful to throw off the motivational power of religion in a plutocracy. Religion serves to enforce the unenforceable. Let the masses have the fairy tales.

Dogtown, Oakland, CA

"Richard Dawkins is just starting another religion and I predict there will be a schism among the atheists."

Hardly. He's just using the scientific method and rational thought to put superstition and religious belief into perspective. It's based on the observable and predictable world. Indeed, this approach has its own regulatory process: peer-review, logic, and open debate. It's the very antithesis of religion.

David Jones, Loughborough, UK

Well, after two millenia, we (and hundreds of millions of others) are still speaking of one man, Jesus Christ. For a man born into poverty, raised as a carpenter, with no social standing, no political power, and who lived a relatively short life...I would say he managed to accomplish something rather impressive. Choose not to believe his claims as to who he was, but the evidence of his life is troubling for those who decide to reject him and his message. As most of the 'athiests' on this forum seem to consider their own intellect so highly , I suggest they read CS Lewis's 'The Case for Christianity'. An understanding of the human condition, the problems on our world and societies leads one to believe that there is something 'wrong' with the way our world functions. Interestingly, the message of Christ provides the reasons for this, and the way to redemption for mankind. Atheism seems to provide nothing in the way of 'hope'. Seems a sad way to exist.

Andrew, London, UK

Dave,

It's superstitious to suppose that scientific method is self-enclosed and correct. It's superstitious to suppose that rational thought is derivitive of scientific method and not vice versa.

But don't let the facts get in the way of your preaching.

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

DadinTx,

I hardly think it's Christians who are getting hysterical on this message board.

Calm down and have a meaningful debate.

Charlotte, Penrith, uk

It's amazing how threatened Christians can feel by:
- one atheist who stands up to speak, when there is a religious person preaching in churches on every street corner in the US at least once a week.
- one person who stands up to speak for a minority (10%+) of the people in the US and their beliefs - comparable it to those who speak for black Americans, Hispanics, etc.
- a group of people who have no reason or rationale to support violence, unlike their own bible which is filled with murder and violence by a supposedly "benevolent protector"
- a group of people who believe infinitely less in Satan than they do
- a group of people who are tired of being subjected to force-fed religion, which was the very foundation of the US

Christians - your insecurity says more than your words do!

DadinTx, Houston,

John McD : I am not "follower" of anyone - this is one of the problems with this debate - the religiously motivated can only ever see things in their blinkered terms. Its this simple - many people cannot stay silent whilst other people inflict their idiotic superstitions on to us. People like Dawkins are correct to speak out against irrational belief systems - to say that people need to believe things that aren't true to have hope is such a completely depressing view of mankind. What on earth is wrong with living your life along principles of your own and making the most of the one and only life we have ? False promises of a hereafter I would actually categorise as evil.

Dave, Cardiff,

Scientists like dawkins' job is to prove or disprove the existence of things, since GOD is a spirit and not a thing, no wonder he cannot prove anything. By this understanding I believe why atheism exist.

Stuart, London,

I think, therefore I am an atheist.

Charles McIntire, Pasuquin, IN, Philippines

The great thing is that people are no longer afraid to come out openly and tell everyone that they have put aside old superstiitions and are now atheists. Wonderful!

alan, cologne,

Richard Dawkins is just starting another religion and I predict there will be a schism among the atheists. The more militant atheists will start killing people who do not share their belief just like Stalin and Pol Pot did before them. The militant atheists will kill because they cannot even criticise religions intelligently without sneers and insults. The funny thing is the militant atheists are the mirror image of the religious extremists. Good luck to Richard Dawkins.

Carolyn, Surbiton,

God is love.
God is hope.

Dawkins is a man with a ludicrous ego and questionable motives. His followers are reactionary and blinkered.

The fact is that without an external axiom we are crippled. With it we can have infinite hope.

Cynicism will cripple mankind, if we allow it. Stick with the hope and knowledge that you're born with.

John McD, San Francisco, ca, USA

some people beleive and some people don't. who's to say who is right and who is wrong.

it's no good attacking and trying to diminish someones perspective. If something brings a man joy what right does anyone have to try and take it away?

