But what scientific issue could possibly divide men and women of reason and logic? What intellectual debate could cause such a rift in the world of the Godless.
The answer is simple.
ELEVATOR ETIQUETTE. (Or to my British friends "LIFT ETIQUETTE")
The story is a true tour de force of childish bickering and shrieking, hysterical overreactions.
Let me introduce the heroes/villains of the story.
First there is Rebecca Watson, a 30 year old Boston native divorcee and atheist of no discernible expertise or talents. Well-known amongst skeptics and atheists as the founder of "Skepchick" a group of skeptical, feminist, "chicks" (figure that one out), and regular podcaster. Her claim to fame is being both a skeptic and a female. Her average looks and frequent, crass, sexual comments afford her generous attention from the legions of drooling, geek-lord fans at events such as Dragon*Con and TAM, not to mention weekly audiences in the tens of thousands for her podcast contributions.
Next we have the atheists' "god" himself Richard Dawkins. 70 year old Kenyan born British evolutionary biologist, educated at Oxford, a 2 time divorcee, AKA Darwin's rottweiler. Hater of all religions, atheist activist, author and media personality.
Now the stage is set, lets explain the story. Rebecca "Skepchick" Watson, (the one who is always talking about sex on the "Skeptics guide to the universe"), was giving a talk at a Hotel in Dublin (the subject of the talk was feminism and the objectification of women), on her way back to her room she was allegedly, possibly propositioned by a man in an elevator.
He said he "found her very interesting", and would she like to get some coffee in his hotel room?
Well, aghast at this, she declined, then proceeded to blog about how all men were insensitive meanies.
Richard Dawkins, presumably drunk on port, or sherry perhaps, decided that he would chime in on the video blog with an incredibly childish and sarcastic post about how Muslim women should stop complaining because of poor little Rebecca's plight.
After confirming it was in fact Dawkins and not a 13 year old troll, it turned into an all out flame war. With all the big names coming down on Skepchick's side. Phil Plait, the bad astronomer, former president of the JREF, hysterically claiming that she was a hair's breadth away from being raped. Even PZ Meyers chimed in with a critique on Dawkins, as did of course, any and all atheists without penises.
Watson, presumably emboldened by her new found and somewhat more mainstream attention encouraged her drooling, hairy palmed male fans and fellow female skeptic(s) to join hands in boycotting all things Dawkins until he apologises. She declared him to be a thing of the past who they did no-longer need.
So in conclusion. After one idiotic comment on an online blog, the world's most famous atheist has managed to marginalize himself, Dawkins is now a relic, with no respect even among his own. He is not needed anymore, after all, they now have the Skepchick!
Moving up in the atheist community is Rebecca Watson, a woman of limited charisma, with no expertise, no relevant qualifications, no publications, no credentials of any kind.
Survival of the fittest? On the contrary.
This is a lose/lose for the Godless, don't these people claim to follow science and evidence? Looks like they are following their heroes wherever they may lead them. I've seen more mature debates in a schoolyard.
