# Richard Dawkins' Brand of Atheism **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 21, 2007, 8:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838 "2007-03-21T08:07:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 25
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2007, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/481 "2007-04-01T20:10:05Z")
[QUOTE=Bagistan] …He would be a laughing stock here in Sweden. [/QUOTE] But not in the U.S. Religion, in particular religious fundamentalism, has had a very strong and VERY negative effect on our governance and ultimately on the rest of the world. This includes the Christian fundamentalists who supported (and many who continue to support) George Bush and his cronies, as well as the Muslim fundamentalists who attacked us in 2001. Both groups are a minority of their respective religions but have a completely out of proportion effect on the world. I think that Dawkins point is that, while most religious people are harmless and even do some good, the type of flawed thinking that religion requires makes fundamentalism possible. To eliminate fundamentalism, you need to eliminate the idea that blind faith (unquestioning gullibility) is a virtue. To eliminate that you need to eliminate all institutions that advocate it, even the ones that are seemingly harmless otherwise. (“Eliminate” of course does not mean some sort of physical violence. It means to wean people away from such things via education.) I’m not sure that I completely agree with that but it’s a defensible position. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2007, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/482 "2007-04-01T20:21:48Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] The information you have given on Pam Reynolds surgery is totally false. I suggest you read the real account. [http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence01.html](http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence01.html) I can understand why you have trouble understanding, you have the wrong information. [/QUOTE] Could you give me a reason to believe you and not **Apos**? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2007, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/483 "2007-04-01T20:55:38Z")
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold] Could you give me a reason to believe you and not **Apos**? [/QUOTE] Perhaps? > [@lekatt](#): > > Yes, most definitely, thoughts can alter external realities. Why, because there is no difference between external and internal realities. If you alter your external reality it automatically alters your internal reality and vice versa. I am fairly sure which way we would expect **lekatt** ’s thoughts would shape reality. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2007, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/484 "2007-04-01T21:04:40Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] Feel free to believe whatever you wish, everyone does. [/QUOTE] I believe I’ll get a blowjob. (There is much to recommend **lekatt’s** model, apart of course from plausiblity and (actual) reality.) ---
**Author:** ![Cuckoorex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Cuckoorex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cuckoorex)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2007, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/485 "2007-04-01T22:15:54Z")
In MY reality, people like **lekatt** respond positively to evidence and reason. There’s no place like home… There’s no place like home… There’s no place like home… ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2007, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/486 "2007-04-01T22:17:22Z")
It’s annoying, if anything. I can think of a couple of reasonable (well, as they can be) arguments to support the “thoughts create reality” idea. **lekatt** seems to be choosing the assertions-devoid-of-actual-argument approach, which is wise because that way no one can disagree with your arguments! ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2007, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/487 "2007-04-01T23:59:47Z")
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold] Could you give me a reason to believe you and not **Apos**? [/QUOTE] Well, for one thing the article is taken from Dr. Michael Sabom’s book which Apos says doesn’t follow the book. There was a TV documentary done on the surgery where the lead surgeon comfirmed Pam was clinically dead during the surgery. Dr. Michael Sabom has interviewed Pam, and I have interviewed Pam. There is also a video tape of the whole operation part of which was shown on the TV special. I am comfortable with the facts of the operation. Pam is only one of thousands of such cases. Suggest you read the material if you are really interested. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/488 "2007-04-02T00:07:09Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] Well, for one thing the article is taken from Dr. Michael Sabom’s book which Apos says doesn’t follow the book. There was a TV documentary done on the surgery where the lead surgeon comfirmed Pam was clinically dead during the surgery. [/quote] I don’t think being the subject of a documentary means truth - plenty of shows fudge it to make a more interesting program. And, if i’m understanding **Apos** ’ argument correctly, he’s not denying that she was clinically dead at a point during the surgery - his argument is that she was not clinically dead _during the NDE_. > [@](#): > > Dr. Michael Sabom has interviewed Pam, and I have interviewed Pam. Do you have a link to a transcript of these interviews? This again isn’t a reason to agree with your argument over **Apos** ’, though, since he doesn’t deny Pam _thought_ she had an NDE. > [@](#): > > There is also a video tape of the whole operation part of which was shown on the TV special. Is it online anywhere? Again though, I don’t see what a video of the operation would do to prove anything either way. > [@](#): > > I am comfortable with the facts of the operation. Pam is only one of thousands of such cases. Suggest you read the material if you are really interested. But this is the problem - i’m reading the material, and I tend to agree with **Apos**. Is there anything you can point to that shows **Apos** to be wrong and you right? ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/489 "2007-04-02T00:12:44Z")
