RDFRS US:
The mission of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science is to support scientific education, critical thinking and evidence-based understanding of the natural world in the quest to overcome religious fundamentalism, superstition, intolerance and suffering.
The Magic of Reality
for the iPad
Sean Faircloth:
Attack of the Theocrats!
J. Anderson Thomson Jr. MD:
why we believe in god(s)
RSS Feeds
The absence of development in their argument struck me too.
I think it illustrates well that it is not a scientific debate they are interested in and that they are lacking real arguments. I have never experienced a scientific debate so inert that arguments do not progress for over 20 years (or should I say 2000 years?)!
Interestingly, the only important change (from 'creationism' to 'ID') occurred not to improve the argument but was legally inspired (and still the arguments didn't change much).
I was surprised by the high number of favourable votes. Was it just due to the way the two sides mobilised or is it in any way representative for time and place of the debate?
Permalink Tue, 13 Mar 2007 01:20:00 UTC | #23165