Tuesday, November 10, 2009 | Science : TGSOE | print version

Print | Comments |

British biologist Dawkins puts on evolutionary 'Show'

by Dave Verbonitz - TulsaWorld

CLICK HERE to see more about Richard Dawkins' new book The Greatest Show on Earth

http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=67&articleid=20091108_67_G5_Oneoft798064&rss_lnk=4

One of the world's most widely known atheists adopts a measured tone in his latest book, putting aside attacks on religion to produce instead a thorough explanation of how humans and other life forms are linked through evolution.

British biologist Richard Dawkins says he was compelled to write "The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution" because Charles Darwin's theory, now fact, is being forcefully — and he fears effectively — attacked by proponents of biblical creationism. He labels them "history deniers" for their refusal to accept evidence supported by straightforward science in fields such as chemistry, physics, DNA research, genetics, geology and archaeology.

Dawkins, of course, rankled many religious people in 2006 with the release of "The God Delusion," a best-seller whose title says it all. But in the opening pages of his latest book, Dawkins cites his "agreeable experience of collaboration" with the Bishop of Oxford in producing a joint 2004 article that concluded, "Nowadays there is nothing to debate. Evolution is a fact and, from a Christian perspective, one of the greatest of God's works."

Not wanting to be wrongly labeled, Dawkins adds that the good bishop wrote the last sentence, "but we agreed about all the rest of our article."
...
Continue reading
http://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/article.aspx?subjectid=67&articleid=20091108_67_G5_Oneoft798064&rss_lnk=4

Posted: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 15 of 15 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #430884 by Mr Blue Sky on November 10, 2009 at 6:26 pm

Well it seems at least the journalists are getting the message! This must be progress?

Other Comments by Mr Blue Sky

2. Comment #430896 by BeyondBelief on November 10, 2009 at 7:38 pm

Except, Mr. Blue Sky, the opening sentence is more of the same baseless "stridentism".

It's as if Richard surreptitiously or with devious intent, has slipped on the smooth and level tones to hide his TRUE intent. In fact, he's always taken this tone, it's just that the topic this time is not one that has automatic deference assigned to it, as Religious beliefs do.

Other Comments by BeyondBelief

3. Comment #430904 by Jos Gibbons on November 10, 2009 at 8:09 pm

While Goble has so far been criticised for bitching about a major defender of evolution being an atheist in every post on the thread under his review of TGSOE, I found myself sympathising with his "It's a shame in terms of its consequences" attitude about as much as I ever could. But Verbonitz really wound me up. Except for his title, the fact that this is to do with evolution is first revealed at the end of the first sentence:

One of the world's most widely known atheists adopts a measured tone in his latest book, putting aside attacks on religion to produce instead a thorough explanation of how humans and other life forms are linked through evolution.

Anyone unfamiliar with RD's work would come away thinking he usually discussed religion, but had taken time out to discuss evolution instead, when in terms of books he's written on the subject quite the reverse is true by an order of magnitude.
It gets better after that, but that goes without saying considering how it starts.
Yet just as even the most reasonable "I absolutely MUST discuss religion now" reviews have been tiresome in their obsession over it (to the point where Glove complains about others droning on about it just long enough to thereby be a hypocrite), it is conversely true that even the worst reviews (by whatever standards you suggest) recognise the book makes a solid case. The IDiots' response so far seems to be limited to a review of a review, so that's no exception. It's striking that the exact same virtues and vices come up over and over again in pretty much all reviews, despite how individuals they all are (or at least many).

Other Comments by Jos Gibbons

4. Comment #430910 by InYourFaceNewYorker on November 10, 2009 at 8:22 pm

Someone once said to me, "The thing that bothers me so much about Dawkins is that he is not a scientist commenting on science. He is a scientist commenting on religion." I had to explain to her that Dawkins has only written one book about religion, and that the others are about science. ;)

Julie

Other Comments by InYourFaceNewYorker

5. Comment #430919 by Quine on November 10, 2009 at 9:05 pm

After a few more years and more in-your-face-blasphemy from every corner, the religious are going to wish we could go back to that nice, polite, Professor Dawkins.

Other Comments by Quine

6. Comment #430932 by Lucas on November 10, 2009 at 9:28 pm

Quine - You damn right, brotha.

Other Comments by Lucas

7. Comment #430935 by TIKI AL on November 10, 2009 at 9:40 pm

Quine @ 5: "After a few more years and more in-your-face-blasphemy from every corner, the religious are going to wish we could go back to that nice, polite, Professor Dawkins."

...I do my very best to blaspheme in the godbots general direction each and every day to help make Richard look like a brilliant Teddy Bear.

Other Comments by TIKI AL

8. Comment #430951 by SilentMike on November 10, 2009 at 11:03 pm

People are always getting on Richard's case for being mean to the people who believe in the invisible man and hurting the fight, but that got him the all the attention for this book.

Sure everyone wags their finger at the "strident" atheist for his past crimes but then the go on to write great reviews of TGSOE. TGD got hammerd by the media but it also got Richard the attention and the notoriety and the big fan-base, and now TGSOE is selling better because of the fallout from TGD and getting a lot of good press.

I believe the appropriate web-term is: WIN.

Other Comments by SilentMike

9. Comment #430956 by InYourFaceNewYorker on November 10, 2009 at 11:50 pm

People think Richard's mean just because of what he talks about. If it were any other subject, they would think he was just expressing his opinion.

Other Comments by InYourFaceNewYorker

10. Comment #430971 by SilentMike on November 11, 2009 at 1:16 am

9. Comment #430956 by InYourFaceNewYorker

I agree. I liked TGD. It was a fun read. I expect to like this book as well.

Other Comments by SilentMike

11. Comment #430978 by pipsy on November 11, 2009 at 2:27 am

The next thing is, "Dog evolved, in mysterious ways..."

Other Comments by pipsy

12. Comment #430981 by pipsy on November 11, 2009 at 2:41 am

Raisins to be cheerful part seventy something.

Other Comments by pipsy

13. Comment #430992 by crusader234 on November 11, 2009 at 4:22 am

i still havnt started reading my TGSOE, (personally signed i might add hehe) im still reading the Ancestors tale, every page makes me think. How stupid of me not to have already read all of Richards books...

Other Comments by crusader234

14. Comment #430997 by InYourFaceNewYorker on November 11, 2009 at 5:16 am

Silent Mike I agree. I liked TGD. It was a fun read. I expect to like this book as well.

Of course you will! Look who wrote it!

crusader234 How stupid of me not to have already read all of Richards books...

I own all of them (signed!) and haven't read them all yet. I'm working on it. How stupid of all of us! ;)

All right everybody, on your knees and say "DAWK!" Ready? 1, 2, 3:

DAWK!

;)

Julie

Other Comments by InYourFaceNewYorker

15. Comment #431019 by Stafford Gordon on November 11, 2009 at 9:36 am

Progress.

Other Comments by Stafford Gordon

Reload Comments | Back to Top