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold] It’s annoying, if anything. I can think of a couple of reasonable (well, as they can be) arguments to support the “thoughts create reality” idea. **lekatt** seems to be choosing the assertions-devoid-of-actual-argument approach, which is wise because that way no one can disagree with your arguments! [/QUOTE] I know this spiritual principal “thoughts create reality” goes down hard for most people. They like to think they are flotsam tossed about in the ocean of life, and can do nothing to change their fates. But the truth of it can be cursorily examined. Positive people get by better than negative ones. A subprincipal would be “you will reap what you sow,” or “what goes around comes around.” Your thoughts are important prophets of your future. You have to be willing to try out new ideas, put them through “reality testing.” Remember you can’t learn much for those who think like you do. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/490 "2007-04-02T00:16:53Z")
lekatt, you allege that I’m wrong, but you don’t delve into the details. Was the complete brain function flatline only roughly 5 minutes long, or not? Did her NDE include the doctors talking about her small vessels, or not? Was the anesthesia cut back on as they began to lower her blood temp and then induce arrest or not? Come on: specifically confirm or deny these key elements. And again, do you or don’t you agree that brain cells continue to be alive during the proceedure? If they are all dead, how are they brought back to life? ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/491 "2007-04-02T00:18:55Z")
[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold] I don’t think being the subject of a documentary means truth - plenty of shows fudge it to make a more interesting program. And, if i’m understanding **Apos** ’ argument correctly, he’s not denying that she was clinically dead at a point during the surgery - his argument is that she was not clinically dead _during the NDE_. Do you have a link to a transcript of these interviews? This again isn’t a reason to agree with your argument over **Apos** ’, though, since he doesn’t deny Pam _thought_ she had an NDE. Is it online anywhere? Again though, I don’t see what a video of the operation would do to prove anything either way. But this is the problem - i’m reading the material, and I tend to agree with **Apos**. Is there anything you can point to that shows **Apos** to be wrong and you right? [/QUOTE] She watched the whole operation and afterward commented on the tools, the conversation, and other things that happened during the operation. I am so used to working with these experiences it is hard for me to understand the objections to them. There are numerous experiences similar to this one, please read the material. I will provide a link to one as an example. [Question 05 about Near Death Experiences.](http://aleroy.com/FAQz05.htm) ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/492 "2007-04-02T00:23:22Z")
[QUOTE=Apos] lekatt, you allege that I’m wrong, but you don’t delve into the details. Was the complete brain function flatline only roughly 5 minutes long, or not? Did her NDE include the doctors talking about her small vessels, or not? Was the anesthesia cut back on as they began to lower her blood temp and then induce arrest or not? Come on: specifically confirm or deny these key elements. And again, do you or don’t you agree that brain cells continue to be alive during the proceedure? If they are all dead, how are they brought back to life? [/QUOTE] She was clinically dead without any blood in her brain for almost two hours. Brain cells were put on hold at a cool temperature, there was no dying brain cells. No was also no brain activity, no brain stem activity, and no blood in the brain. It is all in the article and book. Just do some reading. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/493 "2007-04-02T00:24:47Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] She watched the whole operation and afterward commented on the tools, the conversation, and other things that happened during the operation. I am so used to working with these experiences it is hard for me to understand the objections to them. [/quote] Well, thanks for coping with us. I suppose I have the advantage, in that i’ve not worked with these experience for long and so have a fresh slate. > [@](#): > > There are numerous experiences similar to this one, please read the material. > > I will provide a link to one as an example. [Question 05 about Near Death Experiences.](http://aleroy.com/FAQz05.htm) That’s the site you contribute to, isn’t it? I don’t find anything there that couldn’t happen merely from being conscious from part of the time and being able to hear the voices of people around. The sole objection noted there - that the patient was able to describe the nurses - seems like you’re reading into it; after all, if I hear a voice, i’m perfectly able to say “They sounded like a nice person; calm, pleasant, polite” rather than (what I assume is) your view of “They were smartly dressed, brown hair, black shoes”. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/494 "2007-04-02T00:39:16Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] She was clinically dead without any blood in her brain for almost two hours. [/quote] That just isn’t what the records show. Read even Sanborn’s book. You kind of have to piece the timeline together because he’s very coy about admitting certain things, but the timing is all there. Her anesthesia started at around 7:10 and they didn’t really start anything until 8:40, at which point they draped her and started prepping her body in earnest. At some point during this period, the comment she mentions in her NDE occurs: about having small vessels. You simply CAN’T claim that this happened when she was clinically dead: hooking her vessels up to the machines happened BEFORE they induced arrest (what you think they killed her and THEN rushed to hook up the machines that would cool her blood??). So her NDE, or at least part of it, happened before she died, which calls into question whether it had anything