Here's what I think about some of these prominent atheist speakers:
Dawkins: I dislike him less now than I did in the past. He used to be intolerable back before becoming just a cranky old man. Now I kind of feel bad for him ... a little.
Krauss: I don't like him. At all. He's not only a jerk, he lacks the charm needed to compensate for that. He thinks he's the greatest man on earth, and when he says the word "science" with such pride, it irritates me because he makes it sound like he's superior to most other people because he's into science and those others apparently are not. Plus, he always has to try to stand out in a group interview among atheists, when the last person I want to listen to is him.
Hitchens: Pure ego. But likeable. Hilarious. Entertaining. Opponents loved him. Anyone who compares Krauss to Hitchens should reconsider. Krauss is nothing like Hitchens was.
Harris: Likeable guy, but has views that someone like him shouldn't have.
Shermer: He's fun and all, but I like him less now than before because of his sexual harrassing behaviour towards women (in the past, at least).
James Randi: Likeable guy. Can't say anything negative about him.
PZ Myers: He's a douchebag, and he knows it. I agree with him in general on his sociopolitical views, but he's not a nice guy.
Richard Carrier: Aside from his atheistic views and sociopolitical ones, it's hard to find much I agree with him on. And for some reason, I just don't like him.
Rebecca Watson (skepchick): I like her. I think certain people are overly harsh and critical with her because of some of her views (and that has led to a feedback loop of sorts where she gets nasty in return and then people get nasty back at her and so on), but she makes a lot of good points that should not be dismissed just because she's a feminist.
Matt Dillahunty: Cool guy, and makes a lot of good points. Often knows what the fuck he's talking about, but he has difficulty with proper assertiveness. Too aggressive at times.
Dawkins: I dislike him less now than I did in the past. He used to be intolerable back before becoming just a cranky old man. Now I kind of feel bad for him ... a little.
Krauss: I don't like him. At all. He's not only a jerk, he lacks the charm needed to compensate for that. He thinks he's the greatest man on earth, and when he says the word "science" with such pride, it irritates me because he makes it sound like he's superior to most other people because he's into science and those others apparently are not. Plus, he always has to try to stand out in a group interview among atheists, when the last person I want to listen to is him.
Hitchens: Pure ego. But likeable. Hilarious. Entertaining. Opponents loved him. Anyone who compares Krauss to Hitchens should reconsider. Krauss is nothing like Hitchens was.
Harris: Likeable guy, but has views that someone like him shouldn't have.
Shermer: He's fun and all, but I like him less now than before because of his sexual harrassing behaviour towards women (in the past, at least).
James Randi: Likeable guy. Can't say anything negative about him.
PZ Myers: He's a douchebag, and he knows it. I agree with him in general on his sociopolitical views, but he's not a nice guy.
Richard Carrier: Aside from his atheistic views and sociopolitical ones, it's hard to find much I agree with him on. And for some reason, I just don't like him.
Rebecca Watson (skepchick): I like her. I think certain people are overly harsh and critical with her because of some of her views (and that has led to a feedback loop of sorts where she gets nasty in return and then people get nasty back at her and so on), but she makes a lot of good points that should not be dismissed just because she's a feminist.
Matt Dillahunty: Cool guy, and makes a lot of good points. Often knows what the fuck he's talking about, but he has difficulty with proper assertiveness. Too aggressive at times.
