[Richard Dawkins has been] the single most dangerous man to the cause of science literacy. When he says that evolution has to lead to atheism, he drives reasonable people into the arms of fundamentalists like McLeroy. Most scientists would tell you that’s a false choice—that’s actually the mainstream Christian position—but generally people don’t know that.
I do know that if we’re going to advance the cause of science literacy in this country, we can’t force people to choose between faith and science. Because they aren’t going to choose us.
- Michael Zimmerman, an evolutionary biologist and committed atheist who has been a powerful force in the fight to prevent teaching creationism and intelligent design in science class. He headed The Clergy Letter Project, a nationwide petition signed by over 11,000 Jewish and Christian clergy who believe that evolution is no contradiction to their faith. Quoted from the Texas Observer
This certainly reinforces what a reader wrote in an earlier posting, Atheist Nightmares and Some Good Common Sense.
My name is Dan Porter. I have always believed in God. And I have always been a Christian, which means I have always believed, at some level of understanding, Christian assertions about Christ. But during all of my adult life—I am now 65—I have struggled with many seeds of doubt brought on by modern science, objective history, the question of why a loving God would allow so much suffering in the world and difficulties with seemingly conflicting moral precepts. 
He's fine making these comments but the reality is that in the US and other places religion has too much power and atheists have to start fighting to get equal rights.
Evolution will stay evolution whether or not Dawkins says it shows there are no gods.
The single most dangerous person against science literacy was George Bush.
Zimmerman is playing "concern troll"
Posted by: Chris P | February 21, 2009 at 10:19 PM
Zimmerman is right. Richard Dawkins is "the single most dangerous man to the cause of science literacy." PZ Myers is a close second.
When they say evolution must lead to a conclusion for atheism they are attempting to force a religious agenda, their religious opinion, into the science classrooom. I would not agree that it drives reasonable people to side with the likes of McLeroy so much as it enables compromise. Compromise is not good for science.
Evolution is perfectly compatible with evangelical and orthodox Christianity. Dawkins and Myers are more interested in pushing atheism than science.
Most American hold scientists in high esteem. If Dawkins and Myers keep it up they may alter public perception. They are far more dangerous than Christian fundamentalists.
Posted by: Russ | February 23, 2009 at 12:15 PM