God vs. Science - A debate between Richard Dawkins and Francis Collins

[and-justice-for-all]

by TIME Magazine
Since Francis Collins has now been selected by Obama to head the NIH, we thought readers might be interested to read this debate between Richard Dawkins and Francis Collins from November 2006.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,4047,God-vs-Science---A-debate-between-Richard-Dawkins-and-Francis-Collins,TIME-Magazine

See:
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1555132,00.html (single page version)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1555132,00.html
Originally posted on our site here:
http://richarddawkins.net/article,287,God-vs-science-Can-religion-stand-up-to-the-test,David-van-Biema--Time-Magazine

There are two great debates under the broad heading of Science vs. God. The more familiar over the past few years is the narrower of the two: Can Darwinian evolution withstand the criticisms of Christians who believe that it contradicts the creation account in the Book of Genesis? In recent years, creationism took on new currency as the spiritual progenitor of "intelligent design" (I.D.), a scientifically worded attempt to show that blanks in the evolutionary narrative are more meaningful than its very convincing totality. I.D. lost some of its journalistic heat last December when a federal judge dismissed it as pseudoscience unsuitable for teaching in Pennsylvania schools.

But in fact creationism and I.D. are intimately related to a larger unresolved question, in which the aggressor's role is reversed: Can religion stand up to the progress of science? This debate long predates Darwin, but the antireligion position is being promoted with increasing insistence by scientists angered by intelligent design and excited, perhaps intoxicated, by their disciplines' increasing ability to map, quantify and change the nature of human experience. Brain imaging illustrates--in color!--the physical seat of the will and the passions, challenging the religious concept of a soul independent of glands and gristle.

Brain chemists track imbalances that could account for the ecstatic states of visionary saints or, some suggest, of Jesus. Like Freudianism before it, the field of evolutionary psychology generates theories of altruism and even of religion that do not include God. Something called the multiverse hypothesis in cosmology speculates that ours may be but one in a cascade of universes, suddenly bettering the odds that life could have cropped up here accidentally, without divine intervention. (If the probabilities were 1 in a billion, and you've got 300 billion universes, why not?)...

http://richarddawkins.net/article,4047,God-vs-Science---A-debate-between-Richard-Dawkins-and-Francis-Collins,TIME-Magazine

[Strong Atheist]

1. Again, interesting... nt.

[laconicsax]

2. Someone ever wanted proof of what's wrong with Collins, here it is:

"God is the answer to all of those "How must it have come to be" questions." -Francis Collins.

[and-justice-for-all]

3. Wonderful...

ugh..:puke: