[Closed] Richard Dawkins comments on this Brexit fiasco and it's difficult to disagree

kelvin - Member
I wouldn't say brilliant, his books are a bore.

only the religious ones

Ill-informed, Ignorant, Misled, PhD in economics etc. I don't think he's too positive of us.

Or himself (as an earlier link showed)

Lots of people were misled by lies from both sides of the campaign. And as a result were ill informed and ignorant of the facts.
Also lots of people don't have a PhD in economics.

But he still didn't say anything like you claimed he did.

I expect he's got far more brain CELLS than anyone on here as well as an ability to express facts in a clear unbiased fashion.

Call me an arrogant prick, but put me in a room with Dawkins and I could have a lot of fun pushing buttons and playing games with some of his opinions.

He's not that special, Hitchens was someone I wouldn't ever want to try and debate - but Dawkins? I fancy my chances.

i'd like to see that Tom ..Dawkins is rarely cornered !

We did have a two-thirds majority to join the EEC. 67.23% of votes were in favour, in 1975.

I can't seem to find my link to the Referendum leaflet which said repeatedly the EEC was a business/trade organisation with no political ambitions and that legal authority etc would rest with the UK. I think we'd get 66% for that today, I'd vote for that. The EEC became the European [b]Union[/b] with Maastricht and Lisbon. FFS the French rejected the EU constitution in their 2005 Referendum so the EU turned it into the Lisbon Treaty !

@Northwind again and again we see people quote that "better educated people voted Remain". The implication and intent to insult is clear. The explanation is obvious, people in unskilled or trade jobs are MOST at risk from uncontrolled immigration. I have a Postgrad degree, I am fine.

There are uninformed poorly informed people on both sides of the ballot paper. Remain told more than their fair share of whopping great lies.

badnewz
Not read the whole thread, but just though I'd mention that Dawkins being "at heart an attention seeker" may not necessarily be a disadvantage for the "Professor for Public Understanding of Science".

I mean .. rather than a hermit or Trappist monk at least?

I've always found him (altho only met him once) to be at heart someone who is deeply interested in the findings and implications of scientific discovery and an enthusiastic and accurate communicator of those facts to the world.

But that was before I knew how many phones he had of course.

selfish

gene and expanded phenotype really did change the direction of science,

Shame really, as his theories have been proved to be mostly nonsense.

jamba, what does it say in the Treaty of Rome? OR are you saying that the vote in 1975 was lies and fake news??? That the electorate didn't do their homework, were ill informed etc.

Lots of people were misled by lies from both sides of the campaign.

Which lies were Remain misled by? I can think of two and both were from Cameron rather than anything to do with a campaign.

jamba, what does it say in the Treaty of Rome? OR are you saying that the vote in 1975 was lies and fake news??? That the electorate didn't do their homework, were ill informed etc.

William Waldegrave seemed to think so

[img][url= https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/539/31562543064_466a15d79e_z.jp g" target="_blank">https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/539/31562543064_466a15d79e_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/Q65hqY ]waldegrave[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/122646756@N06/ ]mefty[/url], on Flickr[/img]

Incidentally, what renowned thinkers have the pro-Brexiters got lined up and coming out in open support of Brexit?

Only a semi-rhetorical question.

badnewz
Not read the whole thread, but just though I'd mention that Dawkins being "at heart an attention seeker" may not necessarily be a disadvantage for the "Professor for Public Understanding of Science".

I mean .. rather than a hermit or Trappist monk at least?

Most academics are introverts, so admittedly the ones who are happy being on the tele are the rarity and tend to be looked down upon inside academia.

Insofar as someone like Dawkins has promoted "public understanding of science" and attracted people to that world, all well and good. I think he was doing this with some televised lectures in the 90s.

"Science is interesting and if you don’t agree you can **** off." 😀

Mr Woppit - Member

"Science is interesting and if you don’t agree you can **** off."

That was a quote by the editor of New Scientist not Dawkins. Dawkins said "science works, bitches"

Ironically, option 3 is now what Jean Claude Junker wants with his Multi-Level Europe.

Junker wants even closer Union, the multi-level thing is an excuse fo exclude those who don't qualify and so as not to delay the integration. He is well aware that the closer the integration becomes the harder it will be for those countries to ever leave.its like a Boa Constrictor crushing the life out of it's prey.

@mrmo the Govt leaflet in 1975 spoke of a trade relationship and retained Sovereignty. My parents are lifelong Labour voters and voted In in 1975 and Leave in 2016 saying quite clearly "we where lied to"

@mefty Indeed Waldegrave and others where repeatedly ridiculed for saying such things but how right he was shown to be.

When did levels of intelligence and/or being informed become prequisites for puting an x in a box?

We would never have any elections on that basis.

@jamba,
You have just proved why there should never be a referendum. Your parents couldn't be bothered to do the research, it was written in black and white ever closer union.

Bit like this really.

[img] [/img]

Pity your lot disowned it the day after the referendum.

Now now mrmo, all they said was "Let's give our NHS £350 million". They didn't say they were actually going to do it.

Just like if I say to my friend "let's go for a mountain bike ride in the Lake District tomorrow, come to mine at 9am, I'll drive us there". If my mate turns up and I decide to take him round to my nan's to help redecorate her lounge then he can't complain because I never said we would go for a ride. I haven't misled him at all, he has just misinterpreted a statement that very clearly doesn't make any suggestion of a bike ride.

When did levels of intelligence and/or being informed become prequisites for puting an x in a box?

