Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Victimized by EXPELLED?

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Richard Dawkins posts a letter on his website by an anonymous individual who, supposedly inspired by his viewing of EXPELLED, now holds Dawkins and fellow Darwinists responsible for the Holocaust. Dawkins then shifts the blame to Ben Stein and EXPELLED.

This is the same Dawkins who in books and videos rails against religious people for their credulousness and stresses the need in science and all aspects of life to examine things closely and follow the evidence. So, what is the evidence that this letter is genuine? And who’s benefitting from the letter?

We don’t know who the author is. Moreover, Dawkins is clearly putting it to good use in excoriating Ben Stein and EXPELLED. Until Dawkins provides some compelling evidence that this letter is for real, I would suggest regarding it as the work of a troll seeking to elicit precisely this reaction.

What if I’m wrong? What if the letter was sent to Dawkins by someone who meant what he wrote? It would just mean that someone wrote an intemperate letter and missed the care and nuance with which the producers of EXPELLED traced the intellectual history from Darwin to the Nazis.

Hard as it may be to believe, I get my share of intemperate letters by (ostensibly) rabid Darwinists who listen to people like Dawkins, Shermer, and Dennett, and conclude that I’m trying to destroy science. Do I publicly charge Dawkins et al. with duping them? I suppose I could play Dawkins’s game, but I prefer to hold people accountable for their own indiscretions.

Comments
Stone: "The formation of a new genus question stumped him, then he told us a magical tale where he was going to chase off the creationists(he is a terrifying man isn’t he?) but then decided to make a speech completely irrelevant to the topic about .. was it fish to frog evo or something?" This was probably the question about the origin of new information by mutation. See refutation of critic, incuding raw footage and timeline.Jonathan Sarfati
April 27, 2008
April
04
Apr
27
27
2008
04:31 PM
4
04
31
PM
PDT
Actually I believe Stein asked him if he could put a percentage on it then when he said 98 or 99%, stein pressed him he began to change it... But come on, dude haggled it down to 50%! Like he's pulling numbers out a magic hat... Did he not think perhaps someone might, dare I say, SEE the film ? LOL It's hard to feel bad for Dawkins at any rate.Stone
April 24, 2008
April
04
Apr
24
24
2008
08:13 PM
8
08
13
PM
PDT
Attempting to overstate his bounds and put a percentage on the probability of there being a God? Is he high? How incredibly self important…
But, he said he couldn't put a number on it, until Stein kept asking and then he said one. You could tell pretty easily that he made it up and didn't really care about the question.leo
April 24, 2008
April
04
Apr
24
24
2008
04:00 PM
4
04
00
PM
PDT
Well, well... Expelled in now projected to do $3.8 mil in its first full week (Fri-Thu).....not bad at all.Upright BiPed
April 24, 2008
April
04
Apr
24
24
2008
01:43 PM
1
01
43
PM
PDT
Why does someone as smart as Dawkins always make himself out to be an ass when insulted? Bridle thy tongue.... or in this case thy keyboard. Nobody believes this man has been wronged as many times as he's claimed. The formation of a new genus question stumped him, then he told us a magical tale where he was going to chase off the creationists(he is a terrifying man isn't he?) but then decided to make a speech completely irrelevant to the topic about .. was it fish to frog evo or something? lol then this shit... Oh yes, I'm sure someone would take the time to write you because we all know you ARE biology Mr. Dawkins... And yes, every creationist is a blood thirsty beast intent on destroying your establishment... You know, some people just go into their respective industries and never have this drama.. I've heard people in physics debate the genesis/big bang subject, and not turn it into a series of personal attacks. And even if expelled wasn't honest with what their movie would be showing, to go on camera and say what he said, was just stupid. Attempting to overstate his bounds and put a percentage on the probability of there being a God? Is he high? How incredibly self important...Stone
April 24, 2008
April
04
Apr
24
24
2008
11:54 AM
11
11
54
AM
PDT
#1 "You should publicly apologize for your ad hominem, and your ridiculous film. Of course, you’ll never approve this comment, and I’ll never see it posted, because you are cowards. Prove me wrong." Provided that it's not necessary to prove what is mere evidence, are you sure not to be a bit tired ... ?kairos
April 24, 2008
April
04
Apr
24
24
2008
05:41 AM
5
05
41
AM
PDT
But, wouldn’t we have considered it an unforgiveable breach of etiquette for Dawkins to release the writers identity? Or, to put it another way, what could he have done in this regard that would have satisfied you?
specs: I just received a letter informing me that as we speak, babies are being tortured as a result of your post #7. I hope that in the future, you will not make such irresponsible comments.russ
April 24, 2008
April
04
Apr
24
24
2008
04:44 AM
4
04
44
AM
PDT
But, wouldn't we have considered it an unforgiveable breach of etiquette for Dawkins to release the writers identity? Or, to put it another way, what could he have done in this regard that would have satisfied you?specs
April 24, 2008
April
04
Apr
24
24
2008
03:33 AM
3
03
33
AM
PDT
Bill your arguments are pure reason. Indeed, I don't see how a guy lik RD could decently write what he did write after having more and more (and more) argued about religion as a virus that is as virulent and dangerous as smallpox but much more difficult to eradicate! This is simply unreasonable.kairos
April 24, 2008
April
04
Apr
24
24
2008
01:36 AM
1
01
36
AM
PDT
But Dr Dembski you are clearly making a grave mistake here. After all, whoever wrote to Dicky D, was wrong but whenever you get letters about trying to destroy science, they are correct because you are trying to destroy science. Clearly I can see your confusion here. Why isn't this obvious double standard reasonable to you ? ;)Jason Rennie
April 24, 2008
April
04
Apr
24
24
2008
12:55 AM
12
12
55
AM
PDT
And... Darwins Deadly Legacy (audio part 2) William Wallace
April 23, 2008
April
04
Apr
23
23
2008
11:34 PM
11
11
34
PM
PDT
This is also a good time to listen to Download it to your ipod: Darwin's Deadly Legacy (audio part 1) William Wallace
April 23, 2008
April
04
Apr
23
23
2008
11:34 PM
11
11
34
PM
PDT
The IDiots are coming! --- 'round up the usual suspects! Crap, guys -- this is getting old -- when does protesting too much get a week off?wnelson
April 23, 2008
April
04
Apr
23
23
2008
10:40 PM
10
10
40
PM
PDT
A jerk without the courage to use a real name writes: My God, I just read the letter, you are horrible people! How dare you play upon people's painful emotions for your own political and religious gains? You sick, sick, individuals, you should be so ashamed. You disgusting, weak, terrible people! I can understand manipulating the facts of biology; you've been doing that for years. But maybe the accusations are correct; your morals really are as lacking as your intellect. You should publicly apologize for your ad hominem, and your ridiculous film. Of course, you'll never approve this comment, and I'll never see it posted, because you are cowards. Prove me wrong. minerva
April 23, 2008
April
04
Apr
23
23
2008
10:19 PM
10
10
19
PM
PDT

Leave a Reply