Jerry Coyne gave a presentation on Creationism and ID at The Rockefeller University on May 1. You can watch the video here.

What's troubling about the presentation is the last 5 minutes or so, where Coyne focuses on religion and basically sides with Dawkins, Hitchens, and the New Atheist movement. He propagates the war between religion and science viewpoint and argues that we need to "get rid of religion." He plugs the books by Dawkins and Hitchens. He argues that we need to more publicly express the opinion that religion is the enemy of science. And then he turns to the NCSE position and says, "At least do not pretend that religion and science are alternative and compatible ways of looking at the world." He claims the National Academy of Science's recent statement is "soft-pedaling the dichotomy" and describes Gould's NOMA as "hogwash." He even contrasts religion and science by peddling the stereotype that religious people "blow each other up" while scientists behave in a civilized manner.

Coyne really should stick to genetics and evolution.

David Berlinski will conduct a tour of the United States in April to promote his newest book The Devil's Delusion. Berlinski is a talented writer, an imposing intellect and not reluctant to buck the tide of prevailing opinion.

Confident assertions by scientists that"¦ they have demonstrated that God does not exist have nothing to do with science, and even less to do with God's existence.- David Berlinski

Attitudes about Intelligent Design are influenced by how we view science and God and whether our view of one affects our attitude toward the other. New Atheists have weighed in with their opinions. Another perspective from a bright analytical mind not committed to theism or Christianity is a refreshing turn of events.

I just ran across these comments from Scott Atran about the first "Beyond Belief" meeting. I wonder if the second one was any better.

Read the rest of this entry »

Political activist Richard Dawkins continues to get more extreme. According to this news article, he preached the following message to a standing ovation:

In his speech, Dawkins portrayed a black-and-white intellectual battle between atheism and religion. He denounced the "preposterous nonsense of religious customs" and compared religion to racism. He also gave no quarter to moderate or liberal believers, asserting that "so-called moderate Christianity is simply an evasion."

"If you've been taught to believe it by moderates, what's to stop you from taking the next step and blowing yourself up?" he said.

Dawkins also continued his attack on relgious parents.

But the real news here is that it looks (to me) as if Sam Harris is starting to get a little nervous by the intensity of the anti-religious hate engendered by this new movement.

Read the rest of this entry »

For a long time, creationists have been trying to portray evolution as a religion and have failed. But with a new book on the horizon, Thank God for Evolution!, written by Reverend Michael Dowd, America's evolutionary evangelist, the creationists may finally have a case.

Read the rest of this entry »

The 'culture wars' keep on keeping on. Mike Gene pokes fun at a Darwin Day petition aimed at the Library of Congress demanding that they re-classify books examining ID so they won't be shelved in bookstores with 'real' science books. I attempted to explain why framing ID as 'anti-evolution' is a poisoning the well fallacy (propaganda), only to find that the critical commenter who asserted and defended it didn't really want to discuss the issues if there are in-principle objections to that frame.

So it was with interest I read Jake Young's latest contribution over on his blog, Why Pairing Science and Atheism is High-Brow. Using an argument made by John Dewey back in 1922 about how science was aligning itself with a "Northeastern liberal establishment" on the subject of evolution - and how that would not serve the cause of convincing a more conservative public - Young brings it up to date with the aims of the 'New Atheists'. His summary is pretty good, so I'll cite it here…

Choice #1: We link atheism and science. We frame atheism as scientific. We as far as we are able exclude the religious from the scientific enterprise. The result of choice one is that the majority of Americans are going to associate science with a secular elite — i.e. science is not for the consumption of the general public. Science in this world is for only special people to understand. Science will in effect become a marker of social status rather than a general approach to understanding the world.

Read the rest of this entry »

Today's lesson in history comes courtesy of Christopher Hitchens, author of God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything:

"One of Lenin's great achievements, in my opinion, is to create a secular Russia. The power of the Russian Orthodox Church, which was an absolute warren of backwardness and evil and superstition, is probably never going to recover from what he did to it."

Interview with PBS, 2005

Indeed. Some of Lenin's "great achievements" were the executions of 8.000 people who resisted his theft of church relics. To quote the great man himself: "[W]e can (and therefore must) pursue the acquisition of [church] valuables with the most ferocious and merciless energy, stopping at nothing in suppressing all resistance."

You know, before the New Atheists start comparing themselves to civil rights movements, they ought to confront the authoritarian tendencies displayed by some of its prominent spokesmen.

PZ Myers links to a group of atheists, skeptics, and secular humanists who are searching for a name for their group. Oh, oh, I sense another war on the horizon. Perhaps I can help circumvent this with a good suggestion.

Read the rest of this entry »

Activist Richard Dawkins has succeeded in stirring up another fight among the New Atheists. And this time, it is over the t-shirt that looks like a uniform. As a result, Dawkins had to step in to calm the flock.

While I had some fun with this , there is a serious angle on it all.

Read the rest of this entry »

If you ask me, Shalini, the self-described "pro-Dawkins evangelical atheist," is becoming increasingly confused. In response to "Don't Call Me Miltant!!," Shalini has this to say:

Over at Telic Thoughts, MikeGene is apparently up in arms over my anti-appeaser post.

This is a classic example of projection.

Read the rest of this entry »