Four difficult questions -

[WhatsHisNuts]

I think the fact that it is a 2 page critique is part of the problem. Dawkins' book is 374 pages long and his scienific arguments make up a a decent chunk of the book, but that is not the part that needs to be focused on (IMO). This essay is only 2 pages and covers 3 chapters of a 10 chapter book.

Here are some chapters that I'd like to see discussed from the religious perspective:

6. The Roots of Morality: Why Are We Good?

7. The 'Good' Book and the Changing Moral Zeitgeist

8. What's Wrong With Religion? Why Be So Hostile?

9. Childhood, Abuse and the Escape From Religion

 

[JCDunkDogs]

...saying that science doesn't have proof of the evolutionary chain from A to Z is not a win for believers in the supernatural.

A valid point, logical, well reasoned, and true enough. And, for the record, I agree with you.

I was just stating my experience of these things. It seems that debates in the public square or on TV (as opposed to on radio and in print) are not won on logic and reason. The audience choses a winner based on emotion, then rationalizes that choice later somehow.

Human beings are hard wired somehow to behave this way, I think. So when the archeologist says, "trust me, we will find the evidence," its not as satisfying as hearing the creationist say, "In God We Trust."