This debate has raged for centuries, its not going to be solved on a Times message board. Live and let live.

David James, London,

Stuart - London : Can you explain where the logic is in your faith and belief ? I can't see any - dogma is not logic. How can any logical argument exist which claims the supernatural is real?

Dave, Cardiff,

C.S. Lewis taught at Oxford. I wonder if Prof. Dawkins ever considered what he wrote in Mere Christianity. I find many Christians will quote from C.S. Lewis and themselves have not actually read this book. I would recommend it to both those who believe in God and those who don't.

Gregory Reese, Port Trevorton, PA/USA

The precious christians think their religion is precious and above criticism. Were their religion to truly have some worth, they would not be afraid of one man's words, be they mine or Dawkins.

Religion offers comfort in the same way a rabbit's foot does. Religion makes predictions as accurate as astrology's. Religion teaches people as much about morality as does islam; after all, they worship the same "god" of the old testament and christian religions have perpetrated the same acts as Osama bin Laden, only 500 years ago.

If religion had any real worth and credibility, it would welcome Richard Dawkins to speak in front of themselves. That they seek to silence him shows that they are afraid that Dawkins is right. The religious are afraid that even if Dawkins were wrong, their religious claims could not withstand his words.

If their beliefs can't withstand one man, then their beliefs should be abandoned.

T Shipley, Los Angeles, CA

The logic is called faith and belief. Those who have no faith does not believe and those who does not believe have no faith. But those who have faith and belief, for them & in them GOD exists .

Stuart, London,

Comparing GOD to things, how brilliant.

Stuart, London,

I love Dawkins. He's worse than a Jehovahs Witness.

OK, so you don't beleive in God, but why force what you beleive on thousands who find happiness, faith, love, JOY in God?

Dawkins is on one HUGE ego trip. He lives in a religious world. How many people does he honestly think he can persuade to renounce their faith?

Even if you don't beleive in God you should have some sort of love and compassion in you. Most people live by the ten commandments more or less. Theres a great article in this very paper about living 'biblically.'

people are free to beleive what they want, unless of course you beleive in Dawkins, in which case you have to buy his book. The man is nothing but a CHARLATAN.

And announcing this at Christmas! I can only describe this man by use of words which most certainly aren't in the bible!

Plenty of people are athiest. Many more aren't. We all live in peace. What does Dawkins hope to acheive? Militant Atheism?

David James, London,

peter codner: "the interesrting thing about proseletysing atheistsis that their very denial of the existence of god is in itself an affirmation of it"

Huh? That's a non sequitur.

Anyway, it's not, strictly speaking, a denial of the existence of a god or gods. We're without a belief in god. We think the likelihood of the gods proposed by the major religions is so small that it's negligible, especially given the onerous requirements a belief should entail.

David Jones, Loughborough, UK

peter codner, devizes : Brilliant logic - try applying that to fairies, the Loch Ness Monster, astrology, homeopathy, UFOs etc etc etc
Is there no proposition so daft that the religious won't say it ?

Ian Hughes, Manchester,

As an agnostic I am puzzled as to why Richard Dawkins is so determined to destroy what to many people is a source of inspiration and support and gives a non materialist meaning to their lives. Dawkins leads the comfortable life of an academic, enjoying the money flowing from his publications and basking in international celebrity status. Most of the believers I know, family, friends or aquaintances, lead rather more difficult and less glamorous lives, whether dogged by life threatening ill health, being amongst the less affluent or having much more demanding, yet socially more useful occupations. Their faith not only sustains them in such circumstances but also inspires them to regular acts of kindness to those less fortunate than themselves.
Nor do these people exhibit any intolerance. At the very least their attitude, in contrast to Dawkin's, is live and let live. The promotion of secularism in it's original sense, ie the separation of church and state, giving religion
no more ddemocratic rights or lobbying influence than any other belief system, including atheism, is to be applauded in a pluralist society. Dawkins, however, is not content with this. He now ressembles nothing so much as an Olympic gold star medalist who delights in going around kicking away the crutches of any lame person he meets and wallowing in the cheers of the onlooking crowd.

