Ah. This one brings back memories.

First full disclosure, I am a theist and am not a fan of Dawkins, although I am completely accept evolution and reject the concept of creationism as a scientific alternative. Having said that, I am forced to agree with everything that you have said with one exception. I do not believe that Richard Dawkins has achieved "greatness in the world of science" if by that you mean he has major scientific accomplishments ala Feynmann or Hawking. He is more of a "Sagan" type. He has made a name by popularizing and communicating known science rather than making contributions to science itself. That does not meet the definition of "greatness" for me at least.

I accept your point however this is a minor disagreement and I shall explain why. I think his greatness lies exactly in his ability to popularise science and to do so in a manner which demonstrates the intricacies and beauty of scientific theories in a form which is understandable to laymen, such as myself. The Selfish Gene is one of the most exciting reads I have come across and this coming from someone who dropped science at the earliest possible stage in order to concentrate on the arts.

I feel the same way.

OK, cool. It has to do with point of view. I understand your point.

One minor quibble I have with this is that he does have some significant contributions (most notably the concept of the extended phenotype) and helped advance the ideas of gene-centered evolution. So he definitely did make a name for himself in part through contributions to science. Totally agree that he belongs nowhere on the list of greats strictly in terms of those contributions though.

Instead of talking about rational vs. irrational, try internally consistent.
The extremists world view, while deeply flawed, is internally consistent. If his hooly book was actually written by god, he is right about everything.
Whats so frustrating about the moderate, is that he sees why religious beliefs dosen´t make sense, and then inexplicably professes to have them anyway.
How can you see that a consept makes no sense, and then claim to believe, in the not so destructive parts of it?
I mean if I conclude, that the positioning of the planets has no predictive value on the individual human life, im not gonna use astrology to make small decisions, im just gonna discount it.

What it boils down to for me, is that if you believe in a religion that tells you, that there is an all powerfull, allseeing being, who treatens you torture for all eternity, unless you do everything he says.
The extremist, who does everything he can to please this being, makes more sense than the moderate, who does some of what god tells him, when he feels like it.