Dawkins loses humanist title

[Reforged]

He says all sorts of shit that might offend people who aren't looking to be offended.  I mean, part of that is down to how people tend to get offended by things whether they want to be offended by them or not.  

OFC, he's not being taken to task for being offensive, so much as being empirically and ideologically wrong in a manner that makes a continued association with the aha untenable.

I mean you say empirically wrong but how?
What can you point to and go "Nope. Wrong. Heres the evidence to prove its factually wrong. Bam. Slam-dunk."