I am not fanatical - but You are !

ABC news SUNDAY of the world conference of Atheists in Melbourne this week made for lively controversy in the news . We want this . We are concerned about that ; about them!. What though are we to make of the media correction attempt dominating the report( "I'm not vehement, am I?" ) Paraphrasing Richard Hawkins .Looked more like a talk about others than about AFA; looked more like denial too.

More too of this ABC disease about quoting " what scientists say " to say what you as a non scientist want to say?
To believe too much in tying up the loose ends of scientific study is to risk ignoring too many loose ends.
To paraphrase again "Why do we have to use symbols and metaphors ,Why can't we just be long winded and completely greek - believing only in what we can see from , dare I mention it - mere rhetoric .We know you used the word "science" but if you want to talk "philosophy of science",  talk some more about the range of scientific studies ( including psychology ) to be credible .
Take Dawkins denial of  "aggression". Does he not have adrenalin flowing in his veins ? Sound sustainability scientists accept the role of aggression, and are not in simple denial about it.
Richard Dawkins is less convincing than he thinks because he doesn't appear to be aware of what he's doing . Sure you can make money like Dan Brown questioning everything and "having a go" . React to a trend . We rebels ALL agree that words are powerful , but never let us stop using them, carefully to stop mere predjudice and panic ( more the basis for real concern in the public mind about "religions',say with regard to Islam )
If you going just destroy the temple you are only half doing the job .Whats the point of trying to kill all those people - all the elephants in the room . More effective it is to try to remember whose actually in there and why , and then you won't just end up with a lot of splinters and offending the scientists in there by wearing their badge so carelessly ( Are you promoting the science of evolution(ANS) or the philosophy of evolutionary determinism (ED)- viva la difference) Who really is being reactive here ? Whose the worry -the radicals or the moderates?
Most of us observing rebels share AFA's concern about the dangers of "institutional religion" BUT are asking " are you in denial about being religious yourself" .( science of the mind rather suggests we all are" religious") \Its easier to deal with a problem, if you admit you are part of it .
On the convincing stakes, having Peter Singer as second fiddle is not very convincing.; Surely the man has spent more time chasing reactionary trams than any old greeks we know .