Richard Dawkins dogma destroying science…

I have plenty of atheists friends whom I get along with just fine.

If you look at all the scientific data out there…

  • What we know about genetics…
  • What we know about the origin of life…
  • All we know about the birth of the universe…
  • How life changes and evolves…
  • Where humans came from, and why we think and feel like we do…

If you take a look at all of that — and all the big questions it raises — it infers a tremendous amount of majesty and precision in the universe. But if you decide there’s no God behind it all, I won’t jump down your throat.

There’s no instrument in modern science that lets us hear God speak, in the way we listen to somebody on a speakerphone.

Nobody has ever taken a color photograph of God.

I get that.

So if you’re waiting on that kind of evidence, I can understand why you’re perplexed or unsure.

The problem comes when you go from atheist to Atheist — with a capital A. Certainty with a capital C.

That’s the kind of Atheism Richard Dawkins espouses, and it’s flat-out dangerous to scientific enquiry — it’s literally destroying real science.

When someone like Richard Dawkins adds the capital A to Atheism, he’s subject to the same kind of empty dogma he criticizes from other religions.

And any time you shut down the mystery, the discovery, the ability to be swayed by new evidence, the willingness to forfeit past beliefs to new realization…

You’re no longer a scientist. You’re a dogmatist.

My take on Richard Dawkins’ explanation of the origin of life and evolution…

Click here now to get 3 chapters from my new book, Evolution 2.0, right now. 

43 Responses

  1. wilhelm mistiaen says:

    I have the feeling that “A”theists embrace unproven and probably unprovable hypotheses such as the multiverse, not because for love of reality (I dare not mention “T”ruth), but out of hate for God.
    An example:
    We have the “Free” University of Brussels. It is as “free” for non-atheists as the Democratic Republic of Congo is democratic for Kabila opposants.

    • Lucille Hino says:

      exactly. His NPD personality is evidenced when he reveals his search for vengeance because of an unanswered prayer at the age of 13. But worse, he uses the most primitive flawed view of spirituality to crusade for his personal self promotion. Billions of people most likely influenced by ice age culture from E Africa thru India migrating to all parts of the globe have been tracked by dna and from human origin of consciousness it is not a personal deity but a spiritual sense of natural order that evolved [a brahmin like buddha, maybe even Abraham/Ibrahim] and everywhere entrusting their knowledge with the priests/scribes of their respective cultures

  2. Alex Makarski says:

    Dawkins is a devout man of faith. He believes in a “happy chemical accident”, something no one has seen a color photograph of.

  3. Old Git Tom says:

    Mr Marshall,
    you are 100% right. I’ve followed Dawkins & his works for decades now, years when he abandoned scientific research, to apply himself to disseminating propaganda for Darwinism & materialism. I’ve read his books, with increasing dismay. Dawkins is not interested in real science, nor in honest debate with scientists who diverge from majority orthodoxy. But Dawkins & the Darwinian mafia ARE interested in obliterating alternative voices & approaches in evolution.
    ‘Darwinian mafia’ too strong, you think? Then you probably don’t understand how powerful & ruthless they are. They are the controlling ‘capos’ of biology; & in archaeology, ancient history & cosmology, they are the absolute mandators of timelines, often thru the spurious reputation of the Smithsonian Institute. They have marginalized/excluded brilliant minds like Velikovsky, Sheldrake, Hoyle, & Wickramsinghe, etc., for ‘heresy’. The Smithsonian has a nefarious reputation for ‘losing’ evidence & records it doesn’t approve.
    The grip of 19C Darwinism & materialism is global. The greatly encouraging thing is, it is increasingly at odds with the conclusions of modern science & its honest practitioners. When a few more of the ‘conehead’ absolutiosts at the top have died off, we may yet see a ‘paradigm shift’. Roll on that happy day!

  4. Paul Weidig says:

    I was trained as a geologist in the 1960s. At that time, belief in and defense of evolution were mandatory. So I dutifully subscribed to Darwinianism – for nearly 50 years – until my salvation four years ago. I can’t explain how it happened, but I suddenly realized that two of the greatest discoveries in history – the inseparability of time and space, and the discovery of DNA – completely obliterated my belief in evolution. Why? Because both are incontrovertible proofs of the existence of God the Crestor.

    • Hendy says:

      Both are not proof, but claim…

    • Elliot says:

      You are apparently, currently, out of your mind! Those things you mention, DNA and time/space are certainly NOT INCONTROVERTIBLE PROOFS OF THE EXISTENCE OF ANY GOD, nor of anything else I can think of. Sorry……..

  5. We have a worldwide problem which includes science and religion. There are those who are truly seeking for ultimate reality and truth and those who are simply looking to justify their opinions and attitudes. The danger with opinions and attitudes is they blind the mind to new discovery, possibility and growth. Unfortunately there are closed minded in both camps, religious, scientific or otherwise. The key to human progress and ultimately finding universal truth is to abandon the limitations imposed by dogma both in science and religion, not to say you can’t practice both simultaneously, and still maintain the open mind of a true seeker. Then our eyes, ears and mind will see what is real, and we will all agree. After all, there can be only one ultimate reality.

