1. Comment #94129 by Styrer- on December 4, 2007 at 9:46 pm

Sorry for appearing a dunce, but is this radio or TV? Which channel in either case?

Thanks,
Styrer

Other Comments by Styrer-

2. Comment #94132 by topherclay on December 4, 2007 at 9:58 pm

It seems to be a television program which is also broadcast on the radio and web. As for the channels I think it's BBC World (whatever that is, supposedly international) and the BBC website.
The website probably has all you need to know anyway.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/default.stm

Other Comments by topherclay

3. Comment #94135 by Don_Quix on December 4, 2007 at 10:04 pm

I'm sorry for being an American dunce and being a little off-topic, but in the US we generally only get one or two "BBC channels" on the average metropolitan cable service. Primarily BBC America, which isn't all that great, AND we have to pay extra for it!

Most of the BBC programming I have seen in the past I have enjoyed a great deal. Tomorrow People/Dr Who/Hitchhiker's Guide reprazent!!! heheh.

Anyway, my question is, what is the best way to access BBC programming that is not generally on television in the US? Is it all on the web? Satellite? Bananaphone? Just asking. I like you blokes ;)

Other Comments by Don_Quix

4. Comment #94140 by EvolvedDNA on December 4, 2007 at 10:23 pm

Don_Quix
I live in the frozen north up here in Canada.. I listen to the BBC on satellite radio.. I have XM but it is avaialable with the other guys as well I believe.

Other Comments by EvolvedDNA

5. Comment #94144 by Freelance Scientist on December 4, 2007 at 10:47 pm

He says it is responsible for some of the "greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice" in history.

WOW - and he says that of atheism ? Oh the irony.

Other Comments by Freelance Scientist

6. Comment #94171 by RascoHeldall on December 5, 2007 at 12:13 am

Pope Benedict says that disbelief in God is responsible for some of the "greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice" in history?

Wow. He really said that? All I can say is, I can only guess how much more cruelty throughout history has been committed by people who didn't believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster either.

Seriously - what a moron! I realise he has to believe in angels and suchlike to hold such the esteemed [sic] and worthy [sic] position that he does, but I would have thought that despite that, a certain basic intelligence was necessary as well?

Obviously not.

Other Comments by RascoHeldall

7. Comment #94175 by Styrer- on December 5, 2007 at 12:31 am

Looking forward to this.

But I hope Dawkins is more aggressive than he usually is.

Dennett has said that Dawkins is too 'vehement' and lacking in 'respect' in his theistic attacks.

No. If anything, Dawkins is not vehement and disrespectful enough. His overriding concern with educating us about science sees him seeking out common ground all too frequently with his antagonists - a courtesy which is rarely returned to him, and which cannot be properly entertained in any reason V unreason circumstance.

As much as Dennett should re-consider his own 'softly, softly' approach in light of his rather lack-lustre performance against the maniacally motivated D'Souza, Dawkins should up his ante, and go hell bent on socking it to those who would permit superstition to reside snugly with reason.

He will not lack support from those, like me, whose voices are rarely heard.

Best,
Styrer

Other Comments by Styrer-

8. Comment #94181 by mark8 on December 5, 2007 at 1:16 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Have_Your_Say

hope this helps.

Other Comments by mark8

9. Comment #94191 by Mysturji on December 5, 2007 at 1:44 am

Wikipedia wrote: "Although not officially available in the UK it is available to people who point their satellite dishes at Astra 1, Hot Bird and Thor. In most of the world, it is carried on nearly all satellite and cable platforms."

I'm sorry Auntie Beeb, but that's just not good enough! I pay my license fee to help pay for this channel, and I'm not allowed to watch it, while freeloading Johnny Foreigners all over the world can tune in for nothing?

I shall be writing a strongly worded letter to The Times!

Other Comments by Mysturji

10. Comment #94196 by BMMcArdle on December 5, 2007 at 2:18 am

Why does the Pope hold such a low opinion of the human race?
To quote Robert G. Ingersoll:
"To hate man and worship God seems to be the sum of all the creeds."

Other Comments by BMMcArdle

11. Comment #94202 by aleprechaunist on December 5, 2007 at 2:45 am

Don_Quix and others,

For BBC and other UK programming, look no further than

http://www.uknova.com

Programmes are posted as torrent files, and there is a policy of not posting any programming which is not already available to buy.

Other Comments by aleprechaunist

12. Comment #94205 by Theocrapcy on December 5, 2007 at 2:59 am

The questions being put are degrading into the typical "pol pot, hitler, stalin, mao" rants. It's sad that so many people just don't get it.

Other Comments by Theocrapcy

13. Comment #94217 by Jab on December 5, 2007 at 3:27 am

"
Anyway, my question is, what is the best way to access BBC programming that is not generally on television in the US? Is it all on the web? Satellite? Bananaphone? Just asking. I like you blokes ;) "

From the Don... Check out the BBC iPlayer, google it. You need to download it, but it's pretty useful!

My question to RD was (essentially) "how do you put up with people asking the same stupid shit that you have rebutted countless times?"

Other Comments by Jab

14. Comment #94236 by Rational Thinking on December 5, 2007 at 4:14 am

Some of the questions on the bbc website are hilarious - my particular favourite is the chap who asks whether Professor Dawkins isn't making money out of the ignorant and unread? The writer's view appears to be that the only reason TGD is successful is because society is biblically illiterate.

I'm still laughing half an hour later.

Other Comments by Rational Thinking

15. Comment #94239 by Vaal on December 5, 2007 at 4:26 am

I wonder if Richard gets tired of the same inane arguments thrown at him all the time. It must be tedious in the extreme having to answer all the "Stalin, Hitler", atheist fundamentalist, atheist is a religion claptrap all the time.

If anything, I have to agree that Richard is a bit too nice. I would like to see a bit more of "Hitchens" or "Oliver Reed" in him, particularly considering the gross misrepresentation and personal attacks he has had to put up with. Still, the vehemence of the attacks shows that the message is getting through.

Other Comments by Vaal

16. Comment #94242 by mad_monk on December 5, 2007 at 4:33 am

For once, I'm in luck. Living in Malta I get access to BBC World via my cable tv provider. I am a regular BBC World viewer. Most of their programmes are good, although some are pretty drab (e.g. asia business debates). Have Your Say is a decent concept but the live phone-in questions are often difficult to follow due to the "rich and varied" accents of people from around the world via poor quality mobile phone connections. The questions themselves are often pretty banal also. Richard is likely to face questions of the calibre of "Why is there something rather than nothing? Gotcha!". I'll leave a question and my phone number at the Have Your Say web-site and see if they call me back.

Other Comments by mad_monk

17. Comment #94245 by Jaffas85 on December 5, 2007 at 4:51 am

I have the BBC channel on Cable T.V. where I live however are international viewers allowed to ask a question and leave their number?

Other Comments by Jaffas85

18. Comment #94246 by Jaffas85 on December 5, 2007 at 5:03 am

I just went to the "Have Your Say" site and asked whether he believed that a historical Jesus Christ existed.

I hope they ask it.

Other Comments by Jaffas85

19. Comment #94251 by j.mills on December 5, 2007 at 5:12 am

The comments placed on the Beeb's site on the link are eye-rollingly depressing; but at least the ones on the 'Readers Recommended' page are on the right side of lunacy! Without god(s) there is no hope? I take the contrary view!

Other Comments by j.mills

20. Comment #94268 by Ivan The Not So Bad on December 5, 2007 at 5:58 am

Clicking on the BBC news forums link at the top of the article and geting stuck into the comments section is highly recommended. It's like hunting cows with an AK47.

Other Comments by Ivan The Not So Bad

21. Comment #94275 by Laurence Winch-Furness on December 5, 2007 at 6:27 am

This was my question:

"I have been a keen reader of your books, and have noticed that strident atheism has been a theme from the Selfish Gene to the God Delusion. While I have heard that you became an atheist after learning about evolution, when did you begin to oppose religion, and see it as incompatible with science? What brought you to these conclusions?"

