Dawkins award (was Re: [asa] Atheist finds God thru Behe's books....)

Hi all,

Just a thought...

Having watched the Maher video and reflecting upon Schwarzwald's comments below, I am lead to wonder what it says about the state of the movement which Dawkins is attempting to promote.

What does it say that Maher is the best representative of a person fulfilling the award criteria? Does it imply that those with credible scientific credentials who are vocal atheists are, in fact, very few and far between?

I hardly know the US scene well enough to form an opinion here, but it certainly seems that the AAI are really scrapping the bottom of the barrel.

Comments?

Murray

Schwarzwald wrote:
> The "secular science community" rebukes Maher? Funny, because I could
> have sworn the AAI was a major secular group that crows about the
> importance of science - and they just gave him a freaking award!
> Dawkins, who I hear is a very eloquent defender of science, shrugged his
> shoulders at it. Utter apathy, and besides, he thinks Maher is funny.
> Yes, there are criticisms by some. And many are silent. Indeed, PZ Myers
> urged people who were going to the AAI awards to not cause a scene and
> to keep everything respectful. (Enjoy the delicious irony - PZ Myers,
> urging people to be civil and respectful to someone accused of maligning
> science. Gee, what's the difference in this case that makes it special?)
>
> I'm sure there are some angry comments about Maher over at WhateverBlog,
> and I suppose in some special little way that's heartwarming. But the
> fact that Maher got this award, that Dawkins signed off on the award,
> that Myers was hesitant to make this into a big deal, etc, indicates
> that the "secular science community" isn't walking in unison on this
> issue. Indeed, one of the sciencebloggers argued that apparently Dawkins
> couldn't care less about who he supports, so long as the person in
> question is appropriately hostile to religion.
>
> So what do you think, Rich? Is the AAI - and Dawkins - harming science
> and science education here? Clearly, if you're going to condemn ID on
> the grounds that Maher is having a horrible effect on science and
> science education and they're indirectly responsible, then the AAI and
> Dawkins are doing vastly more harm, with greater awareness of as much.
> They gave him an award! An award dedicated, in part, to promoting and
> defending science! I think it's a clear case, but honestly I half expect
> you to whip around here and argue that, somehow, in some way, ID is to
> blame for the AAI's actions. Hey, I can even draw the line for you - by
> insisting that God is active in nature, ID directly encourages atheists
> to deny their claims, thus indirectly encouraging groups like the AAI to
> support people who may have zany views about medicine so long as they
> make fun of religion in a popular venue. The AAI's existence and
> granting of the Richard Dawkins award to global warming denialists and
> medical science skeptics is the fault of the Discovery Institute!
>
> Science, indeed.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Oct 15 21:19:29 2009