Welcome to Gaia! ::

Since we are three dimensional beings it is nigh impossible to prove anything in the higher dimensions except theoretically through math. Just give me a couple years to learn quantum theory and then I'll explain it though you probably won't be able to understand it. But I can say this. Science "invents" things just as religion does. Just look at dark matter and dark energy.

He's pretty cool I suppose.
But I don't see how he has anything to do with atheism.
It would be like bringing up Ted Haggard or Ray Comfort. Sure they have some relevance but is it worth bringing up?

I'm signing under this biggrin and I think calling him "Darwin's rottweiler" is making unecessary fuss over poor Charlie.

While Dawkins does bring a lot to the table, his Evolutionist approach to belief structures (older religions evolved into newer ones, then to science; all as explanations about the world around us) is a tad outdated, not to mention kinda ethnocentric.

He's a fundamentalist, just like any other, and thus has that detestable practice of not allowing any other perspective but his. At times, when debating a sufficiently educated Christian he will slip to logical fallacy, just like any human being does on occasion when defending the beliefs that are at the core of their identity. Carefully watch a few debates on youtube where the Christian minister argues from a more philosophical perspective rather than bible verses, and you might catch such a slip. He is clever at using his rational "atheist" mindset as a cover for these slips, however. I'm not calling the man evil for such a thing - its human nature to use the world view as a means to limit perspective to support that world view.

At times I get annoyed at how he narrows the debate to Atheism vs Christianity, more often than not. Sometimes, he branches out to include Islam and Judaism on the Christian side. However, I do understand that he can only study so many different faiths to pick them apart as he does - he's only one person, and he does address the big religions in our culture.

I can understand and relate to his frustration about what the more visible religions (or most visible sects thereof) perpetuate. I would personally enjoy his work much more if he embraced atheism as a form of religion and proselytized that way, then tried to understand religions before cutting them down.

Dark matter and dark energy aren't just some made-up things. They are expressions used for a currently unknown cause for certian observable fenomena. For example, galaxies act as though there were a lot more matter (and thus mass) present, and that "missing" mass is called dark matter. Because they don't see anything there. And they still don't know what it is.
It's a simmilar case with dark energy.

You were making it sound like they just made this stuff up. They didn't. On the other hand, religions do make stuff up, or at least claim stuff without objective evidence.

Depends on the god. The Christian god is implausible, but what if God saw no reason to interact with every person, save people, fun stuff like that?
It's impossible to prove or disprove god(s). I've never heard a convincing argument proving that there is or isn't a god.

What you said kinda reminds me of the Periodic Table. They were able to guess undiscovered elements based on the pattern.

technically, we're fourth dimensional as we exist in another direction- time.

Quantum theory seems like a load to me- a lot of it assumes that the math IS the reality, when really it's an abstract measure of probability. Essentially, it states that a photon can be in multiple places a la probability. True enough. It forgets, however, that probability is an abstraction and assumes that it is a tangible thing, and that their equations equal out to reality. Roughly speaking, they're saying that since a coin can be either heads or tails, if we don't know, it must be both head AND tails until we find out.