Wednesday, October 29, 2008 | Reason : Comedy | print version

Print | Comments |

Richard Dawkins embarrassed after death and subsequent resurrection

by News Biscuit

Reposted from:
http://newsbiscuit.com/article/richard-dawkins-embarrassed-after-death-and-subsequent-resurrection-395

Confirmed atheist Richard Dawkins was forced onto the defensive yesterday after he died but subsequently rose from the dead in a miraculous resurrection, much like that of the son of God Jesus Christ.

‘There are a number of perfectly logical scientific explanations for what has happened’ he told journalists flocking to hear his story or just touch the hem of his clothing. ‘Although I was pronounced dead after the unfortunate incident on Friday, the doctors clearly made a mistake. The fact that there was thunder and lightning, and those around claim to have heard the sound of angelic voices is completely irrelevant.’

Dawkins suffered a shocking but ironic death on Friday having been seized by a mysterious gang of burly men dressed as Roman soldiers. They nailed him to a cross, and left him there until he died some hours later. However on Sunday, his body was no longer to be found in Slough mortuary, and he was seen walking on the A4 towards his home, where his resurrection was hailed as a miracle.

It is being suggested in some quarters that Richard Dawkins was being taught a lesson by God, who has now given him magical powers including the ability to walk on water and cast out demons. A bitter Pope Benedict said ‘Why is it the naughty ones get all the attention? I have been saying that I definitely, definitely believe in God for ages and I haven’t been given the ability to perform a single miracle. Unless you count progressing from the Hitler Youth to being God’s representative on Earth, I suppose.’

RD on water

Despite the miraculous events of the past few days, Richard Dawkins was standing by his militant atheism. ‘All of it can be explained by science and rational thought’ he insisted to reporters outside his front door. At this point a leper rushed through the crowd, and kissed Dawkins’ feet, only to stand up apparently totally cured of her hideous affliction. ‘OK, that is pretty impressive, I admit’ said the author of The God Delusion. ‘Oh shit, I think I’m going to get pissed.’ At that he touched a bottle of mineral water, turning it into Chateau Lafitte 1967, and slunk inside to drink it.

Posted: 29 October 2008 by NewsBiscuit

Posted: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 159 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #273851 by The Schuermannator on October 29, 2008 at 10:54 am

One rare gift Prof. Dawkins DOES indeed possess is the ability to cure wounds caused by inflictions of religious indoctrination.

Other Comments by The Schuermannator

2. Comment #273854 by aznxscorpion517 on October 29, 2008 at 10:56 am

Well, of course!

Other Comments by aznxscorpion517

3. Comment #273858 by AllanW on October 29, 2008 at 11:00 am

I love it! Bravo to the writers of this piece.

And if he has the ability reported in the last line then the drinks bill at the next meeting will be a lot lower ...

Other Comments by AllanW

4. Comment #273859 by Don_Quix on October 29, 2008 at 11:00 am

Does this mean we all get to be his disciples?

Other Comments by Don_Quix

5. Comment #273860 by hungarianelephant on October 29, 2008 at 11:05 am

What a shoddy piece of writing.

Everyone knows that the Lafite '67 was rubbish. Now if Richard were creating the '61, that would be worth a trip to Oxford.

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

6. Comment #273863 by Eventhorizon on October 29, 2008 at 11:11 am

I fail to see the relevance

Other Comments by Eventhorizon

7. Comment #273865 by mr-zero on October 29, 2008 at 11:13 am

I touched the picture of RD at the top of this page and was miraculously cured.
Praise be!

Other Comments by mr-zero

8. Comment #273867 by HughCaldwell on October 29, 2008 at 11:13 am

Still, I'm impressed that CHÂTEAU LAFITE ROTHSCHILD was spelled almost correctly.

Other Comments by HughCaldwell

9. Comment #273869 by Tezcatlipoca on October 29, 2008 at 11:15 am

I rested my head on my desk and the mark left on my cheek by the desktop was an image of RD! Praise be to Dawkins...

Other Comments by Tezcatlipoca

10. Comment #273872 by al-rawandi on October 29, 2008 at 11:19 am

Elephant,

What is that creature of the night which inhabits your avatar'

Other Comments by al-rawandi

11. Comment #273875 by MrPickwick on October 29, 2008 at 11:20 am

Poe's law! Poe's law!

Other Comments by MrPickwick

12. Comment #273878 by Steve Zara on October 29, 2008 at 11:23 am

Comment #273872 by al-rawandi

http://www.gruffalo.com/

Other Comments by Steve Zara

13. Comment #273881 by hungarianelephant on October 29, 2008 at 11:27 am

Al-rawandi - It's a gruffalo.

(A gruffalo? Why, didn't you know? He has terrible tusks, and terrible claws, and terrible teeth in his terrible jaws.)

Utterly meaningless to anyone who doesn't have a child under the age of 5, sorry. I'm thinking of reinstating Ben Franklin, or some of the weird epilepsy-inducing flashing things that seem to be de la mode.

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

14. Comment #273882 by Vaal on October 29, 2008 at 11:30 am

Richard

Come around to my house, lots of water to turn into wine!