Jon, London, UK

the interesrting thing about proseletysing atheistsis that their very denial of the existence of god is in itself an affirmation of it

peter codner, devizes, england

Stuart London : Do you realise just how circular your logic is ? Do you actually understand what is meant by circular logic ? To illustrate lets say that you are in a jury in a trial would you dream of coming out with a statement to the effect of :
"There is no evidence either way so it follows that as there no proof of his innocence the defendant is clearly guilty"

Alternatively here is the standard proof of the existence of The Flying Spaghetti Monster

P1. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is a being which has every perfection.
P2. Existence is a perfection.
P3. Therefore, the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists.

Dave, Cardif,

An ordinary person or even the most brilliant scientist cannot prove the existence of GOD by just believing he does not exist. While those who believe in GOD does not need any proof he exist for they believe he is.

Stuart, London,

James, Adelaide, Australia.

Please read his books before you speak, I'll you you'll find that when you've read, say, the god delusion, you'll find you've just made the most stupid assertion on this thread.

Charles, London,

Richard Dawkins is a brave man, not a bad quality in a man who also has brilliance and charm and learning.

Frankly, and take this from someone who knows some of region well, the territory in which he intends to proselytize is just plain nut country.

It has millions of superstitious fanatics and stunted minds, many with shotguns in racks in the back window of their pick-up trucks or automatic pistols in their automobile glove compartments.

I do wish Dawkins well because the world needs a jump start into what is undoubtedly a future without its silly old superstitions, the cause of countless wars and other horrors.

JOHN CHUCKMAN, toronto, Canada

"To make the world a better place?"

That's pretty much it, yeah. Religion needs to be phased out. It's tragic that people will base their entire lives on medieval superstition.

Come on guys, we've surpassed that. Science has shown us that we don't need to invoke some sort of supernatural entity in order to create what we see today - The God of the Gaps is slowly growing weaker and weaker, until (hopefully) he will have no place at all.

Surely, we should strive and lust for truth: for understanding of the world around us, and the universe our world is situated in. Our barbaric superstitions as a race are doing no favours for a future utopia: they're throwing us backward, and not allowing us to move on.

Conor, Wellington, New Zealand

Yay, not being subjected to church dogma is always a good thing! Heck they've been killing each other for hundreds of years, they don't need anyone's help. I just wonder how long it will be before the Christians again practice the murder of non-believers just like the Muslims do?

The Christians have the market on ego-maniacal impulses cornered in the US. They not only believe in a god that tried to destroy the Earth once already, and think thats great, but they also greedily accept the murder of at least one person for their own gain. They love the idea of torturing and murdering others for the sake of their eternal existences. If thats not self-serving creepiness, I don't know what is.

Its time to end the eternal childishness of religion. Its time to counter the garbage of religion and provide a reasonable and harmonious system of understanding rather than one based on threats like religion.

Go Dawkins

The Stone, Decatur, Illinois

If you read "The God Delusion" by Dawkins it is very clear that he is addressing religion as a whole, and is not directing his views solely at Christianity. In fact Christianity is lumped together with with Judaism and Islam as one of the three "Abrahamic" faiths, all of which share the same jealous, sex obsessed deity. If you count trying to get modern man out from under the thumb of a mythology created by ancient nomadic goat herders, as making the world a better place, then yes, that's exactly what Dawkins is trying to do. 'Trying' because that's all he can do. People have to claw their way out of darkness for themselves. I hope more and more people do just that. The world has become far too dangerous for us to clutch to our blankies and binkies, and holy books and scream at each other about how much more real my imaginary friend is than yours.

Erik N., Fresno, California

This is so ironic. When christians went out into Europe to make converts, they were met with a lot of resistence by the pagan high priests, I'm sure.

Now the tables are turned, and now it's the christian high priests who are cowering at the idea of one professor who dares to speak his mind.

See? Evolution DOES happen!

MH, Omaha, USA

"but you who say you have knowlege of these things read The Bible and then prove to me there is NO God."

Actually bobbr, it was reading the Bible in church as a child that led me to realize it was clearly a work of fiction, and one that badly needed a continuity editor at that. Reading the book from cover to cover (and actually thinking about it) really highlights the inconsistencies and contradictions in both the events as well as the portrayal of the character of God.

