Richard Dawkins has attracted criticism (in other news, it’s Monday) after joining and amplifying accusations that Ahmed Mohamed committed some kind of fraud in claiming to have “invented” the clock that got him arrested for taking a bomb to school.
Firstly, so what if he hacked a bought clock instead of assembling one from virgin components? What were YOU doing when you were 14?
Dawkins’ nitpicking included the rather racist allowance for the possibility that the young brown kid didn’t have a full understanding of English…
I agree, although his English seems good, it's possible he doesn't know the meaning of "invention". And he should NOT have been arrested.— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) September 20, 2015
…but in my opinion, the worst in his series of tweets on the topic was this one, prefaced with the classic weasel words, “If this is true…”
If this is true, what was his motive? Whether or not he wanted the police to arrest him, they shouldn’t have done so https://t.co/LtOFAAmVxK— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) September 20, 2015
With that comment, Dawkins veers towards the deranged ramblings of Sarah Palin in implying there may have been sinister motives. Here we have one of the loudest advocates of reason and rationality, with no evidence other than a YouTube clip and his own feels, suggesting Ahmed might have been playing some kind of double-bluff in order to get attention.
With all due respect Professor, I think you might be projecting. I’m sure it’s not that you can’t process the idea of a Muslim boy with a passion for science being victimised for his race and/or religion.
In admitting he’d gone too far, Professor Dawkins explained he was feeling a bit sensitive.