My Las Vegas debate with Christopher Hitchens continues to attract attention and comment. If you'd like to read an account of the debate, you can do so here.
Also on Monday July 21, at 4.30 pm Eastern time, I'll be debating Richard Dawkins (yes, Richard Dawkins!) on Al-Jazeera (yes, that Al-Jazeera). This is a noteworthy development because Dawkins has so far refused to debate me. But now we're appearing together on the Riz Khan television show, which I understand has some 25 million viewers worldwide. If you want to watch Monday's debate live you can watch it here. The segment will also be posed on the web and I will link to it on this blog.
I also hope that, upon seeing for himself that I am not a Hitlerite kind of speaker, Dawkins will summon up the courage to step into the public arena with me. Like one of the atheist commenters recently said on Dawkins's own website: all the best spokesmen for unbelief have gotten a whipping from this D'Souza guy and it's now up to Dawkins to try and redeem the reputation of atheism.
Given that my thoughts are currently focused on how to deal with Dawkins, I'm going to post here on a question that seems to mystify him and many other scientific atheists. These fellows wonder: if there is reasonably good evidence for evolution--as, by the way, both Dawkins and I believe there is--why do around 50 percent of Americans refuse to accept it? The conventional wisdom among Dawkins and others is that Americans oppose evolution because they are religiously committed to a literal reading of the Book of Genesis.
But there is a much better explanation of why Americans reject evolution: the idiotic claims of leading champions of evolution who are promoting an atheist agenda. Consider Dawkins himself, rebutting the claim that there are significant "gaps" in the fossil record. Dawkins concedes that there are such gaps, but then writes this: "The gaps, far from being anoying imperfections or awkward embarrassments, turn out to be exactly what we should positively expect."
In other words, the absence of evidence for evolution is itself proof that the theory is correct! This is so bizarre that it makes one wonder what the presence of evidence might do to this theory. Would a complete fossil record without gaps be evidence against Darwinian evolution, as we hear that Dawkins and his fellow biologists "exactly" and "positively" expect that such evidence should not be present?
Dawkins finally puts his cards on the table by saying of evolution: "Even if the evidence did not favor it, it would still be the best theory available." And if Dawkins is dismissed as a crank, here is Harvard cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker making the same point. "Because there are no alternatives, we would almost have to accept natural selection as the explanation of life on this planet even if there were no evidence for it."
We have here the weird spectacle of so-called scientists who are so wedded to a theory that they cannot even imagine it not to be true. This is a level of dogmatism that would embarrass any theist. Even the strongest religious believer can imagine the possibility that there is no God. So how can these self-styled champions of reason adopt so closed-minded an approach?
The short answer is given by Harvard biologist Richard Lewontin, who in a 1997 essay in the New York Review of Books makes a revealing admission: "We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant proises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment--a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation for the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori commitment to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, the materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."
And you thought I was making this stuff up! No wonder Americans are skeptical of these apostles of skepticism. They are peddling their own metaphysical dogmas in the name of science, even though few are as honest as Lewontin in admitting it.
Reader Comments ( Page 39 of 40)
571. PV; "What contributions have the atheists made to civilization? Where is their dynasty?"
Since there are no gods, we are all atheists and all contributions have been made by atheists. The entire human race is our dynasty. You are just a separatist who wants to think he is special.
a born atheist at 9:34AM on Jul 23rd 2008
572. Brandon: None of which apply to the current war we are in
PV: Did anyone say it did? The point is that when the doctrine has been followed, it has greatly minimized civilian casualties. Moreover, it has greatly restricted nations from going to war at all. The Church, again, is leading the way to peace in our world through concrete laws and teachings.
--------------
Mac: Again, I ask, do numbers make it right?
PV: Numbers mean objective influence. Longevity means objective value and quality. Unity means the ability to defy the effects of time. The Catholic Church is the oldest and largest single organization on the planet. No government, company, or other institution holds a candle to it.
Mac: Talk to the muslims, they outnumber your catholic church preter!
PV: Nope. Catholics are *one single organization,* and we number over a billion. No muslim sect or "denomination" comes close to that number.
----------------
JetFlying: your assertion that the catholic church is over 2000 years old is historically inaccurate.
PV: The Catholic Church is the historical continuation of first-century Judaism. It is directly, historically linked. And Old Covenant Israel traces back to Abraham. The Catholics have an unbroken historical linkage that makes them a dynastic nation.
JetFlying: Your argument is similar to a baptist
PV: There are hundreds of splintered baptist sects today, and I don't think a single one of them can trace its history back beyond the 1600s. The Catholic Church today traces its history back to first-century Judaism in unbroken succession.
----------------
Ryan Anderson: His dismissal of Hindus as "not really a religion" was wonderfully comic.