For example, once I thought about it, it never made sense that an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent god would condemn people -- especially good people -- to an eternity of torture just because they didn't worship him. Torture??

For that matter, why would he need worshipers? Does he need his ego propped up? It doesn't make sense. On the other hand, it makes perfect sense if you ask why a *church* would need worshipers...

I believe in the possibility of a god, but not as he's portrayed by the major religions.

Will, Ithaca, NY, USA

If you spend your life believing that you have the One True Key to Salvation, in any particular flavor, then you lose an incredible amount: you lose the time spent in study and service to making sure you're really, truly, saved; you lose the ability to see people as people, instead of Saved and Infidel; you lose seeing the current world as important and worth improving, because - after all - you're too busy making sure that Salvation's just around the corner.

You also lose if you have the wrong One True Key. Better get them all, just to be safe, right?

Krista, Portland, Oregon, USA

i was once a christian here in the bible belt. raised that way, went to college to be in the ministry, etc.

then one day it hit me like a ton of bricks, that just like i used to believe that a fat guy with a white beard and a red suit used to bring me presents on christmas, i had been believing in a man-made myth that has no real manifestation in the world at all. people just want to believe that there is something out there bigger than themselves so they can give meaning to what they don't understand, but i finally learned that this is not necessary to be happy in life. in fact, it is much better to admit that no one has all the answers, and the moment you think you do is when you assert that you are better than everyone else.

taking personal responsibility for your own life and actions is the only real way to give meaning to your existence. stop trying to define it in terms of an abstract idea, whether it be a god, a pink unicorn, or some other think you insist on imagining...

stephen keith, jacksonville, florida

"If I live my life believing that Christ has saved me and that I will spend eternity in Heaven instead of burning in Hell and am wrong...I've lost nothing." - Jackie Duboise

You've lost intellectual integrity, influenced the political process in America for the worst and been a supporter of the bigotry the church now regularly participates in. You've lost plenty and are losing more for all of us.

Eli Brown, Seattle, WA

Jackie said:
If I live my life believing that Christ has saved me and that I will spend eternity in Heaven instead of burning in Hell and am wrong...I've lost nothing. But what if the athiest is wrong, what do they loose?

The atheist leads a respectable life in which he/she is not motivated to behave well because of the expectation of reward or the fear of "burning in Hell". In the world of a non-believer, human failings are just that---not "sins" that require a human blood sacrifice to "save" one from an angry god.

I would say that the atheist "looses" the tie that binds people to superstition, fear, and tribalism...

Joyce, Thousand Oaks, USA

@ Jackie D.

"If I live my life believing that Christ has saved me and that I will spend eternity in Heaven instead of burning in Hell and am wrong... I've lost nothing. But what if the atheist is wrong, what do they lose?"

This heap of quasi-logical thinking is known as "Pascal's Wager" -- better minds than mine have weighed in on this over the centuries -- look it up.

Suffice it to say, I'm a happy atheist! I hope Dawkins comes to the Detroit area.

~~ Mikey

Michael Rudas, Royal Oak, Michigan USA

James, do you want to see Dawkins under a fatwah licensing Muslims to kill him? So why don't you make your own views on Islam public? Dawkins is doing a great service to civilisation to counteract the insane belief babble of religions.

C.P., Oslo, Norway

James in Adelaide, rest assured that Dawkins directs his "atheistic" views towards all religions, including Islam, and rightly so.

Martin Rule, Warwickshire, UK

If I live my life believing that Christ has saved me and that I will spend eternity in Heaven instead of burning in Hell and am wrong...I've lost nothing. But what if the athiest is wrong, what do they loose?

Jackie Duboise, Seattle, Wa

I hope he comes to Atlanta. Being a nonbeliever myself I am behind enemy lines. I read a recent poll that said out of the 50 most advanced countries in the world, the U.S. is second to last in accepting Evolution and understanding genetics. Maybe it's no surprise due to our school system and how much the religious have intergrated into government. We have a ways to go in order to wake up and smell reality. Dawkins could bring a breathe of fresh atheism here that is much needed.

