[img]http://1.bp..com/-Tx6Gz9dmDTw/Ug-fxPLFNrI/AAAAAAAAAR8/sA8_Jn7cOB4/s280/dawkins.jpg[/img]

Richard Dawkins speaks like a colonial relic
resurrected from the past, and naturally he is
out of touch with the current society; he speaks pejoratively about Muslims that seems to be coloured by his obsession with Darwin’s race-centric evolution theory. His recent jibe on tweeter about the less evolved Muslims having less Nobel Prize than Trinity College went viral, and it is part of his catalogue of
smears against the voiceless Muslim community. For years, believers from all sections of society have tolerated his
unrestrained arrogance in propagating atheist dogmas, as if he had witnessed the creation of the universe.

Why is the man so impatient? Nobody in this
world is contesting the certainty of death. And soon Dawkins will have his answer regarding afterlife, which in turn will answer the questions about the creation and purpose of life on earth. I pray that it is sooner for his
sake - he seems unsettled, and from the
believers’ perspective, this is expected, because atheists do not really have full conviction that life is a coincidence, a product of evolution, and it simply ends here. Our intelligence has propelled us to ask why we exist, and our observation of life and the universe clearly tells us nothing happens by chance, for example leaving building materials in a field will not result in the creation of a building by chance. Hence, there is always a lingering doubt in the back of the atheist’s mind; otherwise, they would exhibit more serenity than believers, who are agitated by the notions of accountability in the hereafter. It is this deep uncertainty that drives the likes of Dawkins to knock on our door and push to debate the issues, because it is fundamentally about his insecurity.

The more we learn about the universe, the
more we should acknowledge the magnitude
of our ignorance; instead an arrogant position is taken, as if these atheists can recreate the universe. Their uncertainty could be laid to rest, if some atheists came back from the dead to verify the answers to the meaning of life and if death is the final destination. In contrast, our Imams and learned scholars are not behaving in the same way, because their conviction actually satisfies their mind and the heart. At most they will gently invite non-believers to embrace Islam, not get fanatical about this
process, and constantly seek confrontation. The same applies to devout Jews and Christians; let us ignore the exceptions, there will always be exceptions like the crazy preachers and missionaries on TV.

Richard Dawkins as one of the leaders of the Atheist trend is trying to emulate a Prophet,
and guide humanity to his way of thinking, and so far he has only manage to conjure up a handful of followers. Fanatical atheists like
Dawkins need to realise, despite all their envious jibes, it is the followers of Muhammad that have passed the test of time and continue to grow, whilst minions like Dawkins will vanish like dusts with his
handful of followers.

As an academic one would expect him to rise above bigotry, yet he seems to have jumped into bed with the low level racist hooligans of the far right, joining the anti-Muslim tirades. His pejorative description of the Muslim women’s dress code as a bin liner, puts him in bar with the likes of Tommy Robinson, Pam Gellar and Melanie Phillips. He ironically describes Islam using the religious term evil. What is evil in the book of atheists? Like the superficial racist far-right, Dawkins implicitly makes parallels between Mein Kampf and the Quran (a book he has not read and studied), what an irony, because it is the far right takes inspiration from Hitler. Dawkins also endorses the works of another far right anti Muslim bigot, Geert Wilders - I see the parallels between Dawkins and the likes of racist colonialists like Cecil Rhodes. His mindset seems to reflect the ideas and values of that time.

It was during the colonial times of Cecil Rhodes that European nations grew wealthy through a combination of piracy, slavery and theft (imperialism), coupled with intellectual and scientific advancements (Industrial revolution), all used to subjugate the conquered nations; this position intoxicated the ruling class so much, they produced academic ‘theories’ that put the white men at the apex of the human chain, they called it ‘evolution’. One cannot deny the terrible consequence from such theories which gave rise to corollary ideas of racial purity and eugenics to justify systematic genocide. The fate was terrible for much of the indigenous peoples, the Aboriginals in Australia, the blacks in Africa, Indians in Asia were considered inferior human race, lower in the evolution chain, terms like savage races, and advanced animals were used to describe them. Even today they cite the book of Darwin “The Origins of Species” but not its full title “The Origin of Species or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”.

Britain has moved from a colonial nation to a
multicultural society; it accommodates people of various religious and racial background; Mo Farah, Amir Khan, Syeeda Warsi, Andy Murray, Sadiq Khan, David Cameron are all part of the same British Rainbow. It seems Richard Dawkins and his far right companions and allies are struggling to fit in.

Yamin Zakaria ( yamin@radicalviews.org )
Published 17/08/2013
London, UK
www.radicalviews.org
http://yaminzakaria..com

Pure ignorance.

You copy/paste the rantings of some butthurt muslim fanatic without even bothering to find out first hand what Dawkins actually said. You highlight the full title of Darwin's book while completely failing to comprehend its meaning. (I don't know why its so hard for you people to realize that you can only learn about science from a scientist and not from a religious cleric).

FYI, Dawkins has never said anything remotely racist, criticizes religion in general and has spent far more time attacking Christianity than he has Islam. If you want to convince people like him to stop criticizing your religion, maybe you should start by convincing your brothers to stop blowing innocent people up every 5 minutes.

If you seriously want to criticize men like Darwin or Dawkins, I suggest you at least read their writings themselves rather than blindly accepting the mangled, misunderstood, strawman versions that religious clerics like to litter the internet with. Here are a few links to their books.

The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex by Charles Darwin
On the Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection by Charles Darwin
The Blind Watchmaker by Richard Dawkins
The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins

NB the last 2 are torrent links to pirated versions since Dawkins' books are copyrighted. You can search for and buy them on Amazon if you're feeling like a virtuous Muslim.

Wow....that was just foolish.


OP, stop copying and pasting nonsense.


Seriously, Dawkins trying to be a prophet? Atheists agitated by the afterlife?


Nonsense

mikeeze: A must watch for atheists www.evolutionvsGOD.com

Absolute BullSh!t! Those People knew little to nothing about Darwinian Evolution. Let him try that with someone that knows his/her stuff. That's why i advise People(most especially Atheists) to read the "Origin of Species" and articles on Natural selection and Evolution. The Christian(interviewer) in the Video is an Ignorant Douche-bag.

Origin of Species(E-book) is FREE on Amazon.com.

http://www.americanscientist.org/ (great site)

Van snickers:

Absolute BullSh!t! Those People knew little to nothing about Darwinian Evolution. Let him try that with someone that knows his/her stuff. That's why i advise People(most especially Atheists) to read the "Origin of Species" and articles on Natural selection and Evolution. The Christian(interviewer) in the Video is an Ignorant Douche-bag.

Origin of Species(E-book) is FREE on Amazon.com.

http://www.americanscientist.org/ (great site)

you mean the : “The Origin of Species or the PRESERVATION OF FAVOURED RACES in the Struggle for Life”, don't you?

I dont blame you. even your prophet, dawkins couldn't give the whole title when asked by rev. fraser on radio sometime in 2012.

and guess what:

In his next book, The Descent of Man (1871), Darwin ranked races in terms of what he believed was their nearness and likeness to gorillas. Then he went on to propose the extermination of races he "scientifically" defined as inferior. If this were not done, he claimed, those races, with much higher birthrates than "superior" races, would exhaust the resources needed for the survival of better people, eventually dragging down all civilization

F00028:
Richard Dawkins speaks like a colonial relic

Stopped reading right there.

Evil Brain: (I don't know why its so hard for you people to realize that you can only learn about science from a scientist and not from a religious cleric)

Fallacy! If the religious cleric has learnt correctly from a scientist, you are better off learning science from him than a dishonest scientist.

Also...Religious clerics are the pioneers and backbones in many scientific areas.

