Question for people that believe in evolution

[johnhanks]

Dawkins is a hack who is also simply the loudest of the atheist movement. He got an MA in zoology, yet is somehow revered by his silly followers as the authority on genetic evolution...

How much Dawkins have you read? Have you read The Extended Phenotype? Not hack-work, I assure you, and very authoritative on evolutionary theory.

...
and whether or not God exists.

Offhand I can't think of any atheist I know who thinks of Dawkins as an authority on this. He's made his own position very clear, and presented his reasons for adopting it, but that's not the same as claiming authority.

 

[Autodidact]

Dawkins is a hack who is also simply the loudest of the atheist movement. He got an MA in zoology, yet is somehow revered by his silly followers as the authority on genetic evolution and whether or not God exists. He is a Darwin wannabe with not nearly the capacity for complex thought or critical thinking as Darwin was. I respect Darwin and his theories because they do make sense, however people falsely brand his theories as incompatible with a belief in God (much like that ridiculous movie that is coming out where they dramatize crap that didn't happen in Darwin's life. It's just more atheistic drivel). But I digress.

Dawkins studied zoology at Balliol College, Oxford, where he was tutored by Nobel Prize-winning ethologist Nikolaas Tinbergen, graduating in 1962. He continued as a research student under Tinbergen's supervision at the University of Oxford, receiving his M.A. and D.Phil. degrees in 1966, while staying as a research assistant for another year.

In 1995, Dawkins was appointed Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science in the University of Oxford, a position that had been endowed by Charles Simonyi with the express intention that the holder "be expected to make important contributions to the public understanding of some scientific field". Since 1970, he has been a fellow of New College, Oxford. In September 2008, he retired from Oxford

Dawkins has been recognized many times as a science writer. He was awarded a Doctor of Science by the University of Oxford in 1989. He holds honorary doctorates in science from the University of Huddersfield, University of Westminster, Durham University, the University of Hull, and the University of Antwerp, and honorary doctorates from the University of Aberdeen[1], Open University, the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, and the University of Valencia.[123][124] He holds honorary doctorates of letters from the University of St Andrews and the Australian National University, and was elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature in 1997 and the Royal Society in 2001. He is one of the patrons of the Oxford University Scientific Society. In 1987, Dawkins received a Royal Society of Literature award and a Los Angeles Times Literary Prize for his book, The Blind Watchmaker. In the same year, he received a Sci. Tech Prize for Best Television Documentary Science Programme of the Year, for the BBC Horizon episode entitled The Blind Watchmaker. Asteroid 8331 Dawkins is named after Dawkins. His other awards have included the Zoological Society of London Silver Medal (1989), Finlay innovation award (1990), the Michael Faraday Award (1990), the Nakayama Prize (1994), the American Humanist Association's Humanist of the Year Award (1996), the fifth International Cosmos Prize (1997), the Kistler Prize (2001), the Medal of the Presidency of the Italian Republic (2001), the Bicentennial Kelvin Medal of The Royal Philosophical Society of Glasgow (2002) and the Nierenberg Prize for Science in the Public Interest (2009). In 2005, the Hamburg-based Alfred Toepfer Foundation awarded him its Shakespeare Prize in recognition of his "concise and accessible presentation of scientific knowledge". He won the Lewis Thomas Prize for Writing about Science for 2006 and the Galaxy British Book Awards Author of the Year Award for 2007.[125] In the same year, he was listed by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world in 2007, and was awarded the Deschner Award, named after German anti-clerical author Karlheinz Deschner.[126][127][128]
[wiki]

It is not to be expected that anyone would duplicate the brilliance of Charles Darwin, one of the greatest scientists in history.

You may certainly disagree with him, but I don't think you can accurately characterize him as an undereducated hack. He has a Ph.d from one of the world's most prestigous institutions, and until recently a renowned professorship there.

 

[MSizer]

...Offhand I can't think of any atheist I know who thinks of Dawkins as an authority on this. He's made his own position very clear, and presented his reasons for adopting it, but that's not the same as claiming authority.

Not to mention the fact that he's written one of the most methodical books in recent years on matters of faith vs. reason, despite not being an authority on the matter.

 

[DarkSun]

Dawkins studied zoology at Balliol College, Oxford, where he was tutored by Nobel Prize-winning ethologist Nikolaas Tinbergen, graduating in 1962. He continued as a research student under Tinbergen's supervision at the University of Oxford, receiving his M.A. and D.Phil. degrees in 1966, while staying as a research assistant for another year.

