Richard Dawkins’ The Greatest Show on Earth Shies Away from Intelligent Design but Unwittingly Vindicates Michael Behe
Richard Dawkins’ new book, The Greatest Show on Earth, is being touted as a scathing rebuttal to intelligent design (ID), yet an actual response to mainstream ID thinking can hardly be found in the book. Though the book makes passing mention of “irreducible complexity” in a couple places, there are zero mentions of leading ID proponents like Michael Behe, William Dembski, Jonathan Wells, Phillip Johnson, Stephen Meyer, or any other well-known ID proponent. Instead, Dawkins refers extensively to “creationists,” repeatedly attacking young earth creationism, while also making heavy use of fallacious (and dubious) “poor design” examples that rebut no argument made by a leading advocate of design since perhaps the 19th century. It seems that Dawkins didn’t have the stomach to tackle the actual modern theory of intelligent design in his new book.
Read the full article here:
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/10/richard_dawkins_the_greatest_s.html
PS. Well done to Francis Ayala who has the guts to step up to the plate and debate.
Can’t help but thinking that is a hugely biased and unbalanced review from someone with a religious agenda, go figure
Listen to Dawkins, he is the voice of reasonable and rational thought!
Yeah, and Dawkins is a model of objectivity, right? Oh that’s right, I am either ignorant, stupid, or perhaps even wicked, but I doubt Dawkins would put that in writing!
I believe in unicorns and lepricorns, I read about them once in a book.
Good 4 u Tommy. But show me the evidence. Anything. I refuse to believe anything unless I have sufficient evidence!!!
Help me Tommy — I’m sounding like Dawkins.
But seriously, the fact this argument is being used by Dawkins shows the level he is prepared to stoop to. Does he REALLY think that there is as much evidence for such fanciful beasts as there is for God? How silly…
Cool, whats your address – I’ll send you the book.
Why are there zero mentions of “leading” ID proponents? They aren’t important. that’s why. This is a science book first and foremost. Dawkins has no obligation to delve into ID thinking because the book isn’t about that. ID, just like pure creationism is not science.
Leave your response!
Nano-Blog News from around the world
NZ CHRISTIAN BLOGS
NZ CHRISTIAN MINISTRIES
PLACES TO VISIT