Threnody Female, Married. Portland, OR, USA

Disappointed. This is supposed to be the foremost convincing and soul-shattering lump of antitheism arguments compiled to date.

In sum, like so many more right than you atheists, Dawkins simply reduces himself to being just another worshipful (albeit well articulated) human being who in place of embracing adoration of some benevolent and unseeable Super Being, instead exonerates with great religious reverence the narrow, lapsing and frail human conjecture of science with no debate over all.

From the first chapter it is clear that this book was written not as a challenge for those that do have Theist belief systems, but rather it is presented as dinner party cocktail rhetoric for those who slobber adoringly and gush over the other atheists at a gathering. I like to refer to them as the new breed of Darwinistic - Dawkins fans.

Dawkins' well known pugnacious approach holds up through the entirety of the book but sadly many of his arguments against creationism and theism are handled in a rather offhanded and unemphatic, unassured checklist way:
*the improbability of a supreme being, yup --- improbable. check.
*we are urged to continue pushing the limits of understanding as "we may eventually discover that there are no limits". check.
*organized religion has done more harm to humanity than good. check.

I find this contrary: Don't limit your understandings but if you believe in non-human-limiting-intelligence you can quietly go away and let the grown ups feel important and knowledgeable. 'K, thanks.

Dawkins arguments are trite and threadbare... he is very fond of the "elegance" of science. And how. Puzzling, this continual praise of the elegance of science throughout the book he will then in turn point out how the lack of precision and exactness is "rejoicing in (temporary) uncertainty". ? ?

Mr. Dawkin's devotes a chapter to why there almost certainly is no God. And that sums up The God Delusion nicely: it's about as good as it gets - 'almost' certainly. Indeed. He is afterall only 6.9 on the atheist scale.

Dawkins' explains to the reader how "utterly illogical" it is "to demand complete documentation of every step of any narrative, whether in evolution or any other science". Isn't that the very same (and major) faux pas and complaint of creationism and religious dogma?

Essentially I'm disappointed at the book's general aimless and repetitious T-shirt slogan comparison of how belief in God is like belief in the flying spaghetti monster or pink unicorn. We are supposed to be impressed with those types of cutesy and "clever" witticisms. So don't forget to be impressed or you have to forego your membership to the Douglas Adams fanclub.

I do feel that Dawkins is successful in one particular aspect of his book's reasoning: capturing the inane and laughable mindless and superstitious failings of most organized religions like the Catholic Church.

The God Delusion is the same blather, rinse repeat collection of arguments that can be found on every message board on the internet: belief in God makes you pitiable, unsophisticated and obtuse yadda yadda yadda. Save your $$$ go read atheist rants on a free forum.