quote:
Originally posted by buffalo:
Excerpt from Skeptic
evolutionary biologist David Sloan Wilson, has penned the following analysis of Dawkins’ theory of religion, which he feels is wide of the mark based on the evidence.
Richard Dawkins and I share much in common. We are both biologists by training who have written widely about evolutionary theory. We share an interest in culture as an evolutionary process in its own right. We are both atheists in our personal convictions who have written books on religion. In Darwin’s Cathedral I attempted to contribute to the relatively new field of evolutionary religious studies. When Dawkins’ The God Delusion was published I naturally assumed that he was basing his critique of religion on the scientific study of religion from an evolutionary perspective. I regret to report otherwise. He has not done any original work on the subject and he has not fairly represented the work of his colleagues. Hence this critique of The God Delusion and the larger issues at stake.
At the moment, he is just another angry atheist, trading on his reputation as an evolutionist and spokesperson for science to vent his personal opinions about religion.
That is an excerpt from Skeptic Magazine, to which I subscribe.
You have quote mined a criticism, without context nor response. Your post is an example of Fundie dishonesty.
There is no other word for it.
If you must resort to this sort of rhetorical and logical dishonesty, we may assume with good reason that you are compensating for the inadequacies of your arguments against Evolution, which is, after all, Dawkins' topic of expertise.
We win again. We always do. Truth is on our side.
nsns