Other Comments by Laurence Winch-Furness

22. Comment #94276 by cryptographix on December 5, 2007 at 6:29 am

Awwwww man, I swear I can honestly bring Dawkins a victory in 2 minutes if someone gives me a phone call and lets me speak. The only problem is that I'm in America. Can I E-Mail my phone number to someone instead of posting it here?

Other Comments by cryptographix

23. Comment #94278 by Atlas on December 5, 2007 at 6:35 am

Pope Benedict probably thinks Hitler was an atheist, or that Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot did the things that they did because they were too reasonable. In this point I agree with Harris, let's just drop the label "Atheist" because then people can come back "well, Stalin was an atheist blah blah blah", how about we just promote reason and rationality? I mean what reasonable person would argue against reason?

Other Comments by Atlas

24. Comment #94288 by Rational Thinking on December 5, 2007 at 6:45 am

Good point Atlas.

My mother, when I told her that if I had to choose another country to live in, I'd probably pick Austria, was horrified. Her "clinching" argument was "Well, Hitler was an Austrian you know". Still makes me chuckle.

This whole "Stalin was an atheist" thing is a very similar red herring. Isn't the point really that nobody gets to use beliefs or disbeliefs to excuse uncivilized behaviour?

Other Comments by Rational Thinking

25. Comment #94289 by jaf on December 5, 2007 at 6:48 am

BBC News 24.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/talking_point_programme/default.stm

Other Comments by jaf

26. Comment #94295 by maton100 on December 5, 2007 at 7:25 am

Wait a minute, I thought lying bullshit and the concept of hell were the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice!?

Other Comments by maton100

27. Comment #94296 by Linda on December 5, 2007 at 7:34 am

In North America tune into BBC World Service TV on either cable or Satellite. The programme 'Have your Say' is broadcast on Sundays.

Other Comments by Linda

28. Comment #94305 by robert s on December 5, 2007 at 8:16 am

Don't forget to start your questions with "how you answer this question will tell us everything we need to know about you..."

Other Comments by robert s

29. Comment #94307 by Ty_Webb on December 5, 2007 at 8:26 am

I'm loving Richard Underhill's comment:

"man needs God, otherwise he remains without hope" hmmm, I think the pope actually meant was "The Catholic church needs fear, otherwise it remains without power".

The most recommended page does look to me like a beacon of hope.

Other Comments by Ty_Webb

30. Comment #94325 by GoatBoy36 on December 5, 2007 at 10:07 am

Hi mad monk, I see you live in Malta. I've just finished reading "Angels of Iron " which is about the great siege. I've actually booked a holiday in Malta next year, and thought I'd read up a bit more of the island's history before I go. I got interested after reading A.J. Quinnell ("Man on Fire", "The Perfect Kill", "The Blue Ring") whose character "Creasy" lived on Gozo. Anyway, I'm looking forward to visiting Malta, especially after another long cold winter in NE Scotland. :-)

gb.

Other Comments by GoatBoy36

31. Comment #94329 by frankie1958 on December 5, 2007 at 10:25 am

Oh that pope....cracks me up every time. :)

The one thing that I like about Dawkins, Dennett, Harris and (most of the time) Hitchens, is that they are NOT strident. They are well spoken and direct which is not nearly as strident as some of the fundamentalist religious folk I see on TV calling for the execution of a primary school teacher because she let her students call a teddy bear Mohammed.....

I think I'll call my dog Mohammed.....

Other Comments by frankie1958

32. Comment #94351 by Vadjong on December 5, 2007 at 12:34 pm

My (self-answering) question :

Does it not frustrate you that so many nice, decent, often thoughtful modern people are still hopelessly devoted to iron-age belief in some God, even though science and culture have revealed that there is SÓ much more on Earth, in the heavens and everywhere in between ?