    • Dr. Edilberto Alvarado, molecular scientist says:

      I finally agree your opinion, I am a follower of cosmic fingerprints. DNA and the relationship of time and space there is perfect MASTERR PROGRAMMER of the genetic code before life appears on earth.

    • Hendy Sitompul says:

      Then, who decide which one is reality, the ultimate?

    • Marco says:

      According to history, if I’m not wrong, many of our greatest scientists were Bible believers and trusted In The Creator. I don’t believe that a belief in a Creator (God) actually stops us from examining and discovering more about our universe and creation. On he contrary, a belief in a Creator encourages us to delve deep into his wonderful, amazing creative power. I’m a scientist and I want to know Him even more.

  6. Claude Darga says:

    My problem lies in religion itself, I don’t believe in religion I am a Christian and I really beleive in the teachings of Jesus but I don’t beleive that comes after that is Constantin and the development of Christianity in Europe.

    • Hendy Sitompul says:

      Even if you believe, it does not mean what you believe is the truth..
      It is simliar to others, there no different….

  7. Terry says:

    Capital A atheists become the more strident the older they get. Funny, that. Is something worrying them? But the grandeur and majesty of design is all any honest human needs to acknowledge a Designer. I don’t have to understand anything about why blood swaps carbon dioxide for oxygen in a lung, for example, to know that Life is a beautiful force with a Mind behind it. I think even Max Planck asserted much the same. “In the beginning” was no doubt many eons ago. Those eons placidly hold their secrets between verse 1 and verse 2, and then in cryptic language that’s no problem to faith we get the outline of the way it was all started up again after the most recent, total, cataclysmic wipe-out. I reckon Velikovsky was on the money, especially with his exposure of – to borrow from your “Atheist” classification – capital E Egyptology!

  8. Bill Freeman says:

    I watched Ben Stein in a past documentary question Dawkins about the origin of life. Dawkins said he did not know how life started on Earth, but believed it came from outer space, “panspermia”. This was Francis Crick’s hypothesis. Of course all this does is put the origin of life problem on another planet, and truly makes the hypothesis unfalsifiable. This is the old game of kicking the can down the road. It is amusing but sad.

    As a Christian engineer (chemical), I have watched this guy plus others in academia actually look ignorant when discussing anything that addressed God. Most so called experts have read little in the Bible or Scripture. Actually, science, theology and philosophy together actually compliment one another. If they don’t, look out!

    As regard persons like Dawkins, the Lord has already spoken to us about him as in I Corinthians: “1Co 3:18: Let no one deceive himself. If any of you thinks he is wise in the ways of this world, he must become a fool to become really wise. 1Co 3:19: For the wisdom of this world is nonsense in God’s sight. For it is written, He catches the wise with their own trickery. 1Co 3:20: The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are worthless.” Some don’t like persons answering questions about science with quotes from Scripture, but also some don’t want to acknowledge God either. They won’t their cake and eat it too.

    The evidence for how life began can be found in the disciplines of science, theology and philosophy combined together. The can be shown in the following chain of events: the Trinity speaks and triggers: the Big Bang, the Anthropic Principle, the origin of life, and the human “immaterial mind/material brain”.

    Regarding theology, the true Christian can find this answer if he or she searches with prayer. Once a person begins to see this connection between science, theology, philosophy, and history, the answer is profound. It becomes not just an answer, but the only answer.

    Regarding science, “modern science” was introduced to men/women by great Christian scientists (Newton, Kepler, Copernicus and others) by using Scripture and acknowledging that God was there and not silent. Copernicus stated: “The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator. Science brings men nearer to God.” (Regis Nicoll – 2016)

    Regarding philosophy, the material brain and the immaterial mind combination was divinely created. What results is the conclusion that the brain is only a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for conceptual thought. Only the immaterial mind can process conceptual thought. The material brain can only process individual thought which is embodied in matter. For example, when the material brain receives a message from the eye, each item seen from the eye is an individual item. It cannot process universals which are infinite. Only the immaterial mind can process universals. See if you can draw a universal triangle that represents all triangles. You cannot because it is immaterial. The material brain can only process an individual triangle which you can draw. Read “Intellect: Mind Over Matter” by Mortimer J. Adler. This book will clarify what I am stating. Evolution cannot explain the brain/mind enegma.

    Finally, the answer to life cannot be demonstrated by using science only, which is knowledge determined within the Universe or the Box. The great Universal (God) that knows the answer to life is outside the Universe or the Box. He created it from nothing. Dawkins uses science inside the box. True Christians use proofs from outside the box to find the answer to life. Dawkins rejects God so he is blind and cannot see outside the box. He will pay for this rejection of God when he stands before Him after death.

    • Hendy says:

      That’s a kind of christian god, what about other kinds of god? Which one is the true god? Can you prove it?
      Faith is not the truth….

