This is a three part series by Richard Dawkins, on one of the greatest scientists of all time - Charles Darwin.
It covers Darwin's life, theory and the amazing and absurd opposition to evolution.
In the series Dawkins has two main objectives: arguing the undeniable evidence for evolution and attacking religious belief. In the first episode he works with a science class in a school. He runs across religiously based opposition from some of the students. I would have taken a more accommodationist approach and said something like: "This is a science class and I am not going to oppose your religious beliefs. It is possible to believe in God and also evolution." Dawkins is naturally aware of this argument as he discusses it with the Archbishop of Canterbury in the third episode. Dawkins has very reasonable objections to the argument, but it is not relevant in science class. Once the religiously minded kids accepted basic science they might come around to Lawrence Krauss's position, which I agree with) : So while scientific rationality does not require atheism, it is by no means irrational to use it as the basis for arguing against the existence of God.
I am sure that Dawkins would see my position as a cop out.
The desperate pig ignorance of the creationists in the third episode is amazing. These people have not the slightest interest in truth or honesty. They smilingly talk nonsense and tell outright lies. Talking to such people is like talking to climate deniers - a total waste of time - because evidence, reason and logic are irrelevant to them.
It covers Darwin's life, theory and the amazing and absurd opposition to evolution.
In the series Dawkins has two main objectives: arguing the undeniable evidence for evolution and attacking religious belief. In the first episode he works with a science class in a school. He runs across religiously based opposition from some of the students. I would have taken a more accommodationist approach and said something like: "This is a science class and I am not going to oppose your religious beliefs. It is possible to believe in God and also evolution." Dawkins is naturally aware of this argument as he discusses it with the Archbishop of Canterbury in the third episode. Dawkins has very reasonable objections to the argument, but it is not relevant in science class. Once the religiously minded kids accepted basic science they might come around to Lawrence Krauss's position, which I agree with) : So while scientific rationality does not require atheism, it is by no means irrational to use it as the basis for arguing against the existence of God.
I am sure that Dawkins would see my position as a cop out.
The desperate pig ignorance of the creationists in the third episode is amazing. These people have not the slightest interest in truth or honesty. They smilingly talk nonsense and tell outright lies. Talking to such people is like talking to climate deniers - a total waste of time - because evidence, reason and logic are irrelevant to them.