Other Comments by Vadjong

33. Comment #94353 by BicycleRepairMan on December 5, 2007 at 12:38 pm

As much as Dennett should re-consider his own 'softly, softly' approach in light of his rather lack-lustre performance against the maniacally motivated D'Souza

Are you serious?, Am I the only one who thought Dennett actually CRUSHED D'Souza? Or rather, D'Souza crushed himself.. Let me explain, D'souza got most of the time, and admittedly, most of his ramblings went by a little bit unopposed, but who came out the best? Who seemed like the most intelligent debater? With Dennett, whenever he gets a question, you can actually see him thinking,and giving a thoughtful, masterly off the cuff answer every time, his entire presentation was thought-provoking, interesting and intelligent. D'Souza screamed like a god-damned lunatic the ENTIRE time, he seemed like he had to, there wasnt a bone in his body that even believed the ramblings he spat out, and I think the audience, theist or none, could tell. obviously he just seemed plain desperate the whole time. Counter that with the sympathetic, rational, calm teddybear Dennett, who could just sit there and watch while D'Souza reached the edges of his logic and pitch at roughly the same moments.

I thought D'Souza evened, or perhaps even won, against Hitchens, because he appeared confident, his arguments gave a sort of air of logic and rationality.

Other Comments by BicycleRepairMan

34. Comment #94357 by ficklefiend on December 5, 2007 at 12:53 pm

The BBC really don't like their programmes to be given out to international viewers who don't pay the license fee, so you won't get it on their own iplayer.

You can hope for the world service or someone to upload it to a tv links type site or torrent though.

Other Comments by ficklefiend

35. Comment #94408 by the great teapot on December 5, 2007 at 3:56 pm

Xians often say "without god there is no hope" or
"there is no purpose to life without God."
I can sympathise completely, if all my friends were xian I would feel the same.


Other Comments by the great teapot

36. Comment #94426 by Goldy on December 5, 2007 at 4:18 pm

Best way of getting the BBC radio is through the computer nowadays - they appear to be closing down radio :-( I used to listen to it on shortwave - happy days!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/
Look up the program - should be able to find it :-)

Other Comments by Goldy

37. Comment #94498 by GSP on December 5, 2007 at 8:01 pm

This should be interesting.

Other Comments by GSP

38. Comment #94532 by octavian on December 5, 2007 at 11:51 pm

Interesting indeed. I also have to say that I agree with Atlas and Rational Thinking (and therefore with Sam). Although I can see the tactical/political motivation for congregating under the label 'atheism', I think a lot of the time it just makes us targets. I also think it is too incomplete of a description of the movement in general. The term 'atheist' could well apply to everyone from RD to someone like Stalin and some might argue even to a Buddhist. But all of those individuals are radically different from each other, so ultimatelly I feel the term 'atheist' in isolation does not adequatelly describe any of them. I think RD and atheists in general should make it clear that what we are really fighting for is not atheism by itself but rather for a mindset of reason and rationality, from which atheism emerges as a natural consequence. It's a very important distinction which may go some way towards deflecting a lot of the baggage the term 'atheism' has accumulated in the public mind. That's my two cents. Cheers.

Other Comments by octavian

39. Comment #94713 by black wolf on December 6, 2007 at 10:15 am

About replacing the 'atheist' label with 'promoter of reason and rationality': sadly, the Pope himself is at the forefront of those who paint theistic faith as the epitome of reason, and he is very successful at convincing the public. The media and prominent public figures regurgitate his words without ever questioning or analyzing if they really make sense, or if they simply appear as such because they rest on unfalsifiable claims, which can be phrased logically correct in principle and still be devoid of content or pertinence to reality.

Other Comments by black wolf

40. Comment #94738 by JemyM on December 6, 2007 at 11:34 am

"Man needs OUR AUTHORITY, otherwise he remains without OUR CONTROL".

Other Comments by JemyM

41. Comment #95012 by ridelo on December 7, 2007 at 7:08 am

D'Souza's shouting style of speaking reminded me a bit like Hitler orated before his audiences. Dennett was much better but I'm afraid D'Souza would get the better percentage of yea-sayers.

Other Comments by ridelo

42. Comment #95023 by alphabec on December 7, 2007 at 7:26 am

Regarding the quotes about this event:

number of answers a way of thinking gives has no bearing on its validity, rationality, or value...

Other Comments by alphabec

43. Comment #95082 by seted on December 7, 2007 at 10:25 am

"Then again, Atheism is a belief, a belief that God doesn't exist."