Jon, Lawrenceville, USA/GA

A bag of wind comes and a bag of wind goes. Only the Lord knows for sure where it goes. I somehow think this bag of wind will be full of very hot air. I suspect he doesn't have many years left before he'll find out, because he ain't immortal.
I can only imagine the horror on his face. He'll be a little, no more like a dark ashen gray!

Bernie Grandy, Halifax, Canada

Jackie Duboise, Seattle : What you say as far as I am concerned is the frankest admission that faith is all hogwash where people convince themselves that believing in old fairy tales is somehow an insurance policy just in case. An atheist such as myself is someone totally unmoved by unevidenced claims - you may as well say that you yourself should believe totally in all religions just in case one of them happens to be correct - why is is that you are atheist to say Hinduism or other supernatural belief systems? Logically they are just as likely to be correct as your supernatural belief system.
Its very common to read the infantile "atheists will burn in hell and brimstone" nonsense here - let me put it in simple terms : I am as likely to be convinced by that as a claim that a wicked witch will cast a spell on me.

Dave, Cardiff,

It is not surprising that atheism is so popular in the current climate. In the first place atheism legitimizes the values of the pleasure principle based consumer society as, if God does not exist all things are permissible. In the second place atheism allows one to blame religion for everything unsatisfactory in one's life, including one's own failings, and is therefore a Godsend (as it were) in our blame culture..

Johannes, London, England

I don't know what Dawkins hopes to accomplish. We the Faithful have their heads buried deep in the sand. Our imaginary friend has assured us an eternal life of bliss. I guess the arrogant evolutionist didn't get the memo, believe in Jesus or burn in Hell. Well, that's all the convincing I need. So Mr. Dawkins can take his scientific circus and shove it. Who needs reason when you have faith?

Christopher, Detroit , MI

Being a Christian I have spent my life believing that because I believe in Christ I will spend eternity with Him. If I am wrong I have lost nothing when I die. But what if it is the athiest that is wrong? What do they do when it is too late to change their minds?

Jackie Duboise, Seattle, Wa

In response to William, Bridgeville, Delaware, I must say that you have it all wrong. Atheism is not about preaching the futility of life, but accepting the world as it is and creating beauty within it. Wouldn't it be better for humanity if we all shed superstition and pseudoscience? I think so. I believe in a bright future for human kind. A future full of scientific enlightenment and personal fullfilment. I am not talking about the arbitrary "hope" one receives as a member of a religious organization. I am talking about the sense of achievement one would receive in taking part in the greatest scientific experiment: humanity. Each one of us is the personal molder of our own life. Let's think about future generations and send them the world we wish we lived in.

As for Dawkins, I disagree with his antagonistic views. The way to reach people is through their hearts, then their minds. Religion has thousands of years on us. It may take many generations to overthrow that dogma.

Nathan Forst, Sardis, Canada, Planet Earth, Milky Way Galaxy :p

If you encountered an adult who was seriously convinced of the existence of fairies in his garden, you'd be worried, and sad for him. But strangely, someone who proclaims the existence of an all powerful creator god is guaranteed a level of social acceptance which is truly baffling.

I've been an atheist for almost as long as I could pronounce the word, and proud of it. Thankfully, the religious inoctrination of my parents and school, failed totally, and I'm a better person for it.

It's time that theists of all flavours were treated as borderline insane. Buldoze the churches and mosques. Relegate the many 'holy books' to the 'Fantasy' section of our bookshelves, and don't respect religious people, instead feel sorry for them.

Interjit Jalestijak, Dudly, West Midlands

"read The Bible and then prove to me there is NO God."

bobbyr, Lees Summit , mo usa

Read the Lord of the Rings and prove to me there is no Gandalf.

My guess when writing this is that as usual irony will be wasted on the stupid.

Danny, Leeds, UK

mind plus x ,equals god...

oscar campos, madrid, spain

In 1000 years religion will no longer exist. I only wish I could be there to see it. Dawkins is only the beginning.

John G., Edwardsburg, MI

It's about time we have this dialog in our society! Gone are the times when people are afraid to voice religious skepticism.

