Changes

Research indicates that the public around the world is widely distrustful of [[Atheism|atheists]] and that atheists are distrustful of each other as well.<ref>[https://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/06/fun-with-atheists.html Fun with atheists] by [[Vox Day|Theodore Beale]]</ref><ref>[http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-12-10/religion-atheism/51777612/1 Study: Atheists distrusted as much as rapists]</ref>  

Research indicates that the public around the world is widely distrustful of [[Atheism|atheists]] and that atheists are distrustful of each other as well.<ref name="Fun with atheists">[https://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/06/fun-with-atheists.html Fun with atheists] by [[Vox Day|Theodore Beale]]</ref><ref name="usatoday30.usatoday.com">[http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-12-10/religion-atheism/51777612/1 Study: Atheists distrusted as much as rapists]</ref>  

Furthermore, as can be seen below, history and other [[social science]] research indicates that atheists have frequently engaged in deceit and and other immoral behaviors.  

Furthermore, as can be seen below, history and other [[social science]] research indicates that atheists have frequently engaged in deceit and and other immoral behaviors.  

A total of 43 per cent of the contributors were atheist, 33 per cent were Christian and the remainder belonged to other faiths.<ref>[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/anti-atheist-distrust-deeply-and-culturally-ingrained-study-finds-a6952276.html Anti-atheist distrust ‘deeply and culturally ingrained’, study finds], ''The Independent'', 2015</ref>}}

A total of 43 per cent of the contributors were atheist, 33 per cent were Christian and the remainder belonged to other faiths.<ref>[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/anti-atheist-distrust-deeply-and-culturally-ingrained-study-finds-a6952276.html Anti-atheist distrust ‘deeply and culturally ingrained’, study finds], ''The Independent'', 2015</ref>}}

[[Vox Day|Theodore Beale]] says about atheists not trusting other atheists: "The reason most atheists trust fellow atheists less than anyone else is because they recognize their own lack of integrity and morality."<ref>[https://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/06/fun-with-atheists.html Fun with atheists] by [[Vox Day|Theodore Beale]]</ref>

[[Vox Day|Theodore Beale]] says about atheists not trusting other atheists: "The reason most atheists trust fellow atheists less than anyone else is because they recognize their own lack of integrity and morality."<ref name="Fun with atheists"/>

== Americans and Canadians distrust atheists as much as rapists ==

== Americans and Canadians distrust atheists as much as rapists ==

The study is part of an attempt to understand what needs religion fulfills in people. Among the conclusions is a sense of trust in others.

The study is part of an attempt to understand what needs religion fulfills in people. Among the conclusions is a sense of trust in others.

"People find atheists very suspect," Shariff said. "They don't fear God so we should distrust them; they do not have the same moral obligations of others. This is a common refrain against atheists. People fear them as a group."<ref>[http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-12-10/religion-atheism/51777612/1 Study: Atheists distrusted as much as rapists]</ref>}}

"People find atheists very suspect," Shariff said. "They don't fear God so we should distrust them; they do not have the same moral obligations of others. This is a common refrain against atheists. People fear them as a group."<ref name="usatoday30.usatoday.com">[http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-12-10/religion-atheism/51777612/1 Study: Atheists distrusted as much as rapists]</ref>}}

See also:

See also:

[[File: Voroshilov, Molotov, Stalin, with Nikolai Yezhov.jpg|right|225px]]

[[File: Voroshilov, Molotov, Stalin, with Nikolai Yezhov.jpg|right|225px]]

[[File: The Commissar Vanishes 2.jpg|thumbnail|right|220px|Nikolai Yezhov walking with [[Joseph Stalin]] in the top photo taken in the mid 1930s. Subsequent to his execution in 1940, Yezhov was edited out of the photo by [[Soviet Union]] censors.<ref>[http://www.newseum.org/berlinwall/commissar_vanishes/vanishes.htm The Commissar Vanishes</ref>]]

[[File: The Commissar Vanishes 2.jpg|thumbnail|right|220px|Nikolai Yezhov walking with [[Joseph Stalin]] in the top photo taken in the mid 1930s. Subsequent to his execution in 1940, Yezhov was edited out of the photo by [[Soviet Union]] censors.<ref>[http://www.newseum.org/berlinwall/commissar_vanishes/vanishes.htm The Commissar Vanishes]</ref>]]

Historically and presently, most [[atheism|atheists]] lean [[leftism|politically left]] (See: [[Atheism and politics]]).  

Historically and presently, most [[atheism|atheists]] lean [[leftism|politically left]] (See: [[Atheism and politics]]).  