      • Bill Freeman says:

        Hendy:

        Apparently you are not learned in this area. The only true God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. I suggest you read up on this fact. As far as other gods, look at Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, and other small religions. There are many gods, but if you know how to evaluate them, you see quickly that something is wrong. For example, Hindu’s believe their god is not personal. Judeo/Chrisitians believe God is personal (personality). You cannot have it both ways so then you must see which one has truth without contradictions. As for faith, it is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. There is substance and evidence for the Judeo/Christian God. Note that the Scripture or Word of God solves the brain/mind controversy not handled by Darwin adherents. I stop here to see your questions. If you cannot provide questions with any substance, I know you are not learned in theology, philosophy and science as a whole. You just have opinions without any substance or truth. First, find Christ, ask for forgivness, accept Him as Savior, and then with the Holy Spirit study Scriptures. Search for Him and He will find you and convict you of His love, knowledge and omnipotence. If you reject Him, you will one day have to stand at judgment for your sins. You will not like the outcome. Jesus is exclusive. He states” I am the way the truth and the life, no one can come to the Father but by Me”. Now, I did not say this, Jesus says it. So if you don’t like exclusivity, you will have to take it up with Him. I pray you accept Him and then try and understand Him.

        • Hendy says:

          “The only true God is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.” is faith, and faith is not the truth…
          Where has the god of Abraham been before 5,000 years ago? Tell me….

        • Hendy says:

          As long as Jews reject christian god, there is no reason to accept it….

    • Hendy Sitompul says:

      When you bring faith to public, chaos, why? Because many and many faith versions against each other out there…

  9. Perry God has spoken with a greater voice than we mortals use our vocal curds to generate. The whole vration from the micro to the macro screams outHis magnificent unmatched science, design and implementation .
    Plus in thes last “days He has spoken to us – by His Son. therefore pour souls like Dawkins are without excuse. I am sorry for the guy.

  10. ramaiah says:

    Dear Marshall,
    No body expects to see God who is self where of his own existence apart from realising his own Real Self being nothing but God as per Vedanta Philosophy of Hindus.Consciousness is all that exists in this universe without which nothing can be perceived to exist.

  11. ken miller says:

    re: faith is not the truth. Correct …Faith is a “conscious” decision to accept something unseen on the basis of what one “chooses” to believe is the truth… based on what you feel, hear, see, experience and reason to be true…in a Christians case the existence of our creator.

    • Bill Freeman says:

      Wrong. Faith is the substance of things hoped for. the evidence of things not seen. It is not based on choosing. Substance and evidence is not open to choice. Substance and evidence is based upon truth. It is a gift from God for those who love the Lord and repent of sins for salvation. His Spirit tells the Truth about your faith.

      Is this the Kenneth Miller at Brown? If so, we meet again. I disagree with many of your ideas and choices. You are Catholic and a Darwinist. I could go on and on with you, but choose not too as you think the Professor (you) has all the knowledge. Again wrong.
      Still, hope you are doing well and umpiring baseball effectively.

    • Old Git Tom says:

      Ken Miller,
      factually wrong, there: experimental psychology has long known that ‘perception is concept dependent’.
      It’s counter-intuitive, I know, but if you don’t believe in fairies or aeroplanes, or have never seen one, you won’t ‘see’ any. Yes, that’s right!
      Sight & all the senses are called ‘perception’, for brevity. Eyes are NOT cameras, & the brain is NOT a computer. Despite claiming to know ‘a lot’, science still cannot adequately explain human perception. It’s a mystery we all (mostly) share FAITH in. Common exceptions are oft-exasperated policemen, who get radically different accounts of what different witnesses ‘saw’ of the same thing.

    • Hendy Sitompul says:

      Faith is just choice or just inheritance, not more, and faith is against each other, meaning that there is no truth in each…

    • Hendy Sitompul says:

      The only truth is what proven, what evidenced, what factual, what rational….The existence of your creator is the one has to be proved….

      • Old Git Tom says:

        Mr Sitompul,
        your rather outmoded faith in Victorian materialism misleads you. Scientific positivism was a blind alley. There are NO such things as ‘hard truths’, & science rarely claims ‘absolute proof’.
        As I tried to explain, empirical evidence boils down to faith in the evidence of the chimerical, human senses. Mathematical logic similarly floats on a mysterious faith. Ie., as Goedel demonstrated, even immaculate systems of logic cannot ‘prove’ themselves (& math is simply formal logic).
        Science & religion share the same oceans of mystery, & we navigate on frail rafts of faith.

        • Hendy Sitompul says:

          I don’t have any faith and nothing misleads me, but you might outmoded faith in Victorian as you wish…..

          Science has done a lot of jobs even some corrections have to be made, what you call positivism, It is clear…

          Nothing so far faith has done, but foolish people with gimmicks….

  12. Hendy Sitompul says:

    Darwinian evolution has to be proved, but Faith is super Horribale that foolish people with gimmicks…

Leave a Reply

You must use your real first and last name. Anonymity is not allowed.
Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are marked *