This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← Richard Dawkins slaps creationists into the primordial soup

black wolf's Avatar Jump to comment 13 by black wolf

from the comments on their site:
"Dwarkins does not understand Americans. ... and the Supreme Court has ruled that Atheism is a religion equal to any other."
"( sorry darwin in wrong, evolution is just a viral infection)"
"To describe Hawkins as evangelical is pretty good..."
"... Christians who accept" evolution. That is, of course, the majority - including my Catholic Church."
"Dawkin's brand of Scientism is far more damaging then a few wingnuts in America that don't buy evolution (44% is nonsense). "

My comments on these:
- Why is it that believers apparently exclusively and persistently misspell Dawkins' name or can't tell him and Stephen Hawking apart? This reveals a willful ignorance of science and profound disrespect for a person's dignity. I try my best to spell any person's name correctly, even if it means I'll have to find a book that references him or a website to make sure. And in these cases, the article providing the correct spelling is right in front of their rage-dazzled eyes.
- The 44% figure is not only from a respectable polling institution, but has been corroborated by polls from other institutions and consecutive years. Flatly denying all those polls' validity from personal disbelief is a classic argument from incredulity and further illustrating how ignorance disrespects its own intellect.
- The SC didn't rule that atheism is a religion, and again, it is willfully ignorant or mendacious to claim it had.
- no, truth is not dependant on majority opinion or hurt feelings of national pride
- The Catholics and evolution:
"Although I, personally, believe in some form of evolution, I have serious problems with the way some theories of evolution are presented as fact, especially given the flaws in those theories, and any atheistic theory of evolution is, of course wholly incompatible with Christianity (and rational thought)." - commenter
"Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo- Darwinian sense - an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection - is not." - Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn
While these do not represent the official majority position of the CC, we are well aware that it takes some degree of naiveté and obfuscative interpretative quibbling to bring the text of the scriptures into accordance with a complete view of the Theory of Evolution, inanely pretending that the authors of Genesis had been inspired to paraphrase evolution in the most obscurantist way conceivable. And they illustrate how quickly a large portion of the Catholic grass roots to some of is leaders would eagerly revert to 19th century creationism if science didn't uphold the pressure.

edits applied to grammar, content and added commentary 6:06 CET

Fri, 18 Jul 2008 19:51:00 UTC | #202764