JP, California, USA

I am pleased to hear this news. It is time to tell the religious people of this country that we are tired of their laws and influence in government. This country was based on religious freedom not Christianity! The founding fathers were Deists and would be appalled by the actions of the the churches in modern times. Let this be the start of a revolution to end the influence of the church on our youth and to help others realize that adults do not believe in fairy-tales. Fiction is fun but it is not reality.

Ryan Daisey, Greenbackville, Va

I'm finding it easier to say that I'm an atheist in conversations where I'm not sure of other's religious background. I feel that it's because I'm more sure of why I stand on that ground. I bet the effect of the lecture tour will not be to directly "convert" anyone, but to bring about a more common definition/understanding of what it means to be an atheist. If the belief system of an atheist wasn't considered to be "a tool of Satan" by the general public, then it would seem much more reasonable for a deist or theist to compare their belief system to atheism more logically and without prejudice.

Do your best Dawkins. Rational thought has been around longer than any active religion....I don't see that changing soon.

Dustin, Boise, Idaho, USA

I would definitly go if he comes to Oklahoma.

Ryan, Marlow, Oklahoma

Spend some time to read the other side you so called seekers of truth...How about the "Dawkins Delusion".

Man is the only creature on the planet with an innate sense of right and wrong! Ever ask yourselves why? We were made to to worship the God who created us...but He gave us a choice...choose not too and be a child of the Devil, with the resulting Eternal Damnation or choose to do so and be a child of God resulting in Eternal Life!

Imagine a godless generation without fear or wrong or right...TOTAL CHAOS!

All predicted though folks...we truly are in the last days when man will be consumed in their own glorification and consider themselves GODS! It's tight there in the Bible...you remember it don't you...pick it up and read it I beseech thee and save your soul from Eternal...here this....Eternal DAMNATION...

Sorry to be blunt but it's high time we stopped tip toeing around it and started preaching fire and brimstone...because that's what awaits the "FAITHLESS"!

Leon Biscornet, Victoria, Seychelles

Please come to East Tennesee! We need you here!

Michael, Johnson City, Tn USA

A boring journalistic whinge: I think it's inappropriate to use words such as "crusade" and "church" in the opening paragraph considering both of these are purely religious concepts against which Dawkins has spoken out. "Preach", on the other hand, is fine - it could just mean that he is spreading a good message, without the use of either force or brainwashing. Cheers. Joe

Joe Smith, London,

I don't care where this man comes in Alabama. It won't be a successful venture for him, thank God (literally).

To believers, Merry Christmas.

To all the rest, Happy Winter Solstice/ Dead Grass/ Cold Weather (?) day. And quit whining about us saying Merry Christmas.

Patrick, Alabama, The Great USA

I'll be first in line for your lecture!

Mary, Marble Falls , Texas

Dawkins has indeed included Islam in his crosshairs. Actually, all of the so-called New Atheist writers have done so. Those who believe that they are targeting only Christianity have clearly not read their writings.

Chris, Chicago, USA

Richard Dawkins is a welcome guest during these fearful times, when murderers and politicians alike make claims to, and appeals for, divine favor as they pursue their extremist goals. To borrow Carl Sagan's words, Dawkins is one of our "candles in the dark."

Robert Micciulla, Reidsville, North Carolina/USA

"You were born with no purpose ... WHY BOTHER TO DO OR CARE ABOUT ANYTHING? "

So your friends and family, hobbies, and all the many wonderful things in the world are meaningless to you? That seems a very sad world view, to need some external validation and imposed "meaning" to be able to enjoy life.

Doesn't it make more sense to live your life well, respect yourself and others, do what's right simply because it's right (rather than from a fear of punishment) and focus on what we have in life while we have it, rather than constantly focus on what someone told you will happen when you die?

The world is a beautiful, wonderful place, and it has what meaning we give it, whether or not there is some sort of objective (external) "meaning". We'll all die someday, what happens next is a mystery.

If we live life well, care for ourselves and others, that is what's important & gives life meaning.

If there is a truly loving god, he will welcome us if we do this, regardless of our beliefs.

Will, Ithaca, NY, USA

Dear Richard,
Try the same tour in the UK. Stand on the pavement outside the Green St Mosque in Birmingham offering, silently, a one page leaflet asking mosque goers to embrace modernity and science. The West Midlands police will arrest you for incitement, insulting Islam, or threatening societal cohesion.
Give thanks the US has a 1st Amendment protecting free speech. The UK wallows in the dark ages in rights comparison.

Milton V, Ealing, W5,

"... what does motivate an atheist? "

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?" - Douglas Adams

Molcom Ansell, London,

Richard Dawkins's is a wonderful writer and speaker for out time. A bit more than century ago, the wonderful speaker Robert Ingersoll was the spokesman for rationality. For this holiday season I offer a part of Ingersoll's short and to the point, "CHRISTMAS SERMON. 1891"

The good part of Christmas is not always Christian -- it is generally Pagan; that is to say, human, natural.

Christianity did not come with tidings of great joy, but with a message of eternal grief. It came with the threat of everlasting torture on its lips. It meant war on earth and perdition hereafter.

It taught some good things -- the beauty of love and kindness in man. But as a torch-bearer, as a bringer of joy, it has been a failure. It has given infinite consequences to the acts of finite beings...Not satisfied with that, it has deprived God of the pardoning power.

From: http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/robert_ingersoll/

Forrest Erickson, Maryville, TN

Best news in a while - I am there!

Someone buy Tony B-liar a ticket too!

Clem, NJ, UsA, NJ

People have been living in a magic bubble for far too long. They protest about the "meaninglessness" and "hopelessness" of atheism, as if this had any effect whatsoever on whether or not it were actually TRUE. No, stumbling blindly through life so arrogantly believing that the creator of the entire universe created you in its image and thinks you're special is an insult to the human intellect and an impediment to human development.

It is also utterly moronic, even as the article implies, that lack of faith requires faith, and is in itself just another religion...makes no sense by very definition, but people claim it. Atheists do not believe anything that cannot be proven. Faith by definition is belief in that which cannot be proven. To call atheism a religion is like calling baldness a hair color.

Dawkins is one of the few new heroes of secularism and reason. I hope people will heed him and start thinking...then we may be able to save this country and our planet before it's too late.

Jared, Fairport, New York

I think it hilarious to hear this continual line about being outspoken in your opposition to beliefs for which there is not a shred of evidence is somehow a "faith" position. Imagine a jury sitting on a murder case who based their verdict not on the evidence presented but on a variety of bizarre dogmas. Are we to conclude that this is perfectly valid as it does not rely on the wholly unreasonable faith position of relying on evidence ?

Dave, Cardiff,

Well, I'd have to agree with Richard on many things, but I do think he could be a better teacher in some ways.

I'd say it's good/beneficial for people to 'see' and think in a logical way, if the human species is to develop and survive for the generations to come.

If we ALL believed, we'd probably all be dead now, wouldn't we? For there would be no questions - no science (logical explanation as opposed to miracles) :) I'd rather live my life for what it is, than go through life preparing for an afterlife.

If we all had a common goal, maybe the world would be a better place. The world IS a beautiful place, if you take modern society and human conceit out of the equation.

We're all animals, yet 'we' seem to be so conceited, thinking we have some major importance here on Earth over the rest of the animal kingdom.

"For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is, than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
Carl Sagan

Stephen Umney, Northants, UK

I admit, up front, that I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

So, realistically, what does motivate an atheist? The joyous message of "No Hope"? Wonderfu! Let's share the "good news" with everyone we meet! You were born with no purpose, you will live a few short years, you will die and pass from the scene and will have left no impact on others who will, likewise, leave no impact!

WHY BOTHER TO DO OR CARE ABOUT ANYTHING? And when you think you have the answer to that, respond with another "Why?"

William, Bridgeville, Delaware

The bible was written by pontious pilot to control the roman christians of the day and to begin the greatest hoax on the world since the irs christianity judaism paganism islam etc was all meant to explain the unexpianable of the era and now that we have science and truth we have finally grown up and realized that we may not be alone in the universe but there are no deities guiding us and ready to spank us if we misbehave. the world needs to wake up and realize we are just here and thats it maybe then it might be a better place free of religious indifference and unneccesary hatred and intolerance.

ian, los angeles, california

Bill Q wonders if Dawkins "includes Muslims" in his thesis. Indeed he does, pulling no punches. Read the book!