I am not so keen on the fishes and loaves, how about a curry instead? :)

Other Comments by Vaal

15. Comment #273884 by al-rawandi on October 29, 2008 at 11:31 am

elephant,

I probably have a five year old somewhere.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

16. Comment #273885 by eh-theist on October 29, 2008 at 11:31 am

Does this mean that Richard will never boil a goat in its mother's milk? (That's the most important commandment of them all!)

Other Comments by eh-theist

17. Comment #273887 by Wosret on October 29, 2008 at 11:34 am

Funny...

Other Comments by Wosret

18. Comment #273889 by Damien Trotter on October 29, 2008 at 11:34 am

I know that appreciation of comedy is quite the subjective, but the piece (above) had nothing.

DT

Other Comments by Damien Trotter

19. Comment #273890 by hungarianelephant on October 29, 2008 at 11:34 am

al-rawandi - Nah, you'd have been hit for the maintenance payments by now, after mum recognised the youngster's taste in shorts.

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

20. Comment #273891 by JFHalsey on October 29, 2008 at 11:35 am

Some of that article was just plain stupid, but some of it was pure gold. Like this quote, from the pope:

I haven’t been given the ability to perform a single miracle. Unless you count progressing from the Hitler Youth to being God’s representative on Earth, I suppose.’

Other Comments by JFHalsey

21. Comment #273893 by JernJane on October 29, 2008 at 11:38 am

Ehm, ok. Didn't really hit home with me.

Other Comments by JernJane

22. Comment #273894 by stereoroid on October 29, 2008 at 11:38 am

Does this mean the Professor is going to be Canonized? If so, I don't see why. Nikon have some decent cameras out too, and if you like to use old lenses, you can't beat Pentax.

What?

Other Comments by stereoroid

23. Comment #273895 by Philster61 on October 29, 2008 at 11:39 am

First of all.Id like to welcome Richard back after his ironic death.Secondly,Id like to ask him.How is John(Lennon) and Elvis?
And thirdly now that Richard has retired from his previous position,does his most recent appointment as Messiah mean that he will move into the Vatican since the current pope may now be considered irrelevant.It would defintely make Mass more interesting.
Last of all,does Richard intend to profit from his newly discovered talent as a winemaker and will this be tax deductable? "Blessed are the winemakers"

Other Comments by Philster61

24. Comment #273900 by a non e-moose on October 29, 2008 at 11:41 am

if this article is trying to make a point, I fail to see it.

Other Comments by a non e-moose

25. Comment #273901 by Mr Blue Sky on October 29, 2008 at 11:46 am

Have I missed something? What is funny and where did this come from? I am confuzzled?

Other Comments by Mr Blue Sky

26. Comment #273903 by Philster61 on October 29, 2008 at 11:49 am

Err yes Mr Blue Sky.You did miss it.Its called satire.ie:taking the piss.Making fun of........... sorry old boy.

Other Comments by Philster61

27. Comment #273906 by DonRock0 on October 29, 2008 at 11:54 am

Ok, this is downright hilarious. I suspect even RD would find this funny.

Other Comments by DonRock0

28. Comment #273907 by Ascaphus on October 29, 2008 at 11:55 am

Interesting thought. What would each of us accept as evidence enough to make a believer out of us? I'm not sure a miracle would do; there is always the chance that we simply don't understand what is going on, and that future advances in knowledge will have an explanation. I certainly will never trust the voices in my head - or in other people's heads!

Any suggestions?

Matt

Other Comments by Ascaphus

29. Comment #273908 by Steve Zara on October 29, 2008 at 11:57 am

Comment #273900 by a non e-moose

The point of the article is clear.

At that he touched a bottle of mineral water, turning it into Chateau Lafitte 1967,

The Creator has a slightly poor taste in wine, and understands little about the conditions in which a reasonable red wine should be drunk, (unless the mineral water was warmed at slightly above room temperature for half an hour).

Other Comments by Steve Zara

30. Comment #273909 by Lenny on October 29, 2008 at 11:57 am

Is this one of those pieces that feels like a satire even though it's not clear what is being satirized?
My best guess: Dawkins is so confident in his disbelief that even if he had Christ's supernatural powers he STILL wouldn't believe. Pretty lame if that's it.

Other Comments by Lenny

31. Comment #273910 by hungarianelephant on October 29, 2008 at 11:59 am

Ascaphus - He doesn't seem to be around any more, but Barry Pearson did some work on this: http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/gods/convert.htm

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

32. Comment #273911 by Steve Zara on October 29, 2008 at 11:59 am

Comment #273909 by Lenny

My best guess: Dawkins is so confident in his disbelief that even if he had Christ's supernatural powers he STILL wouldn't believe. Pretty lame if that's it.

Actually, I think that is a pretty interesting point.

Even if Dawkin's did apparently have Christ's powers, I would not believe in the supernatural. Would you?

Other Comments by Steve Zara

33. Comment #273913 by Wosret on October 29, 2008 at 12:02 pm

32. Comment #273911 by Steve Zara

I wouldn't. Though I'd far rather Son Goku's power.

