But is it? (just wondering, not saying)
It today's society you don't get heard with subtle. You don't get listened to with balanced arguments. You don't get elected if you admit some form of doubt or uncertainty.
Today's society likes to be told (in a very short soundbite) what to believe.
Thats why unsupported ideas like ID have gained so much ground over supported ideas like Evolution. Because scientists always try to be fair and balanced and mention any uncertainty... whereas their opponents just trot out soundbite theories that SOUND GOOD.
Maybe what is needed IS for people like Prof Dawkins to come out and start fighting back... because sometimes you have to shout to be heard. (As someone who knew a bit about the issues involved i did get a "he's being a bit unbalanced" feeling occasionally... but if everyone on the other side is being unbalanced...
And even given the provocative title he still gave a lot of time to opposing views (the scientist within?) that opponents wouldn't have done. )
Maybe if a few scientist had shouted louder when the idea of ID first came up it wouldn't have taken off the way it did.
PS/ Darn it, i think i missed the 2nd part of the show.
PPS/ Out of interest, would this sort of programme even get shown on US tv, cos the impression i'm getting these days of the US makes me think a programme that set out to attack religion would have no chance over there.
Playing: Link to the Past, Astroboy, Kario Kart, Mario World (Micro) KOTOR 2: Sith Lords (Xbox) Morrowind (PC)
Last edited by toms; 01-17-2006 at 09:02 AM.