What drives Dawkins? Indeed to make the world a better place. He sees religion as a source of ignorance and strife. One need not look far to see that he is right.

george.w, Normal, IL, USA

Come on. "High priest" of atheism? Until when are you going to keep up this stuff. Wordplay is the only thing that you can come up with? It's like the creationists and their fetish for the word "theory" (as in: just a...). How can lack of religion be a religion? We are born atheists, and a-anything-ists for all that matters. We only start believing in stuff, deluded or not, after. All the different gods and superstitions geographically and historically distributed swiftly among same groups, and the religious still don't get the hint? There is no true religion. That no god-religion is true is atheism. We are just not convinced. Either we are STILL atheists (since we were born), or we just came BACK to being atheists, after some time of being dogmatically indoctrinated.

Andy, L.A., CA

Richard Dawkins is awesome! I hope he speaks near Ohio because I'd love to see him live. The people who denounce him are the very ones that need to listen to his message. Anyone who cares about what is true realizes this. Thank goodness for Richard Dawkins!

Ed Elfrink, Hilliard, Ohio

Dawkins doesn't care if you believe in a god or not. He cares when fundamentalist dogma supersedes reason in any religion including Islam. This is the fatalistic side of religion. The acceptance of evolution being merely one case in point.

I'll head off the arguments from ignorance before they happen.
"Evolution is just a theory!"
"Evolution has not been proven!"
"Evolution has a hard time explaining the beginnings of life!"
"There is no fossil evidence!"
“A missing link has not been found!”

Anyone with the intension of making these silly comments should first reference the Talk Origins Archive before they stick their foot in their mouth.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html#CA200

Gene Goldring, Vernon, Canada

James,

Probably not, as then he would realize the stupidity of his claims

Jonathan, Birmingham, UK

I hope he'll be speaking near me. He has contributed more towards humanity's progress than anyone who perpetuates mythological plagiarisms ever did.

James, RD does not place his primary emphasis on Islam, Judaism, or Buddhism for the same reason he won't specifically pan Raelians...they're a rather small demographic in the US. He does however, address these and every other religion in that Prof. Dawkins speaks in favor of rationality, something every religion asks its believers to forgo in favor of faith. Perhaps if you read his work you would be more aware of his positions.

Lastly, I don't see you responding to his arguments against your theological assumptions. Ad hominem attacks are an attempt to distract an audience rather than win an argument.

Jeff, Gettysburg, USA/Pennsylvania

Just what this world needs,another idiot who says "follow me" I have all of the answers!Jim Jones,and David Koresh had all of the answers.Nothing like giving hope to the world.The problem is,every other athiest has already beat him to it! He brings nothing original in any way,shape ,or form. Ho hum!Boring


Larry-- !

Gene, SeasideOregon,

In an environment of suffocating religious rhetoric Dawkins comes as a breeze of wonderful fresh air. I hope this tour brings him to my hometown of Houston.

Summer, Houston, TX

Soon Enough there will be an answer concerning this . there will be those amazed and joyfull in eternal life. And those amazed and fearful facing eternal suffering. God is Real, He is the Creator of all things, He sent His Son Jesus Christ to pay for our sins and grant us enternal life. I Am The WAY, The TRUTH and The LIFE no one comes to the Father except Thru Me. When Jesus Christ returns every knee shall bow. you are either 100% with Him or 100% against Him. But for many of you Satan has decieved you with pride, and lies. You attack the truth when it can set you free, by doing so you seal your eternal fates. There is a Heaven , equally so there is a Hell, and its not a party with your friends. you are being decieved by the great deciever, but you who say you have knowlege of these things read The Bible and then prove to me there is NO God.

bobbyr, Lees Summit , mo usa

what goes for Jesus freaks applies to muslims too.

michael, Melbourne, Australia

keep up the good work richard. The end is at hand for jesus freaks. Muslims too. The sooner the better.