A very calm and thoughtful response to a rather silly fundamentalist
I found this at Jerry Coyne's wonderful blog, whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com. In the following clip a Muslim fundamentalist essentially accuses Dawkins of dishonesty by asserting that even if all all the evidence pointed to a supernatural designer and away from natural explanations Dawkins would still reject supernatural explanations because of his disdain for them, and the god(s)implied. The questioner in fact goes so far as to suggest that Dawkins already does not this, because the evidence already does, according to the fundamentalist, point to divine creation. Dawkins, therefore, already does believe in divine creation but will not admit it. This is a spectacularly rude thing to say of course to someone who has never demonstrated anything exemplary academic integrity, and who has clearly changed his mind (based on evidence) on many positions over the years. Fundamentalists though often give themselves permission to say the rudest things in the service of their religion. Below Dawkins responds very much more kindly than most. It might also be useful to note the creationist's use of the word chance, which is, in the hands of the creationist (any creationist it seems) is a weasel word intended to confuse listeners as to what kind of processes are. The implication is that they completely random. Which isn't the case.