What is the 9th Commandment again? You shall not bear false witness...?
Shame that so many ID/Creationism proponents ignore this one, isn't it?
I salute you on this one :lol:
This isn't a failure of evolution. It's perhaps a failure of science teaching on the whole, as what you say isn't unique to the theory of evolution.
Of course not. But it's one of the things where the whole ostility emerges. And, it is not a neutral stance. Which is the major problem.
But Dawkins isn't the only person against creationism. And Dawkins is interested in what is true based on the available evidence, and from his point of view, the idea of God (and certainly the idea of the major monotheisms) is not true.
Of course he is not. He is just the most prominent at the moment, and life is a game of chess: you allways try to get the king down. Also, what I called ignorance is not his statement that there is no evidence of god... I am a believer, but have to agree to that, having spent a bit of time to search for naturalistic evidence and don't finding any.
What I call ignorance is his pretty blatant attack on religion in general, making it the bogeyman of history. Making Bogeymans is allmost allways a sign for a grudge (psychology is science too, by the way...), and grudges lead to ignorance towards otherwise obvious facts. Such as the historical fact that religion is not responsible for all the bad in the world.
Dawkins did not write his book for a scientific purpose. Instead he took science as a lever to launch his very own, and as i believe quite personal, attack on religion and christianity in particular. He played the emotional card, not the empiric one. And he got emotions back, not arguments. It's all a matter of action and reaction.
No-one has ever come up with any form of evidence
No, no one has... and it hurts me that so many of my brethren still don't understand the concept of a scientific proof. Because they still think they got one. But Dawkins actions broke any hope for a solution for this misery. Not his rethorics, not his science, not his proofs, but his attacks. It's alot harder learn from someone who lashes with a whip at you.
so many times of where they are wrong, and pointing to the wealth of evidence in favour of evolution, they stick their fingers in their ears and shout "la la la, I can't hear you", then proceed to say the same things over and over again.
I'll give you an insider information now: you hear the EXACT SAME argument over in the other camp. This could be a quote by allmost any pastor I know that tried to deal with scientists...
The problem is, both sides have to learn to listen before they can talk, and maybe both would eventually come to the conclusion that they're not talking about the same thing. That's excluding fundamentialists of course, we'll allways have these. In that matter, all respects to Greg, who tries to understand what's going on in other peoples minds.
It's either profound ignorance of the facts, and idiocy on their parts as they cannot grasp the basics of evolution, or they are breaking the 9th Commandment because they know what it is science is saying, but they are spreading lies about it in order to fool people who don't know any better.
Again a sentence you hear at the christian front over and over again. Problem is, this is exactly what I mentioned before: Polarisation. Don't doubt that most of these people genuinely BELIEVE that what they believe is the truth. So it would be inapropriate to call them liars from an ethical point of view. While there is lots of ignorance, I seldom encountered idocity. They simply are not used to scientific thinking. It's not something that comes to you easily. Most associate science with logic, so if something is logical it is scientifical. The universe exists, so someone must have made it. There is an irrefutable logic behind this argument... there's just no science. And they don't get the difference. If you want to explain them that difference, it won't do any good to call them liars.