Please and please,my fellow atheists STOP arguing with all these "religious folks." The more you argue with them,the more you give them legitimacy.They don't care if their views are right/wrong,sane/insane,black/white/grey.They only seek for one thing;LEGITIMACY.Even a close atheist friend of Professor Dawkins once gave him this advice.Please,HEED IT.

tuagbo: Please and please,my fellow atheists STOP arguing with all these "religious folks." The more you argue with them,the more you give them legitimacy.They don't care if their views are right/wrong,sane/insane,black/white/grey.They only seek for one thing;LEGITIMACY.Even a close atheist friend of Professor Dawkins once gave him this advice.Please,HEED IT.

that's funny. I was just thinking the same thing about you atheists.

Interesting! Atheists believe in right and wrong?

How can you believe that when you say the world is just a random chemical process with no meaning.

tuagbo: Please and please,my fellow atheists STOP arguing with all these "religious folks." The more you argue with them,the more you give them legitimacy.They don't care if their views are right/wrong,sane/insane,black/white/grey.They only seek for one thing;LEGITIMACY.Even a close atheist friend of Professor Dawkins once gave him this advice.Please,HEED IT.

italo: Interesting! Atheists believe in right and wrong?

How can you believe that when you say the world is just a random chemical process with no meaning.

Dont fall my hand, Italo. You know that I separate you and the protestants because cathecism givesca deeper understanding of faith. The average reverend father is far more knowledgeable than the average pastor. Thats why it only takes 4 catholics to debunk ghe numerouspentecostals here on nland.



Atheists dont just look at the universe like some mechanical mixture of chemicals and matter. No, we are more spiritual than that....we look at the wonders of science and nature. We dream sci fi dreams too. We cherish this one life we are given

F00028:
you mean the : “The Origin of Species or the PRESERVATION OF FAVOURED RACES in the Struggle for Life”, don't you?

I dont blame you. even your prophet, dawkins couldn't give the whole title when asked by rev. fraser on radio sometime in 2012.

What a Clown! Natural selection is merely the "Preservation of favored Characteristics" not Races.

tuagbo: Please and please,my fellow atheists STOP arguing with all these "religious folks." The more you argue with them,the more you give them legitimacy.They don't care if their views are right/wrong,sane/insane,black/white/grey.They only seek for one thing;LEGITIMACY.Even a close atheist friend of Professor Dawkins once gave him this advice.Please,HEED IT.

*Thumbs up*

F00028: and guess what:

In his next book, The Descent of Man (1871), Darwin ranked races in terms of what he believed was their nearness and likeness to gorillas. Then he went on to propose the extermination of races he "scientifically" defined as inferior. If this were not done, he claimed, those races, with much higher birthrates than "superior" races, would exhaust the resources needed for the survival of better people, eventually dragging down all civilization

This is a bare faced lie! It amazes me how you religious people can claim holiness one minute and bear false witness against a dead man the next. Talk aabout a forked tongue!

The truth is that Darwin was about the least racist person on earth while he was alive. He spent months living with and befriending "savages" from an island tribe and he reported that they were no less intelligent than the average white person. He aargued that the differences in aappearance between races were all superficial and the differences in behavior merely cultural. He debunked the belief (widely held by creationists at the time) that Africans were a separate species, more closely related to apes.

It's funny that modern-day creationists are ascribing to Darwin the racist beliefs of olden day creationists. You guys are all a bunch of liars and ignoramuses. Shame!!!

Van snickers:

What a Clown! Natural selection is merely the "Preservation of favored Characteristics" not Races.

you need glasses ni?

mtcheeew! all you negroes at the bottom of the evolution chain think you are more darwin than darwin.

the title says "FAVOURED RACES"

If you could reason with religious pple. there would be no religious pple.

House MD.

F00028:
you need glasses ni?

mtcheeew! all you negroes at the bottom of the evolution chain think you are more darwin than darwin.

the title says "FAVOURED RACES"

And you can think you can understand the entire book just by looking the title? That must have been what you were doing throughout secondary school then. It explains why you're so dull.