[[Vox Day|Theodore Beale]] wrote about [[secular left|secular leftists]] and leftists in general:

[[Vox Day|Theodore Beale]] wrote about [[secular left]]ists and leftists in general:

{{cquote|Regardless of whether it is...[[Richard Dawkins]], [[PZ Myers]], or the vast and [[Lesbianism and obesity|corpulent mass]] of [[feminism|feminists]], the Left has an observable tendency to shun debate.  They assert many different reasons for doing so, but the truth is always revealed by their seemingly contradictory willingness to debate the incompetent and the overmatched....

{{cquote|Regardless of whether it is...[[Richard Dawkins]], [[PZ Myers]], or the vast and [[Lesbianism and obesity|corpulent mass]] of [[feminism|feminists]], the Left has an observable tendency to shun debate.  They assert many different reasons for doing so, but the truth is always revealed by their seemingly contradictory willingness to debate the incompetent and the overmatched....

In Stark's list of 52 top scientific contributors,<ref name="Origins">Williams, Alex,[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1581/ The biblical origins of science], ''Journal of Creation'' 18(2):49–52, August 2004.</ref> only one ([[Edmund Halley]]) was a skeptic and another ([[Paracelsus]]) was a [[pantheism|pantheist]].

In Stark's list of 52 top scientific contributors,<ref name="Origins">Williams, Alex,[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1581/ The biblical origins of science], ''Journal of Creation'' 18(2):49–52, August 2004.</ref> only one ([[Edmund Halley]]) was a skeptic and another ([[Paracelsus]]) was a [[pantheism|pantheist]].

The other 50 were Christians, 30 of whom could be characterized as being devout Christians.<ref name="Origins" />

The other 50 were Christians, 30 of whom could be characterized as being devout Christians.<ref name="Origins" />

Stark believes that the [[Enlightenment]] was a ploy by [[Militant atheism|militant atheists]] to claim credit for the rise of science<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3274629/False-conflict-Christianity-is-not.html</ref>.

Stark believes that the [[Enlightenment]] was a ploy by [[Militant atheism|militant atheists]] to claim credit for the rise of science.<ref name="goliath.ecnext.com">http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3274629/False-conflict-Christianity-is-not.html</ref>

In ''False conflict: Christianity is not only compatible with Science - it created it''. Stark writes:

In ''False conflict: Christianity is not only compatible with Science - it created it''. Stark writes:

{{cquote|Recent historical research has debunked the idea of a "Dark Ages" after the "fall" of [[Roman Empire|Rome]]. In fact, this was an era of profound and rapid technological progress, by the end of which Europe had surpassed the rest of the world. Moreover, the so-called "Scientific Revolution" of the sixteenth century was a result of developments begun by religious scholars starting in the eleventh century. In my own academic research I have asked why these religious scholastics were interested in science at all. Why did science develop in Europe at this time? Why did it not develop anywhere else? I find answers to those questions in unique features of Christian [[theology]].  

{{cquote|Recent historical research has debunked the idea of a "Dark Ages" after the "fall" of [[Roman Empire|Rome]]. In fact, this was an era of profound and rapid technological progress, by the end of which Europe had surpassed the rest of the world. Moreover, the so-called "Scientific Revolution" of the sixteenth century was a result of developments begun by religious scholars starting in the eleventh century. In my own academic research I have asked why these religious scholastics were interested in science at all. Why did science develop in Europe at this time? Why did it not develop anywhere else? I find answers to those questions in unique features of Christian [[theology]].  

Even in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the leading scientific figures were overwhelmingly devout Christians who believed it their duty to comprehend God's handiwork. My studies show that the "Enlightenment" was conceived initially as a propaganda ploy by militant atheists attempting to claim credit for the rise of science. The falsehood that science required the defeat of religion was proclaimed by self-appointed cheerleaders like [[Voltaire]], [[Denis Diderot|Diderot]], and [[Edward Gibbon|Gibbon]], who themselves played no part in the scientific enterprise......<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3274629/False-conflict-Christianity-is-not.html</ref>}}

Even in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the leading scientific figures were overwhelmingly devout Christians who believed it their duty to comprehend God's handiwork. My studies show that the "Enlightenment" was conceived initially as a propaganda ploy by militant atheists attempting to claim credit for the rise of science. The falsehood that science required the defeat of religion was proclaimed by self-appointed cheerleaders like [[Voltaire]], [[Denis Diderot|Diderot]], and [[Edward Gibbon|Gibbon]], who themselves played no part in the scientific enterprise......<ref name="goliath.ecnext.com">http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3274629/False-conflict-Christianity-is-not.html</ref>}}

There is abundant amount of historical evidence which demonstrates a causal relationship between the Christian world of ideas and the rise of modern science.<ref>[https://streetapologist.wordpress.com/2014/10/29/the-history-of-science-vs-historical-revisionism/ THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE vs. HISTORICAL REVISIONISM]</ref><ref>[http://www.ldolphin.org/bumbulis/#anchor5343749 Christianity and the birth of modern science]</ref>

There is abundant amount of historical evidence which demonstrates a causal relationship between the Christian world of ideas and the rise of modern science.<ref name="streetapologist.wordpress.com">[https://streetapologist.wordpress.com/2014/10/29/the-history-of-science-vs-historical-revisionism/ THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE vs. HISTORICAL REVISIONISM]</ref><ref>[http://www.ldolphin.org/bumbulis/#anchor5343749 Christianity and the birth of modern science]</ref>

Professor [[Eric Kaufmann]], who specializes in demography and politics (and is an agnostic), wrote:

Professor [[Eric Kaufmann]], who specializes in demography and politics (and is an agnostic), wrote:

{{cquote|Worldwide, the [[Desecularization|march of religion]] can probably only be reversed by a renewed, self-aware secularism. Today, it appears exhausted and lacking in confidence... Secularism's greatest triumphs owe less to science than to popular social movements like nationalism, socialism and 1960s anarchist-liberalism. Ironically, secularism's demographic deficit means that it will probably only succeed in the twenty-first century if it can create a secular form of 'religious' enthusiasm." <ref>[http://www.sneps.net/uploadsepk/JQR%20Demography.pdf Shall the religious inherit the earth? - Eric Kaufmann]</ref>}}

{{cquote|Worldwide, the [[Desecularization|march of religion]] can probably only be reversed by a renewed, self-aware secularism. Today, it appears exhausted and lacking in confidence... Secularism's greatest triumphs owe less to science than to popular social movements like nationalism, socialism and 1960s anarchist-liberalism. Ironically, secularism's demographic deficit means that it will probably only succeed in the twenty-first century if it can create a secular form of 'religious' enthusiasm." <ref>[http://www.sneps.net/uploadsepk/JQR%20Demography.pdf Shall the religious inherit the earth? - Eric Kaufmann]</ref>}}

Internet atheists frequently engage in historical revisionism as far as the rise of modern science in Christianized Europe.<ref>[https://streetapologist.wordpress.com/2014/10/29/the-history-of-science-vs-historical-revisionism/ THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE vs. HISTORICAL REVISIONISM]</ref>

Internet atheists frequently engage in historical revisionism as far as the rise of modern science in Christianized Europe.<ref name="streetapologist.wordpress.com"/>

For more information, please see: [[Christianity and science]]

For more information, please see: [[Christianity and science]]

=== North Korea and the start of the Korean War ===

=== North Korea and the start of the Korean War ===

Since the beginning of the Korean War (1950–53), the communist government of North Korea, which practices [[state atheism]]<ref>Elizabeth Raum. North Korea. Series: Countries Around the World. Heinemann, 2012. ISBN 1432961330. p. 28: "North Korea is an atheist state. This means that people do not pray in public or attend places of worship. Buddhist temples exist from earlier times. They are now preserved as historic buildings, but they are not used for worship. A few Christian churches exist, but few people attend services. North Koreans do not celebrate religious holidays"</ref>, has repeatedly falsely denied that the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea (DPRK) launched the attack which began the war.

Since the beginning of the Korean War (1950–53), the communist government of North Korea, which practices [[state atheism]],<ref>Elizabeth Raum. North Korea. Series: Countries Around the World. Heinemann, 2012. ISBN 1432961330. p. 28: "North Korea is an atheist state. This means that people do not pray in public or attend places of worship. Buddhist temples exist from earlier times. They are now preserved as historic buildings, but they are not used for worship. A few Christian churches exist, but few people attend services. North Koreans do not celebrate religious holidays"</ref> has repeatedly falsely denied that the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea (DPRK) launched the attack which began the war.

