Richard Dawkins David Rice Care of W.W. Norton + Company, Inc. 500 Fifth Avenue New York,
Richard Dawkins David Rice
Care of W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
500 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10110
I've read and thoroughly enjoyed your book The Blind Watchmaker. It
was GREAT. I wish it were required reading in public schools. It
troubles me to know that public schools produce students that are not
just less informed than their parents, but MIS-informed by Creationist
fools bent on indoctrinating any and all children into their cults via
covert (well, not quite so covert in some locations) means. In fact,
it makes me DAMN ANGRY. This very day I read over three million bytes
on the Evolution / Theistic Anti-Evolution (otherwise known as
"Creationism") so-called "debate," and my head is still spinning at
the arrogance, lies, deception, deliberate mis-quotes, immoral,
unethical, and blindly superstitious ignorance espoused by
For over three years I've been butting heads against Creationists.
To tell the truth, I'm getting real tired of it. An example--- words
you will never hear from a Creationist: "Stop me if you've heard this
one before." What I mean is, their assertions never change, even when
utterly refuted long ago. They may reword them some times, but the
baseless claims stay the same. It gets so damn tiresome correcting the
same mistakes by Creationists over and over and over again. One must
be a Pitt Bull Terrier, jaws firmly clamped into the Creationist's
deceptive blathering prattle, just to keep from giving up due to
exhaustion. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.
Six days ago I read an article in FidoNet's A_THEIST message base
that had a quote from you and your book The Blind Watchmaker. Since I
was reading the book at the time, I looked the quote up, and was NOT
surprised to see that the person making the quote had done some highly
selective editing, to make it say something utterly different than
what you actually wrote. The person who posted the quote is, of
course, a Creationist. Doesn't this frost your balls to no end?! She
gave the "quote" as follows:
"Evolution is the only thing that allows an atheist to be
She then went on to assert that all people who believe evolution is
correct MUST be atheists, and other inane and wrong assertions. I very
quickly posted what you REALLY WROTE, and now every one knows she
misrepresented you. For every lie and deception a Creationist makes,
so few are countered because the resources (mostly time) to do so are
not available. She also mis-quoted Gould and Eldridge, so you're in
good company! I very highly suspect that the ICR is at the root of
your being mis-quoted.
The ICR is morally and ethically bankrupt. The following is their
basic methodology, and it appears to be the only "work" they do (they
sure as no-Hell are not doing real scientific research).
Quote from scientist:
"I am more likely to flap my arms and fly away than I
am to beat my wife."
Creationist quoting scientist:
"I . . . beat my wife."
I actually read the following quote from a Creationist:
"Science has the serious flaw that it is self-correcting." -
Mr. Ray Cote is a few months away from getting a degree in physics.
Scary thought, no? This says a lot about the state of education in the
United States of [North] America! In another 70 years I expect the US
to be a "third-world" country, thanks in part to Creationist's efforts
to "dummy up" science classes, and it seems no one gives a shit about
how poorly the outlook our future appears. Americans ARE NOT being
equipped to compete with the world, and we will no doubt suffer for
our ignorance and apathy. But then, I never graduated high school, so
who am I to judge?
Speaking of quotes, here's a few that I use "against" creationists:
"Apes evolved from Creationists." This is my all-time
"WARNING! Evolution may be hazardous to your sense of self-
importance." I think Creationism is a peculiar form of
arrogance and a bloated sense of self-significance.
"Science has proof without any certainty.
Creationists have certainty without any proof." -Ashley
The One True explanation for the K/T border:
"Some of the more aware dinosaurs were worried about the
environmental consequences of an accident with the new
Iridium enriched fusion reactor. 'If it goes off, only
the cockroaches and mammals will survive...' they said."
Some Creationist crap I've contested in various forums (you've no
doubt encountered all of these, and more):
01) shrinking sun
02) missing moon dust
03) missing helium in atmosphere
04) decaying "c" (speed of light)
05) confusing abiogenesis with evolution
06) the argument "schools that teach Creationism have higher
academic achievement than schools that teach evolution"
07) calling evolution "evilution."
08) Velikovsky and his peculiar delusions
09) "Higher" vs. "lower" life forms
10) "No value to human life" if evolution is true.
11) "Second law proves. . . ."
12) "Theory of Abrupt Appearances" (i.e. "Creationism"
without calling it "Creationism."
13) "Evolution supports racism" argument
14) Conspiracy of scientists to hide the truth
15) Polonium Halo (which has been falsified. Want data?)
16) CBS "documentary" [sic] on "Noah's flood."
17) Darwin On Trial "proof"
18) "God the deceiver" theory (known as "last Tuesdayism")
19) "It's only a theory" argument.
For the "shrinking sun," the Creationists claim that Sol is
shrinking at 1% every 100 years. I ask them to calculate back 10,000
years (the time they believe Sol and Earth were created) and produce a
figure for the size of Sol back then--- cumulative (compounding per
cents) gives us a much more massive, very hot sun: the Garden of Eden
must have been hot as Hell!
Concerning Velikovsky, there is a person named Ted Holden who is an
arch disciple of his, and he claims that he "proved" that Earth had a
"less felt effect of gravity" because it is his contention that
Saurapods could not stand in 1G. He believes that Earth orbited
Saturn, and that Venus was ejected as a comet out of Jupiter and
knocked Earth into its present orbit--- all witnessed by humans at the
time! His claims get much more bizarre. He's good for a laugh or two
when I'm feeling down. Here's an actual quote from Ted:
From: news@fedfil.UUCP (news) Ted Holden. Message-ID:
"The methodology for driving change which Velikovsky
postulates is utterly unlike standard evolution theory,
hence is not fubar [fucked up beyond all repair--- d.rice]
for the same reasons. It explains change which we see in
the living record. It doesn't do magical things, as
evolutionism attempts to do."