Evil Brain:

And you can think you can understand the entire book just by looking the title? That must have been what you were doing throughout secondary school then. It explains why you're so dull.

dunno which secondary school you went to or if you even went but a title for book such as his is not supposed to be misleading.

it should make clear the book's content and author's intent.

You got me flattered...yet confused.

I just wonder who's right it is to decide right and wrong...for Atheists.

Logicboy03:

Dont fall my hand, Italo. You know that I separate you and the protestants because cathecism givesca deeper understanding of faith. The average reverend father is far more knowledgeable than the average pastor. Thats why it only takes 4 catholics to debunk ghe numerouspentecostals here on nland.



Atheists dont just look at the universe like some mechanical mixture of chemicals and matter. No, we are more spiritual than that....we look at the wonders of science and nature. We dream sci fi dreams too. We cherish this one life we are given

Evil Brain:
The truth is that Darwin was about the least racist person on earth while he was alive. He spent months living with and befriending "savages" from an island tribe...

The Descent of Man, Chapter 6, On the Affinities and Genealogy of Man, Darwin argues that he expected the civilized races of men to fully exterminate the savage races of men in just a few centuries. He also expected the anthropomorphous apes [Ed. note: those most like humans] (gorillas and chimpanzees) to become extinct. As a result, he believed that the gap between humans and animals would eventually be much greater than exists. Darwin postulated that this higher form of man would come from the current Caucasian race. In his book, Darwin states that the current gap between apes and humans is between the gorilla, on the ape side, and the Negro or Australian aborigine, on the human side:

The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as present between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla.

F00028:

The Descent of Man, Chapter 6, On the Affinities and Genealogy of Man, Darwin argues that he expected the civilized races of men to fully exterminate the savage races of men in just a few centuries. He also expected the anthropomorphous apes [Ed. note: those most like humans] (gorillas and chimpanzees) to become extinct. As a result, he believed that the gap between humans and animals would eventually be much greater than exists. Darwin postulated that this higher form of man would come from the current Caucasian race. In his book, Darwin states that the current gap between apes and humans is between the gorilla, on the ape side, and the Negro or Australian aborigine, on the human side:

The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as present between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla.

Creationists are experts at editing people's statements and quoting them out of context to make them look bad. Here's what Darwin actually said:

The great break in the organic chain between man and his nearest allies, which cannot be bridged over by any extinct or living species, has often been advanced as a grave objection to the belief that man is descended from some lower form; but this objection will not appear of much weight to those who, from general reasons, believe in the general principle of evolution. Breaks often occur in all parts of the series, some being wide, sharp and defined, others less so in various degrees; as between the orang and its nearest allies—between the Tarsius and the other Lemuridae between the elephant, and in a more striking manner between the Ornithorhynchus or Echidna, and all other mammals. But these breaks depend merely on the number of related forms which have become extinct. At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world . At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.

He was simply explaining that apparent gaps between species where simply due to extinction and using humans and apes as an easy to understand example. This is not even remotely racist. You're just using the same tactic you people use to twist your bible (quoting tiny, cherry-picked snippets out of context) to misrepresent Darwin.

Oh and by the way, all the anthropoid apes are now considered endangered. Bonobos and Mountain Gorillas are critically endangered. Can you guess why? Because human beings (poachers and Bush meat lovers) have been exterminating them. But Darwin wasn't a prophet, he just combined existing knowledge and common sense to preduct the future. Science: It works bïtches!!!

@evilbrain you think a primitive negroid like you understand darwin more than his " highly developed civilized " disciple?

according to darwin's foremost german disciple, ernst haeckel, if you want to draw a sharp boundary between the human races and the apes, “you must draw it between the most highly developed civilized people on the one hand and the crudest primitive people on the other, and unite the latter with the apes.”

elsewhere haeckel identifies these cruder and primitive races as the australian aborigines and the south african bushmen, which he says, still live in herds, climb trees and eat fruit. according to haeckel, certain more primitive groups of "people" are more ape than human.

