Comment by Gaytor on March 25, 2010 at 4:43pm

For your history instructor, it's important to note that he's (Dawkins) allowing the question for discussion, not suggesting that Aliens were the ones that created us. If you force the question in enough ways you can corner people into saying many things. Saying this, "There could be a signature in life that we haven't recognized." is not the same as saying, "Life arose from and Intelligent Designer." Nor does it mean that we should spend time looking for it. (By the way, this is clearly heavily edited.)

A very important point for those whom are Christian whom want to carry out this argument that God designed the world which would include Old Earth and Evolution... where do you find that in the Bible? In fact those claims are refuted by the Bible's very specific claims in regards to the order of creation and timelines from Adam to Jesus the must be fulfilled. A point of fact, if you support Intelligent Design, you are violating the First Commandment because you are no longer talking about a Christian God. Saying "God" as an ethereal without knowing any of the details of said god or what the Bible says in this case makes you an Agnostic Theist. Why in the world would an Agnostic Theist be in a Christian Church? It's critical that you point this out to Christians whom claim to believe in intelligent design. Hell, their God didn't understand anything scientific that we take for granted today. Plants need a sun to survive for example. Clouds are made of water and not the dust of his feet. Here's the Skeptic's Annotated Bible page to the link on Science .

You don't need to go to anyone at the school unless you like. Point out that they are supporting Christianity and watch the rats run back in their holes. Don't get angry back, just make your point and the teacher will have to move on. The teacher will have little to no support if you mention that ID and Genesis cannot co-exist. Being embarrassed with facts shuts people down, especially in groups, very quickly.

Comment by Frank on March 25, 2010 at 8:11pm

Dawkins himself has come a long way since 2008. I suggest that you ask your history teacher to show the following video as a follow on to the discussion ... and see how the class responds to a more updated Dawkins is this video from earlier this month, God, Science and Sanity.

Comment by Happy Tikiman on March 25, 2010 at 8:50pm

nice thanks :-)

Comment by Marc Baskin on March 25, 2010 at 8:51pm

The problem with these environments is that everyone is thinking exactly the same thing because everyone is thinking exactly the same thing :) I began my education in a Bible College where i was taught that Noahs Ark had actually been found! Because i respected my professors, became friends with them i believed every word they said. We all did. Thats the whole problem with blind faith, of course.

I personally began to opening question my faith in this environment and although i was not loud or boastful about my doubt, I was repeatedly 'witnessed to'(aka sat down and told to shut up). I would agree with Gaytor. These environments are difficult to speak out in, but still ... speak the truth. I began to openly question the things we were all being taught as if i was a believer. "I wonder if there's at least something right about evolution, i mean ... scientists use it to create medicines that work ... so there has to be at least a tiny smidgen of truth to it, right?" At least this is how i talk to my parents about it :)

A side question: is there a group of humanists at the college? If there is, I'd band together!

good luck!

Comment by Happy Tikiman on March 25, 2010 at 8:56pm

I have only come across one atheist on campus. Its slim pickins here...

Comment by Eric Steiger on March 25, 2010 at 9:38pm

I'm still trying to grasp why this video would be shown in a history class. A philosophy or comparative religions course, sure. But shouldn't history deal in documented, researched facts about human events, societal development and structures, technological innovations, etc...? Or is it just me?
With regard to Dawkins' debates, I have to say that he does more harm than good. I've read much of his writing, and viewed many video clips on his debates. His writings are a valuable asset to non-believers everywhere. But video clips are just not his medium. He comes off as arrogant, dismissive, and pushy even though I'm on his side. While he has gotten better, as Frank's clip shows, it is still not his medium. He still can be easily outmaneuvered by someone skilled in the arts of persuasion.
You're words are compelling, Dr. Dawkins. Please stick to the keyboard and avoid the camera.

Comment by Velogiraptor on March 25, 2010 at 10:31pm

I like Dawkins and all, but he's not the most assertive debater in the world. That doesn't help him out much, especially when his opponent gets to edit the video after the fact.

When the class laughs about the scientist not believing in God, the first question that should be asked is "Which God?" At the risk of drawing further debate, I would then bring up the idea that life already exists on this planet, so it is much more probable that if life on this planet were directed by something intelligent that it would be something like ourselves.

To take the god angle on the creation of the universe would mean that simplicity must rise from complexity. This is what ID people use as proof that the universe was created by a god. If the universe is so complex that it must have risen from complexity, then the creator, being complex, must also have risen from complexity. It's recursive creation. That would mean that there's a god above the Christian God if it is a Christian that is arguing for ID. As Gaytor mentioned, that violates the commandment about not worshiping any god above 'him'.

So we're left with two possibilities if we're bent on ID. One is that there's an infinite loop of creators, and the other is that life, like we already know exists on this planet was the designer. If it's life like we already know on this planet, then it would have arisen after the beginning of the universe.

In the end though, we have no evidence of design, but we have plenty of evidence of evolution. We have observed it directly in viral colonies.

The larger issue here is that it sounds like your teacher has gone completely off-topic. If you don't want to be directly implicated in the reporting of this travesty, you can try to send an anonymous letter of complaint.

Comment by Reggie on March 26, 2010 at 9:06am

I like Dawkins and all, but he's not the most assertive debater in the world.

He's no Hitchens, I'll give you that. But the real problem with Dawkins, especially in the heavily edited video clip shown to the class, is that he is a scientist and scientists are not used to dealing with dishonesty in thier work. Whereas, you have someone like Ben Stein and the filmmaker (who I cannot recall the name of) that deliberately misled many of the interviewees about their purpose. Lying for Jesus is a popular pastime among fundamentalists.

So, while Ben Stein worked hard to get Dawkins to give an example of ID that Dawkins could accept as being plausible, Dawkins gave a hypothetical that he thought was the most probable way for ID to be true. The flimmakers, however, were just looking for a way to make Dawkins look silly.

Dawkins has learned his lessons. I recall him speaking about debates he used to engage in at college campuses against Creationists. After one debate, he was curious about how his opponent, an articulate and intelligent young woman, could possibly defend creationaism. As it turns out, she didn't believe in creationism. She was just debating for the weak side of the argument against an expert to practice and hone her debate skills. I don't think he engages in those types of debates anymore.

Comment by B. on March 26, 2010 at 10:09am

I'd switch schools.

(I'm not a quitter, I just don't think an environment so rampant with idiocy is conducive to higher learning!)

If people burst out laughing at a stupid scientist for not believing in God, I'm not sure how I would react. It would be like being trapped in some alternate universe/twilight zone where the human race is regressing to our neanderthal roots. First I'd ask if they were kidding, next I'd wonder aloud what it's like to have the same reasoning capacity as a 6 year old.

I've actually never been confronted with a group that held such blatant moronic views and voiced them leaving me the odd man out. I guess I wouldn't know how to react at all; I'd probably be too dumfounded to even speak. But what do I know? I'm just another stupid scientist that doesn't believe in God!

Comment by Frank on March 26, 2010 at 10:21am

I can't see what the big deal is really about Dawkins's behavior. Yes, he is passionate about evolution and the ill outcomes caused by religion on society (and especially defenseless gullible children). I actually find him knowledgeable, forthright, and entertaining. I love his books, they are an interesting read ... never bland. I think he just has a different sort of humor, a sarcastic one that at times bites hard and deep. But, then again, I guess the mirror doesn't lie (people often prefer to deny the true reflection coming back from the looking glass). He, like I, is stunned to know that so many people can actually participate in religion all the while knowing that it is supernatural fiction. For a logical person, it sort of short-circuits your reasoning brain a bit. To me, irrational thought (especially forced on children) is much much more offensive and heinous. Dawkins's approach is nothing compared to the arrogance and brute power of religion. I back Dawkins 100%. He is the one that is often disrespected and mistreated. In the interview above, he was filmed in blackness, as if to indicate that he was in the dark, or godless, or of the devil himself. When he met with Wendy Wright from Concerned Women for America, she made him stand in a corner, even though there were chairs nearby .... I guess they want him to feel awkward or uncomfortable or unwelcome or underserving of being treated like a human. Go get them Dawkins. Children are being forced unknowingly or by force to betray reason and live lies. That is a billion times more arrogant and offensive that Dawkins's funny faces or quick tongue.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page