[A Rant, of highly specific nature]
I came across an excellent review of Richard Dawlins latest opus (by an atheist nontheless) who said "Richard Dawkins just likes the sound of his own voice, why is the book (the God delusion) any more interesting than a book about why vampires don’t exist?".
As a philosophy grad I heartily agree with the above reviewer. The ability to *do* science doesn’t correlate with the ability to *do* philosophy and there are much better atheist philosophers of religion than Dawkins. Wittgenstein and Russell being prime examples. There is also one glaring logical fallacy underlying most of Dawkins thought. Go through the above book and replace the word "God" with the word "Memes". I’ll bet good money that most chapters will still make sense. Memes are as much an unprovable concept as God is.