We would never have any elections on that basis.

They didn't and that is the biggest reason 'we' have voted for national economic self-immolation in the mistaken view it would mean less 'effniks' in 'brittun'.

But we've done all this to death about eight times and the rugby is on so this reheated argument can go bollocks.

bails ..i nearly thought you meant what you said for a moment!

I'm just picking this thread up, so sorry if my comments come a bit late. A few observations:

1) I agree profoundly and unequivocally with every word Dawkins spoke in that little homily.

2) Even when I agree with him, the force of his arrogance is breathtaking.

3) Who the hell edited that piece?!? It's utterly bizarre! 😯

[quote=jambalaya ]The explanation is obvious, people in unskilled or trade jobs are MOST at risk from [s]uncontrolled immigration.[/s] their employer moving production to a country which remains part of the EU and/or the removal of EU grants helping to sustain the area they live in

Fixed for real world accuracy, particularly given the high leave votes in areas with low numbers of immigrants "stealing jobs".

[quote=jambalaya ]My parents are lifelong Labour voters and voted In in 1975 and Leave in 2016 saying quite clearly "we where lied to"

Did they specify when?

the Govt leaflet in 1975 spoke of a trade relationship and retained Sovereignty.

We fully retained sovereignty… even the government's A50 white paper states so.

My parents are lifelong Labour voters and voted In in 1975 and Leave in 2016 saying quite clearly "we where lied to"

Yes, they were lied to.

They didn't and that is the biggest reason 'we' have voted for national economic self-immolation in the mistaken view it would mean less 'effniks' in 'brittun'.

As Hilaire Belloc's Matilda discovered threats of immolation tend to lose their effect when repeated too often. A point Michael Gove made and was castigated for.

That Dawkins bloke should stick to his favourite subject about religion. 😆

jambalaya » My parents are lifelong Labour voters and voted In in 1975 and Leave in 2016 saying quite clearly "we where lied to"

They were.
There was no £350M to go to the NHS every week.

[img] [/img]

Can't get the original link to work - is it the same video as this?

Your parents couldn't be bothered to do the research, it was written in black and white ever closer union.

That's pretty offensive, wtf do you know about what they did or didn't do in 1975. What research was possible in 1975, where would you have fiund a copy of the Treaty of Rome. The research they did was listen to what they where told and [b]read the leaflet they where sent[/b].

For decades we where all told it was a Common Market, a trade organisation.

The French rejected an EU Constitution but their government soghed the Losbon treaty anyway. The Dutch got wise to this and all future treaty / treaty change must be approved by Referendem.

Yes Pondo ..same video don't know why BBC have taken it down ?

mrmo,

Still banging on about political union are we? As we are entering a new phase people really need to let go of that utopian view you know. 😆

Brexit is the watershed moment and in the next few year that silly EU bureaucratic system will be hammered to pieces as more and more Europeans will wake up from the nightmare.

The attempts by EU bureaucratic system to break and destroy nations into pieces in order to control them, will now be happening to them instead. Coz people (Europeans) know they are beginning to look stupid now if they stick to that EU bureaucratic system coz the system will definitely crash hard ... very hard.

Wait and see in the next few years as the favourite past time will be hammering EU bureaucratic system whether they like it or not ... 😆

What's 1975 got to do with the EU?

The attempts by EU bureaucratic system to break and destroy nations into pieces in order to control them

Does the UK look more or less likely to break into pieces as we leave the EU?

We will always have bureaucracy, some of which will be at a level other than the nation state level, for many good reasons.

The research they did was listen to what they where told and read the leaflet they where sent.

Yes Pondo ..same video don't know why BBC have taken it down ?

It's just so backwards, unity done properly is always better than lots of warring factions.

The EU is not perfect and I do not pretend otherwise, but it's probably the most progressive forward thinking sensible institute that's ever existed.

And we can't influence it if we are not involved.

Too important to be left to the people - the contempt continues

kelvin - Member

The attempts by EU bureaucratic system to break and destroy nations into pieces in order to control them

Does the UK look more or less likely to break into pieces as we leave the EU?

It is EU bureaucratic system that has slowly cultivated the break-up. It is common sense to know that it is much easier to govern smaller nations than few powerful ones. All the EU bureaucratic system needs to do is let it runs it course and nations, like the UK, will eventually break-up because the "fire stoker" is stoking the fire in the background. Imagine if there is no EU bureaucratic system where do you think all those independence talks will come from? Yes, independence is fine but there are nations/countries/regions that are not meant to be created as independence state because they simply can't feed their own people tbh.

We will always have bureaucracy, some of which will be at a level other than the nation state level, for many good reasons.

Too important to be left to the people - the contempt continues

but it's probably the most progressive forward thinking sensible institute that's ever existed

Now that is funny.

pondo - Member

Too important to be left to the people - the contempt continues

It's not meant in contempt, I absolutely include myself firmly in the group of people who don't know enough to have had an informed decision. I voted because it would have been more wrong to abstain, but I did not feel qualified to do so.

You really don't need brain capacity to put a cross on ballot paper.

The result confirms your brainless statement.

mefty - Member
but it's probably the most progressive forward thinking sensible institute that's ever existed
Now that is funny.

granted its no

Committee for the Liberation and Integration of Terrifying Organisms and their Rehabilitation Into Society

but what other examples can you give, the UN maybe?

Sorry but haven't read all the answers/comments on this thread...
Nice One Rich . I Totally agree.

but what other examples can you give, the UN maybe?

NATO