PV: Your ignorance is showing again. Hinduism is impossible to define, unless we think of it as a sort of melting pot of dozens of thousands of differing belief systems, gods, and religions in India. It has no single organizational structure, it has no agreed upon set of doctrines, it has no chain of command. It's not a united institution at all. In short, "Hinduism" ends up being a collective term for a regional disjointed pantheism commonly found in India and Nepal. Comparing Hinduism and The Catholic Church is like comparing apples and oranges. The Catholic Church is ONE ONE institution, ONE company of people, ONE single denomination. Get it? Your ignorance on this topic is what's wonderfully comic.
preteristvision at 10:21AM on Jul 23rd 2008
573. PV: "Numbers mean objective influence..."
Ok, so there are a billion catholics and 5 billion non-catholics. Objectively that tells us...
Ryan Anderson at 10:51AM on Jul 23rd 2008
574. The only group that I am a part of is the human race and that has the catholic church trumped by a lot.
a born atheist at 10:54AM on Jul 23rd 2008
575. Get out of my head Ryan.
a born atheist at 10:55AM on Jul 23rd 2008
576. I think the time to stop taking PV seriously is at hand.
Or am I the only one still taking him seriously?
Ryan Anderson at 11:01AM on Jul 23rd 2008
577. Ryan: a billion catholics and 5 billion non-catholics. Objectively that tells us....
PV: You're a silly guy, Ryan. You can't handle the truth that the Catholics are the top dog in the world. No other institution on earth has as many members, as long of a history, as much influence, as much money, and as bright a future. Not Microsoft. Not Warren Buffet. Not the United States. Not Google. Not Iran. Not anyone. There's your objective reality. We must be doing something right.
preteristvision at 11:14AM on Jul 23rd 2008
578. PV: Keep on trucking, buddy.
Ryan Anderson at 11:22AM on Jul 23rd 2008
579. I love this bit from "The Family Guy".
Seems apropos for some reason.
A Mule: No sorry, Kevin Bacon wasn’t in Footloose.
Guy: What!?, of course he was.
A Mule: No he wasn’t, you lose.
Guy: Of course he was, he was the star.
A Mule: Nope, you’re wrong. Look it up.
Guy: I don’t have to look it up, it’s common knowledge…
A Mule: Nope..
Guy: he was on the cover…
A Mule: Nope…
Guy: of People Magazine
A Mule: Nope..
Guy: when the movie…
A Mule: No…
Guy: Everyone knows...
A Mule: No
Guy: that….
A Mule: No!..
Guy: Kevin Bacon..
A Mule: NO!
Guy: was the star…
A Mule: NO!
Guy: in Footloose..
A Mule: NO!
Guy: It was a huge movie,…
A Mule: NO!
Guy: he was the lead.
A Mule: NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! HeeHaw! HeeHaw! HeeHaw!
Ryan Anderson at 11:26AM on Jul 23rd 2008
580. The Catholic church has the BIGGEST COCK EVER!!!
It RULZ!!
RIGHT ON, PV!
brandon at 11:59AM on Jul 23rd 2008
581. Toad & GearHedEd, sarcasm doesn't read well in blog comments or online threads. You need to be more explicit. I don't know GearHedEd's history and didn't see any sarcasm there. Missed it. Somehow mark it clearly in the future. Thanks.
Which of you two are faith freak believers?
Peter at 3:00AM on Jul 23rd 2008
=================================
"That inevitably leads to the unsupported conclusion..."
That's pretty explicit already.
Just me. Many Gods, no sin, no book, no evangelism.
Toad at 12:18PM on Jul 23rd 2008
582. 571. PV; "What contributions have the atheists made to civilization? Where is their dynasty?"
xxxxxx
Where's yours? Do animal sacrificers and sarpint kissers belong? Fred Phelps? James Dobson? the harvest ministries?
Clif Kuplen at 2:08PM on Jul 23rd 2008
583. Clif: Where's yours?
PV: The Catholic Church built Western Civilization. We've had more to do with the development of science, hospitals, the arts, the university system, and law than any other single institution on the planet. We are the longest-lasting government, the largest corporation, the most influential political force, and the loudest voice of ethics of the past twenty centuries.
Call us when you atheists get an organization of a billion members with any influence and accomplishment.
preteristvision at 4:05PM on Jul 23rd 2008
584. PV: The Catholic Church built Western Civilization.
Yeah, let's not give any credit to pagan Greece and Rome.
Ryan Anderson at 4:07PM on Jul 23rd 2008
585. "Yeah, let's not give any credit to pagan Greece and Rome" - ryan
And what about the Hebrews? If the Catholic Church is just an extension of the "Jewish" faith (see post 572), then you can thank the Jews more than any other.
Monty at 4:55PM on Jul 23rd 2008