I rather like the "Conspiracy of scientists" theory that
Creationists enjoy. They fail to understand that a great many (perhaps
most?) scientists working with the knowledge that Evolutionary Theory
is sound and correct are also theists, and very commonly Christians
(in the USA at least). I imagine Creationists view the scientific
community as some great cabal which is run by some evil Master
Scientist who dictates policy which must be accepted without question.
Many people in general think poorly of scientists, which I cannot
comprehend. I had a punching fight (with words, not fists) with a
Creationist two weekends ago--- I used scientific terms so that I
would be very clear and precise in what I said, and he accused me of
being a "pseudo-intellectual trying to impress with big words." I
think the "biggest" word I used was "Allele" or "genetic drift." This
individual claimed to have two degrees, one in engineering and the
other in mathematics.
Gentry's claim that "Polonium Halos" are somehow "fingerprints of
god(s)" (from Dr. Gentry's Creation's Tiny Mystery) has been falsified
by John G. Brawley, Jr. Gentry REFUSES to tell people where he got his
samples, except in the most general of terms, so Mr. Brawley went out
and did his own study which he meticulously documented. He will make
his data available to anyone who wants it (including photographs). He
demonstrated conclusively that "Polonium Halos" are the results of
known processes in Radon-222. In my opinion Gentry either deliberately
lied or is wildly incompetent. (Brawley's address: PO Box 224, Eureka,
The author of Darwin on Trial, Phillip E. Johnson, showed up in
usenet's talk.origins newsgroup. He implied that evolutionary theory
was a form of racism because it was his contention that evolution is
an "Anglo-Saxon" version of a creation myth, and to teach it
exclusively is culturalism and imperialism. He posted very large
articles stating wild assertions, and refused to address most of the
questions put to him. Even though he is a Creationist, he would not
answer the question of if he was or not. In fact, the few replies he
did make were so vague and free of content, he sounded like a lawyer
(which he is). He has no training or education in biology, and yet
Creationists consider him an authority on "Darwinism."
The "God the deceiver" Creationist theory is one I particularly
enjoy. It means that God Jehovah Yahweh actively set out to deceive us
by making the universe appear very old, even though it is only a dozen
thousand years old at most. "God could have done it, therefore God
did." Their "proof" is "God's word" in Genesis! No really! It seems
to me this kind of God sounds more Satanic than otherwise. I counter
the argument by saying God could have made everything last Tuesday---
prove me wrong!
Many "main stream" Christians consider Creationism to be bad
theology. They feel that Creationist lunacy pushes people away from
Christianity and "Jesus" (though what contemporary Christianity has to
do with Jesus I have NO idea ).
I have read quite a lot of Creationist "literature" (for lack of a
better word, though "propaganda" comes to mind). I have yet to find
the Theory of Creation Science. There's a six-volume set called
"Creation Science," but the theory isn't in it--- I guess Morris
forgot to include it (ran out of room perhaps?). In fact, when I talk
to Creationists who call themselves "Creation Scientists," not one of
them can tell me their theory--- they all say "Buy these books. They
will explain it to you." (I have; they didn't.)
"Creation Science" is a money-making business, and has nothing to
do with science. (A circus comes to mind.) I've often thought about
becoming a "Creation Scientist," because I could use the money, and
would enjoy going on lectures across the nation. Problem is, unlike
the ICR crowd, I have morals and ethics, and taking money from
ignorant fools who would pay to listen to my lies and deceptions is
something I could not do. Gish and Morris seem to have no problems
with doing so, it appears.
Remember Duane Gish claiming that there was a protein study done
that said "bullfrogs are closer to humans than chimpanzees?" (July
1983, the Public Broadcasting System.) It took over 8 years of
constant hounding by scientists to extract the admission that he
didn't have access to the data, and that he took someone else's word
for it. He still maintains that his claim is true; now he just says he
can't prove it. At the start he promised "I'll send the data to you"
and at the end he said "I haven't got the data and no way to get it.
Sorry! You'll just have to believe me." Is this supposed to impress
his Gods? He refuses to accept evidence that said "study" was more
than likely a joke by Berkeley geochronologist Garniss Curtis, which
Mr. Gish jumped on like a duck on a Junebug.
Concerning Punctuated equilibrium, you provided Creationists with a
massive amount of quotes that they may edit, dice, and slice to meet
their agenda. One such quote that I will bet Creationists will convert
towards their own ends:
". . . Both schools of thought agree that the only
alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many
complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation,
and both would reject this alternative."
Can you imagine what a Creationist could do with this? Why, he or
she could turn you into a staunch supporter of Creationism! All that
would be required is to edit out the last six words. In fact, I
suspect some Creationist somewhere has already done this. By the way,
another explanation is that a space ship from Planet X came here and
"seeded" Earth--- but this seems to me just as unlikely as the Gods
The "equal time" crap that seems to be flourishing in American
public school boards: I demand that The Stork Theory be given equal
time with the Copulation Theory for where babies come from. I demand
that The Solar Chariot Theory be given equal time with Heliocentric
Theory! I demand that The Hungry Dragon Theory be given equal time
with orbital mechanics to explain the Lunar Lunation Cycle! (Which
MUST include the Goddess Selene, or you'll all go to Hell and society
as we know it will become an anarchy full of murderers, sodomites,
sheep molesters, and Democrats.)
Your book was great.
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank