Anyone catch NPR's "On Point" yesterday? It was a sorta debate btwn the Discovery Institute's George Gilder and Oxford's Richard Dawkins. Apparently, Dawkins decided at the last minute NOT to debate Gilder directly, only come on after him (pretty wimpy if you ask me). I understand that he doesn't want to lend Gilder any credibility, but in listening to Gilder, I don't know what Dawkins was afraid of. He sounded confused, inarticulate, and repetitous; alot like Bush, in fact. At one point, Gilder betrayed the real rationale for his pseudoscience, saying "In the Beginning, there was the Word…" If this is the best that I.D. can come up with, maybe rational people should take the opposite tack: call out the I.D. guys in some national forum, and expose them for the frauds and religious wingnuts that they are. What do ya'll think?
I wish I could believe that would reduce the national ignorance level. But the nutjobs really don’t deserve to be taken seriously or allowed to participate in discussions with real scientists.
On a similar note, here’s an article titled Wierd Science on the Religious Right:
Not confronting them, makes real scientist look weak. I understand that we do not want to lend them credibility, but a vast majority of Americans are already opposed to evolution. To gain respect in America, you need to be vocal and be heard. The more it is discussed, the more the mainstream will be open to it.
Of course, I could be wrong, but what do we have to lose.
Found a link, if anyone is interested: