I think his biggest problems is the leaps in his own logic. Yes he is a biology scholar but he is neither a theologian or logician.  When asked to defend the jumps from Evolution to God is Dead by logicians or theologians he usually refuses or loses handily.  Nevertheless, he keeps on making those jumps.  

How can someone be moral and nonreligious?  Without an external value giver (God, Karma, whatever) why should one be moral?  There does not seem to be value to anything without it.

That's absurd.  A personal *experience* must have some quality or else it would not be an experience.

To be fair you also can't bring Dawkins to the table when it comes to discussing theology.  Each side argues based on different criteria.

I really want to dress as Hector Salamanca.  All you really need is a wig, a wheelchair and a bell.

So much liked.

Don't touch the crab dip.

That was the lessoN of that movie? I though it was that bashing a guys head in is a great way to get the ladies.

And a real hero.

I think that's the problem. She's foisted on us like she's a real person. Sure she shows it all, but isn't appealing when she's a tragic figure.

You are history's greatest monster.

And that I think is the ultimate problem. There are people who select their own message but that shouldn't lead people to reject all religion. Charles Manson misintelreted the White Album but no one hates the Beatles for it.

It's now called Robot Wars.

I used to be an atheist, but then I stopped being pissed at everyone.

I need that ringtone.

Dy-no-mite!

Whatever makes it easier to obsess about how much y'all like my attempts at humor the better.

Say that you love me.

The great advantage of allowing friends is to reenergize community paradigms as well as shifting into a dynamic web 2.0 work space and promoting synergy.

You wish you WERE dead.