to do with death at all (in fact, there is a wealth of evidence that people have “NDE” experiences regardless of whether they die: merely the fear or the belief that one is dying or about to die can induce them. Furthermore, you always seem to forget that there are countless cases in which people have NDE recollections and predictions that DON’T match up with reality) They didn’t even begin to cool her blood until around 10:50 and she was in cardiac arrest a little after 11. Her CC went flatline at 11:10, but it was not until 15 minutes later that her brainstem went flatline, and within minutes they had begun to warm her blood again, at which point her brainstem became active again, and her heart was beating by noon. So where is this two hour period exactly where she was clinically dead the whole time? > [@](#): > > Brain cells were put on hold at a cool temperature, there was no dying brain cells. No was also no brain activity, no brain stem activity, and no blood in the brain. None of that answers the question I put to you. If the cells were still alive, then BY DEFINITION there was _some_ function, even if it was metabolically slowed. There is no “hold.” This is not Star Trek, there is no pattern buffer for cells. They continued to be alive, utterly regardless of whether their activity produced the standard EEG waves. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/495 "2007-04-02T02:35:04Z")
[QUOTE=Apos] That just isn’t what the records show. Read even Sanborn’s book. You kind of have to piece the timeline together because he’s very coy about admitting certain things, but the timing is all there. Her anesthesia started at around 7:10 and they didn’t really start anything until 8:40, at which point they draped her and started prepping her body in earnest. At some point during this period, the comment she mentions in her NDE occurs: about having small vessels. You simply CAN’T claim that this happened when she was clinically dead: hooking her vessels up to the machines happened BEFORE they induced arrest (what you think they killed her and THEN rushed to hook up the machines that would cool her blood??). So her NDE, or at least part of it, happened before she died, which calls into question whether it had anything to do with death at all (in fact, there is a wealth of evidence that people have “NDE” experiences regardless of whether they die: merely the fear or the belief that one is dying or about to die can induce them. Furthermore, you always seem to forget that there are countless cases in which people have NDE recollections and predictions that DON’T match up with reality) They didn’t even begin to cool her blood until around 10:50 and she was in cardiac arrest a little after 11. Her CC went flatline at 11:10, but it was not until 15 minutes later that her brainstem went flatline, and within minutes they had begun to warm her blood again, at which point her brainstem became active again, and her heart was beating by noon. So where is this two hour period exactly where she was clinically dead the whole time? None of that answers the question I put to you. If the cells were still alive, then BY DEFINITION there was _some_ function, even if it was metabolically slowed. There is no “hold.” This is not Star Trek, there is no pattern buffer for cells. They continued to be alive, utterly regardless of whether their activity produced the standard EEG waves. [/QUOTE] The medical profession disagrees with your assessment of brain cells. Oh yes, you have the name of the doctor wrong. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/496 "2007-04-02T02:38:20Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] The medical profession disagrees with your assessment of brain cells. [/QUOTE] Prove it. Provide a medical citation from an independent source (not one of your NDE supporting sites) that defines cell death in the way that you need to have it defined, please. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/497 "2007-04-02T02:39:07Z")
Meanwhile, back at the OP… ---
**Author:** ![Cuckoorex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Cuckoorex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cuckoorex)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/498 "2007-04-02T03:20:01Z")
I’m going to call a spade a spade; lekatt, you have no leg to stand on and your eloquence does not change the fact that you have next to no evidence to support your arguments. You are intelligent and well-read, and in my experience, intelligent and well-read individuals inevitably become atheists. They may hold onto faith for a while, but eventually they stop fooling themselves and accept that religous beliefs (at least Judeo-Christian-Islamic beliefs) are bullshit. There, I said it. I think that Judeo-Christian-Islamic beliefs are bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/499 "2007-04-02T05:06:25Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] The medical profession disagrees with your assessment of brain cells. [/quote] Cite? Cells do not go on “hold” as if they could be frozen in perfect stasis Cells continue to be alive, that is, they continue to perform internal chemical reactions, even if the rates at which they burn important things like glucose at a much reduced rate. Find me a doctor that says otherwise, specifically, if you can. > [@](#): > > Oh yes, you have the name of the doctor wrong. That’s it? THAT is your response? I mistyped his name and that means you get to completely beg off all the pointed questions I asked about the timeline that you apparently have no answer to? ---
**Author:** ![Cuckoorex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Cuckoorex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cuckoorex)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2007, 10:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838/500 "2007-04-02T10:33:48Z")
[QUOTE=Apos] That’s it? THAT is your response? I mistyped his name and that means you get to completely beg off all the pointed questions I asked about the timeline that you apparently have no answer to? [/QUOTE] When you’re immune to reasoning, you get to ignore many things. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838.md?page=24) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/richard-dawkins-brand-of-atheism/396838.md?page=26)