Mr Dawkins if you happen to read this before your appearance on 'Have your Say' would you be so kind as to explain to those who insist on resorting to this argument why IT MAKES NO SENSE!

I have seen and heard it repeated endlessly, and it is always said with great aplomb, as though the debater is putting a full stop at the end of the sentence with his/her great insight.

It really is frustrating.

Sorry for the rant but this has really been geeting under my skin. :-)

Other Comments by seted

44. Comment #98664 by wooter on December 14, 2007 at 2:21 am

"Then again, Atheism is a belief, a belief that God doesn't exist."

So Believe in that there is no belief in God. That is ironic. I am holding a glass and your belief{!) says " do not believe that that glass has no glassmaker. There was a strong wind that blew pieces of glass came together and as a whole it just popped up with the help of blind "blind watchmaker?" That's quite a belief.

Mr Dawkins if you happen to read this before your appearance on 'Have your Say' would you be so kind as to explain to those who insist on resorting to this argument why IT MAKES NO SENSE!

You are right it does not make sense that that glass came out by itself or chances. Mr Dawkins even cannot answer this simple analogy. So do not pass the ball.

I have seen and heard it repeated endlessly, and it is always said with great aplomb, as though the debater is putting a full stop at the end of the sentence with his/her great insight.

It really is frustrating.
To me this web page is totally funny. I would not say frustrating.

Sorry for the rant but this has really been geeting under my skin. :-)

I am sorry I can't help you about your skin. See the doctor.But honestly, how do you believe that there is no MAKER? Please how do you convince yourself?

Other Comments by wooter

45. Comment #99174 by huxley_leopard on December 15, 2007 at 7:58 pm

Mr. Wooter,
I am sorry for your frustration, but your frustration stems from a misunderstanding on your part. You need to read the chapter in The God Delusion on "designed and designoid objects". A glass is obviously a designed object, and no-one is saying it isn't, especially not people who employ reason. However, Planet Earth and all the living things that live on her are not designed objects. To some, they may appear to be designed (hence they may be called "designoid"), but they aren't. They just happened. In fact there is a lot of evidence to show that life on this planet wasn't designed but evolved. We have tailbones. Whales have to come up for air.

There is of course the possibility that a god created the world and all living things, and then planted huge amounts of evidence for evolution just to test our faith. This is Bill Hicks's "Prankster God" running around burying dinosaur bones etc.

There is also the possibility that a god (prime mover) started off the Big Bang knowing exactly what would happen and knowing that a world would be created like ours etc., and in effect designed evolution to create man... this is so ludicrous on many levels, not least because it is not only the hurricane blowing through the junkyard and building a 747, it is someone designing that hurricane.

Hope this goes some way to clearing things up for you.

Other Comments by huxley_leopard

46. Comment #99526 by wooter on December 17, 2007 at 1:44 am

Mr Huxley,
Mr. Huxley,
First I quoted some lines from other comments. I am not frustrated I am just curious and you sound a reasonable person since I can judge from response. Design's definition in Merriam Webster as follows; to create, fashion, execute, or construct according to plan. I focus on the word "plan". if we look closely there is an amazing plan that causes an amazing collaboration and cooperation between designed creatures, from sunlight, plants, rain, evaporating, trees, oxygen, carbon dioxide cleaning air, and animals that work like servant. Sheep and cows are like milk taps, chickens eat dirt but give us nutritious eggs. Everything is connected to each other through a marvelous plan and all the things serve Human being. In this case if there is a plan, then there must be a plan maker. We can't explain all these amazing cooperation between creatures with "it just happened" because who created the sun created the trees bad plants, which created the plants created the soil. Everything came out from one plan that plans all creatures in one big design.

Other Comments by wooter

47. Comment #104906 by dlitt on December 29, 2007 at 11:42 pm

Pope Benedict has attacked atheism in his latest encyclical. He says it is responsible for some of the "greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice" in history.

"Dark Ages in mirror are closer than they appear" - Scientific American.

If we were to re-enter the Dark Ages (it doesn't require much pessimism to envision that scenario), we will do so with nukes. Then we will see God's face.

Other Comments by dlitt