In 1995, Dawkins was appointed Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science in the University of Oxford, a position that had been endowed by Charles Simonyi with the express intention that the holder "be expected to make important contributions to the public understanding of some scientific field". Since 1970, he has been a fellow of New College, Oxford. In September 2008, he retired from Oxford

Dawkins has been recognized many times as a science writer. He was awarded a Doctor of Science by the University of Oxford in 1989. He holds honorary doctorates in science from the University of Huddersfield, University of Westminster, Durham University, the University of Hull, and the University of Antwerp, and honorary doctorates from the University of Aberdeen[1], Open University, the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, and the University of Valencia.[123][124] He holds honorary doctorates of letters from the University of St Andrews and the Australian National University, and was elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature in 1997 and the Royal Society in 2001. He is one of the patrons of the Oxford University Scientific Society. In 1987, Dawkins received a Royal Society of Literature award and a Los Angeles Times Literary Prize for his book, The Blind Watchmaker. In the same year, he received a Sci. Tech Prize for Best Television Documentary Science Programme of the Year, for the BBC Horizon episode entitled The Blind Watchmaker. Asteroid 8331 Dawkins is named after Dawkins. His other awards have included the Zoological Society of London Silver Medal (1989), Finlay innovation award (1990), the Michael Faraday Award (1990), the Nakayama Prize (1994), the American Humanist Association's Humanist of the Year Award (1996), the fifth International Cosmos Prize (1997), the Kistler Prize (2001), the Medal of the Presidency of the Italian Republic (2001), the Bicentennial Kelvin Medal of The Royal Philosophical Society of Glasgow (2002) and the Nierenberg Prize for Science in the Public Interest (2009). In 2005, the Hamburg-based Alfred Toepfer Foundation awarded him its Shakespeare Prize in recognition of his "concise and accessible presentation of scientific knowledge". He won the Lewis Thomas Prize for Writing about Science for 2006 and the Galaxy British Book Awards Author of the Year Award for 2007.[125] In the same year, he was listed by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world in 2007, and was awarded the Deschner Award, named after German anti-clerical author Karlheinz Deschner.[126][127][128]
[wiki]

It is not to be expected that anyone would duplicate the brilliance of Charles Darwin, one of the greatest scientists in history.

You may certainly disagree with him, but I don't think you can accurately characterize him as an undereducated hack. He has a Ph.d from one of the world's most prestigous institutions, and until recently a renowned professorship there.

Richard Dawkins =/= Charles Darwin...

Typo?

 

[Autodidact]

Richard Dawkins =/= Charles Darwin...

Typo?

No. The poster criticized him as being no Darwin. That's like criticizing a physicist for not being Einstein. Einsteins and Darwins only come along once a century if we're lucky.

 

[DarkSun]

No. The poster criticized him as being no Darwin. That's like criticizing a physicist for not being Einstein. Einsteins and Darwins only come along once a century if we're lucky.

Sorry. I probably should have read the thread, lol.

IMO, not being much of a Darwin doesn't sound like much of an insult.

 

[haltensie]

Well, I accept evolution as a proven scientific theory because the evidence in support of it is overwhelming. Today, you can just not be taken seriously as a scientist if you do not accept evolution as established truth. We have seen dozens of animals, including humans, evolve. We have seen hundreds of plants evolve. And thousands of microbial life forms evolve. There's DNA to support that at one point or another, you share a common ancestor with any given organism. To deny this piece of evidence would be to deny fraternity tests or anything else of the like. And on top of it all, we have a nifty fossil record showing us that life on Earth has actually had a very long, complex, diverse history of evolution.

I was a young earth creationist growing up. But that's mainly due to my mother. From a very young age, I always had a naturalist mentality. When I was 14, I moved away from my mother for a year and lo and behold when I returned to her, I was no longer a young earth creationist and I completely accepted Darwin's theory. My mother was not able to plug my ears and blind my eyes and feed me lies and deceit when the subject of evolution came up. Anyway, not going to give a life's story anymore. BTW, don't get me wrong, don't hate my mom, I still love her very much

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Well, I accept evolution as a proven scientific theory because the evidence in support of it is overwhelming. Today, you can just not be taken seriously as a scientist if you do not accept evolution as established truth. We have seen dozens of animals, including humans, evolve. We have seen hundreds of plants evolve. And thousands of microbial life forms evolve. There's DNA to support that at one point or another, you share a common ancestor with any given organism. To deny this piece of evidence would be to deny fraternity tests or anything else of the like. And on top of it all, we have a nifty fossil record showing us that life on Earth has actually had a very long, complex, diverse history of evolution.

I was a young earth creationist growing up. But that's mainly due to my mother. From a very young age, I always had a naturalist mentality. When I was 14, I moved away from my mother for a year and lo and behold when I returned to her, I was no longer a young earth creationist and I completely accepted Darwin's theory. My mother was not able to plug my ears and blind my eyes and feed me lies and deceit when the subject of evolution came up. Anyway, not going to give a life's story anymore. BTW, don't get me wrong, don't hate my mom, I still love her very much

Thanks for sharing that.....and welcome to RF...

 

[goodjewishboy]

this tread is simply to learn and understand.

What evidence of evolution has persuaded you to the believe that evolution occurs?

if you have articles or anything that supports your statement i would be interested in reading them.

Objective observation, evolution does not require belief.

 

[Gabethewiking]

this tread is simply to learn and understand.

What evidence of evolution has persuaded you to the believe that evolution occurs?

if you have articles or anything that supports your statement i would be interested in reading them.

I do not "believe" in Evolution, I seen the facts of Evolution and therefore accept it, just as I accept the facts of Gravity and Heliocentric Theory and so on.

Genetic mutations (which you can see now if you want) are very interesting evidence as they change before our eyes, worth studying if you are interested in how the world came to be as it is.