6. Congratulations,” he wrote.Reacting to the news, Javed Akhtar’s wife, actor Shabana Azmi wrote in a tweet, “Such marvellous news.
5. According to the CFI press release "The recipient will be a distinguished individual from the worlds of science, scholarship, education or entertainment, who publicly proclaims the values of secularism and rationalism, upholding scientific truth wherever it may lead". does it mean that although no atheists have been on the panel, there have been atheistic winners; or that there have been no irreligous panel members Although I will refrain from editing this article, I completely disagree with Sirana: To include criticism from Dawkins in this particular context is highly inappropriate and in my mind violates the NPOV principle, because Dawkins' poor opinion of a prize awarded for spiritual understanding, often enough to scientists, is entirely predictable and rather frivolous. Richard Dawkins is a fellow of the Royal Society and was the inaugural holder of the Simonyi Chair for the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University. an anom user removed the following section: If nobody says otherwise in the talk section I'll revert it soon.
NASA Distinguished Service Medal. "If you were teaching Muslim sixth formers in a London school and you told them they can't have their God and have Darwin, they'd stick to their God and be lost to science," he said.The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, congratulated Lord Rees on the award. this is unclear. "It is very important that the Templeton Prize recognizes the contribution of someone who is not an advocate or a controversialist, but an honest and creative thinker at the very heart of British scientific achievement," he said.Lord Rees, who regularly attends chapel at Trinity College, Cambridge, said that while he has "no religious beliefs at all" he believes that the Church of England is a "force for good", adding that he would do everything he could to help to preserve its choral traditions and architectural legacy.
Richard Dawkins is a renowned English ethologist, evolutionary biologist, and author.Anil Kapoor wished the lyricist with a tweet. Since stating that the prize for promotion of spirituality is usually given to someone who supports religion is both obvious and not apparently a criticism. Looking at the talk page here, seems like a back and forth on this in the past. I am relatively content that these comments by these critical (and apparently non-neutral and very anti-religious) scientists are included to the extent that this gives the opportunity to point out that this view, and the more lengthy quote from from Harry Kroto are both contrary to the facts of to whom the prize is in fact awarded. He recently tweeted about the unnecessary reopening of liquor shops during the lockdown, garnering support of other social media users as well. Mr Richard Dawkins’ letter was a very very pleasant surprise,” he said. (t is)bad for science in general, bad for the Royal Society, bad for the UK - basically secular country - and very bad for Martin (Lord Rees). Is Dawkins suggesting the the prize for promotion of spirituality be given to people who attack religion, or is he just making an off hand observation that it is usually given to people who promote religion. “Knowing that Richard Dawkins has been your hero since you read ‘The Selfish Gene’, the prestigious Richard Dawkins Award must be extra special for you @Javedakhtarjadu Saab! Don't see what it would be advertising for. But the civil rights activist has not said what he will do with the £1.1m award. First off should be rewritten like this if to be reinserted. Without more context of his comment it's impossible to tell if this statement is intended to criticize, and if it's not then it's clearly undue weight to a mild and obvious observation.