I've thought about that at lot, I'd only be able to ever use a minute, insignificant fraction of it for fear of hurting something though...so lame.

Other Comments by Wosret

34. Comment #273914 by rod-the-farmer on October 29, 2008 at 12:04 pm

If he is Canonised, then he can't be simultaneously a Pentax-costal. And that leper at the doorway ? Sorry, that was a woman wearing a burka. Curing HER would indeed be easy. Cast off your ~~burdens~~ burka, and arise !

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

35. Comment #273917 by Philster61 on October 29, 2008 at 12:07 pm

"Hes not the Messiah...................Hes just a naughty boy"

Other Comments by Philster61

36. Comment #273921 by Tezcatlipoca on October 29, 2008 at 12:10 pm

Rod,

couldn't he be both Canonised and Pentax-costal provided he had the correct adapter ring(question mark)

Other Comments by Tezcatlipoca

37. Comment #273922 by lol mahmood on October 29, 2008 at 12:10 pm

Not funny. Not even particularly well written. Onion wannabe.

Other Comments by lol mahmood

38. Comment #273924 by Philster61 on October 29, 2008 at 12:12 pm

My best guess: Dawkins is so confident in his disbelief that even if he had Christ's supernatural powers he STILL wouldn't believe. Pretty lame if that's it.

So are you suggesting that if evidence was found about Dawkins Divinity he would have to rewrite the God Delusion.Instead it would be called The Dawkins Delusion as written by God.On what evidence would Dawkins divinity be based on?

Other Comments by Philster61

39. Comment #273930 by jimbob on October 29, 2008 at 12:18 pm

What's so remarkable about walking on water? Where I live (Minnesota) people walk across lakes several months of the year!

Other Comments by jimbob

40. Comment #273932 by NewEnglandBob on October 29, 2008 at 12:20 pm

What is "News Biscuit"?

A collection of monkeys typing randomly on keyboards? They need monkeys of higher intelligence.

Other Comments by NewEnglandBob

41. Comment #273934 by ImagineAZ on October 29, 2008 at 12:22 pm

Only the true messiah denies his divinity.

Other Comments by ImagineAZ

42. Comment #273935 by Mark Jones on October 29, 2008 at 12:24 pm

Comment #273911 by Steve Zara

Even if Dawkin's did apparently have Christ's powers, I would not believe in the supernatural. Would you?

Well, it would be a great opportunity for investigation into these phenomena, which presumably by definition would now be part of the natural world, so no longer could they be considered supernatural. Err, I think.

Other Comments by Mark Jones

43. Comment #273939 by j.mills on October 29, 2008 at 12:32 pm

Well, I thought it was funny, so there.

Ascaphus said:

What would each of us accept as evidence enough to make a believer out of us?

It's a non-problem really. If god wants to convince us, he can just make us convinced. Jus' like that. Nothing is difficult for god/s. Remember how he hardened Pharoah's heart and inspired Joshua? (If I've got the right god...)

Hey, I just noticed Richard has no reflection! Not just a zombie messiah, also a vampire! [Shiver.]

Other Comments by j.mills

44. Comment #273944 by Layla Nasreddin on October 29, 2008 at 12:35 pm

Slough? SLOUGH?! What the hell is he doing there?

(Isn't Slough supposed to be the most boring town in all England, or something like that? Recall John Betjeman's line, "Come friendly bombs and fall on Slough!"

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

45. Comment #273946 by Diacanu on October 29, 2008 at 12:37 pm

Anyone else got a mental picture of Dan Dennett shaking his fist grumbling "dammit, why does Dawkins get the superpowers? I'm just as hardcore an atheist, and I'm smarter than him! He's even said so!! Grr!!"?

No one?

Just me?

Tch, it's always just me.

Other Comments by Diacanu

46. Comment #273947 by Sciros on October 29, 2008 at 12:38 pm

A collection of monkeys typing randomly on keyboards?

1) Take a crap ton of monkeys and give each a typewriter.

2) After a while take their papers and find one that's the CLOSEST TO Shakespeare of them all (this is the tricky bit).

3) Then take that one paper and redistribute it to all the monkeys and have them perform random monkey edits to it.

4) Repeat steps 2-3 A LOT.

5) You has Shakespeare as written by monkeys.

6) You has an analogy for natural selection.

Other Comments by Sciros

47. Comment #273948 by rod-the-farmer on October 29, 2008 at 12:39 pm

Any discussion of Pentax-costals would be held in secret (in camera, so to speak). Trying to get inside their meetings is too much hasselblad. Mamiya mia, they are a closed group, Leica it or not. Stop me now, before I get really silly.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

48. Comment #273950 by Diacanu on October 29, 2008 at 12:41 pm

Steve-

Nope.
I'd be building a Marvel comic style technology that would suck his powers into a yellow class cube, which would become the battery for my power-emulation augmentation armor.

I mean, as long as reality is cracked open to allow for Bible shit, why not funnybooks?

Oh, excuse me, graphic novels.
;P

Other Comments by Diacanu

49. Comment #273951 by Frankus1122 on October 29, 2008 at 12:42 pm