Mark Jones

Your comment reflects a debate that has been raging online for some time about the appropriate strategy to adopt.

I'm of the impression that the conclusion is always that there is room for more than one strategy.

Some people really do stop paying attention when put on the defensive, and some people are easier to put on the defensive than others.

Richard doesn't sugar-coat what he has to say, and that means he may have more trouble getting his points across to some people than would someone who does sugar-coat things. (I think the opposite is true as well.)

I'm glad we have the whole spectrum of approaches "in play."

EDIT: and it is not so much that Richard doesn't sugar-coat things, I suppose, but more that Richard doesn't even bother addressing religion in his writing on science except in cases where it "stands in his way," so to speak.

And the irony there is, I think, that the religious people who will continue reading through his books despite that are either people who are indeed not stubborn and very willing to give Richard a fair chance, and people who are like "I don't care, I'm right and he's wrong anyway!" The in-between people, who aren't quite so strong in their religious convictions, but don't quite have it in them to push past what they see as "stabs" at their world view, may be disinclined to actually read through a whole book.