Which is true?

Oh honestly.

I saw this on Twitter but didn’t feel like doing another seen-on-Twitter post, so I’m grateful to the Evening Harold for doing a parody.

Eminent scientist turned huffy, proselytizing sideshow, Richard Dawkins, has had his motives for taking to Twitter to heap shit on a fourteen year old boy questioned, with many believing that he knew exactly what he was doing and that it was a pre-meditated attack carried out purely for attention.

“Assembling a Twitter rant is fine. Making it look like it was done as part of some great crusade for truth, and isn’t a famous 74 year old man picking on a boy is not fine. Which is true?” said the first villager we found in the Squirrel Lickers, Phil Evans.

Wait, what, you’re thinking – he didn’t, did he? Yes, he did. He did it repeatedly. He defended it.

What’s his objection? That Ahmed Mohamed called his clock an invention when he may have simply disassembled and reassembled an existing clock.

Yes really.

Richard Dawkins ‏@RichardDawkins 12 hours ago
Assembling clock from bought components is fine. Taking clock out of its case to make it look as if he built it is not fine. Which is true?

Why do you ask?

117 Responses to “Which is true?”