F00028: @evilbrain you think a primitive negroid like you understand darwin more than his " highly developed civilized " disciple?

according to darwin's foremost german disciple, ernst haeckel, if you want to draw a sharp boundary between the human races and the apes, “you must draw it between the most highly developed civilized people on the one hand and the crudest primitive people on the other, and unite the latter with the apes.”

elsewhere haeckel identifies these cruder and primitive races as the australian aborigines and the south african bushmen, which he says, still live in herds, climb trees and eat fruit. according to haeckel, certain more primitive groups of "people" are more ape than human.

And Darwin is responsible for Haeckels unfounded beliefs because? You now want to start blaming Darwin for stuff other people said and did?

So if somebody reads one of your posts and partially agrees with it, then goes and starts abusing ibos in another thread, that would make you an anti-ibo tribalist?

Evil Brain:

And Darwin is responsible for Haeckels unfounded beliefs because? You now want to start blaming Darwin for stuff other people said and did?

So if somebody reads one of your posts and partially agrees with it, then goes and starts abusing ibos in another thread, that would make you an anti-ibo tribalist?

darwin's responsible for a lotta stuff. for starters he gave a scientific rationale for racial prejudice.

his deceptive theory is the bedrock of the materialist philosophy that allowed for colonialism, racism, the slavery that you atheists pretend to abhor, and blind individualism as a consequence of the principle of natural selection.

F00028:

darwin's responsible for a lotta stuff. for starters he gave a scientific rationale for racial prejudice.

his deceptive theory is the bedrock of the materialist philosophy that allowed for colonialism, racism, the slavery that you atheists pretend to abhor, and blind individualism as a consequence of the principle of natural selection.

You're a liar and a dunce for what yu just said in bold.


You Arab brothers enslaved and colonized africans hundreds of years before Darwin. Go back to your cave!!!!

Logicboy03:


You're a liar and a dunce for what yu just said in bold.


You Arab brothers enslaved and colonized africans hundreds of years before Darwin. Go back to your cave!!!!

sigh...another primitive, bottom of the evolution chain, negro...

F00028:

darwin's responsible for a lotta stuff. for starters he gave a scientific rationale for racial prejudice.

his deceptive theory is the bedrock of the materialist philosophy that allowed for colonialism, racism, the slavery that you atheists pretend to abhor, and blind individualism as a consequence of the principle of natural selection.

Bros, science doesn't lie. It doesn't make $hit up, it goes with the evidence. If the evidence actually stated there were significant differences between the races, science wouldn't lie. It does not contradict facts. However, this is just plain slander, as there was nothing even remotely racist about the man. The mere fact that his theory points at his ancestors being APES, ie before the black man (assuming he had figured out homo-sapiens originated from africa before he died, I'm not sure), alone should give you a clue. You guys still make the hubris filled claim that you could not have originated from 'monkeys' because you're too special, you're too superior to other lifeforms, yet you have the gall to call him a racist? He was willing to look beyond species let alone race..

Now, supposing your story books claimed you were special, you know, like the jews? Who gladly slaved non-jews, among many other things. Or decreed arabs or muslims special, who should treat kaffirs with as much contempt as they could muster.... I believe your arab masters generally decide how many times a day you're allowed to take a $hit, no?

And there's no dogma or doctrine I'm aware of which states everyone who subscribes to evolution should consider Darwin the shining pillar of all that is right in the world. If he hadn't come across evolution, someone else would (and others were closing in on it). You see, evolution is a fact, Darwin just discovered it. I don't see dogma anywhere which proclaims we should worship Einstein for figuring out some of the intricacies of gravity.

I do understand though that the most moral human to have existed (according to your doctrine ie), the standard bearer of all things nice and good, one to emulate through the ages (see yarima), was a slaving p.edo. That's a fact btw, not slander.

F00028:

sigh...another primitive, bottom of the evolution chain, negro...

How muslim of you.......apparently that was the same thing12th century Arab muslims said to you pagan ancestors. Fool

F00028:

sigh...another primitive, bottom of the evolution chain, negro...

lol!!!!