=== Evolutionary pseudoscience and historical revisionism ===

=== Evolutionary pseudoscience and historical revisionism ===

The [[creation]] vs. evolution issue is a matter which deals with historical science and not experimental science.<ref>[http://johnhartnett.org/2014/06/17/evolution-is-not-operational-science/ Evolution is not operational science]</ref>  

The [[creation]] vs. evolution issue is a matter which deals with historical science and not experimental science.<ref>[http://johnhartnett.org/2014/06/17/evolution-is-not-operational-science/ Evolution is not operational science]</ref>  

[[File:Ernst Mayr.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Ernst Mayr]] ]]

[[File:Ernst Mayr.jpg|thumbnail|right|200px|[[Ernst Mayr]] ]]

The atheist [[Ernst Mayr]] was a [[Harvard]] biologist and served as director of Harvard's Museum of Comparative [[Zoology]] from 1961 to 1970.<ref>http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/bios/mayr.html</ref><ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/06/2/l_062_01.html</ref> Mayr was a prominent [[evolutionist]] and was referred to as "the [[Charles Darwin|Darwin]] of the 20th century". <ref>http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/daily/2005/02/04-mayr.html</ref>

The atheist [[Ernst Mayr]] was a [[Harvard]] biologist and served as director of Harvard's Museum of Comparative [[Zoology]] from 1961 to 1970.<ref>http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/bios/mayr.html</ref><ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/06/2/l_062_01.html</ref> Mayr was a prominent [[evolutionist]] and was referred to as "the [[Charles Darwin|Darwin]] of the 20th century".<ref>http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/daily/2005/02/04-mayr.html</ref>

Mayr wrote:  

Mayr wrote:  

=== Evolution and fraud/speculation posing as fact  ===

=== Evolution and fraud/speculation posing as fact  ===

[[Image:Nebraska Man.jpg|thumb|alt=human evolution|150px|left|[[Nebraska man]] was made famous by Henry Osborn of the American Museum of Natural History. Nebraska man turned out to be nothing more than a single pig-like tooth.]]

[[Image:Nebraska Man.jpg|thumb|alt=human evolution|150px|left|[[Nebraska man]] was made famous by Henry Osborn of the American Museum of Natural History. Nebraska man turned out to be nothing more than a single pig-like tooth.]]

Evolution is a [[pseudoscience]] that engages in historical revisionism and often has speculation posing as historical fact (see: [[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]] and [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Evolution and just so stories]]). In January of 2012, the  ''Journal of Research in Science Teaching'' published a study indicating that evolutionary belief is significantly based on gut feelings.<ref>

Evolution is a [[pseudoscience]] that engages in historical revisionism and often has speculation posing as historical fact (see: [[Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]] and [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Evolution and just so stories]]). In January 2012, the  ''Journal of Research in Science Teaching'' published a study indicating that evolutionary belief is significantly based on gut feelings.<ref>

*[http://www.livescience.com/18051-belief-evolution-gut-feeling.html Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling]

*[http://www.livescience.com/18051-belief-evolution-gut-feeling.html Belief in Evolution Boils Down to a Gut Feeling]

*[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.20449/abstract Feeling of Certainty: Uncovering a Missing Link Between Knowledge and Acceptance of Evolution]</ref> See also: [[Causes of evolutionary belief]]

*[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.20449/abstract Feeling of Certainty: Uncovering a Missing Link Between Knowledge and Acceptance of Evolution]</ref> See also: [[Causes of evolutionary belief]]

A notable case of a scientists using fraudulent material to promote the theory of evolution was the work of German scientist and [[atheism|atheist]] [[Ernst Haeckel]]. Noted evolutionist and [[Stephen Gould]], who held a [[agnostic|agnostic]] worldview<ref>http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2007/03/20/a-review-of-the-dawkins-delusion-by-alister-mcgrath/</ref> and promoted the notion of [[Non-Overlapping Magisteria|non-overlapping magesteria]], wrote the following regarding Ernst Haeckel's work in a March 2000 issue of ''Natural History'':

A notable case of a scientists using fraudulent material to promote the theory of evolution was the work of German scientist and [[atheism|atheist]] [[Ernst Haeckel]]. Noted evolutionist and [[Stephen Gould]], who held a [[agnostic]] worldview<ref>http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2007/03/20/a-review-of-the-dawkins-delusion-by-alister-mcgrath/</ref> and promoted the notion of [[Non-Overlapping Magisteria|non-overlapping magesteria]], wrote the following regarding Ernst Haeckel's work in a March 2000 issue of ''Natural History'':

{{cquote|"Haeckel’s forceful, eminently comprehensible, if not always accurate, books appeared in all major languages and surely exerted more influence than the works of any other scientist, including Darwin…in convincing people throughout the world about the validity of evolution... Haeckel had exaggerated the similarities [between embryos of different species] by idealizations and omissions. He also, in some cases — in a procedure that can only be called fraudulent — simply copied the same figure over and over again.…Haeckel’s drawings never fooled expert embryologists, who recognized his fudgings right from the start. Haeckel’s drawings, despite their noted inaccuracies, entered into the most impenetrable and permanent of all quasi-scientific literatures: standard student textbooks of biology... Once ensconced in textbooks, misinformation becomes cocooned and effectively permanent, because…textbooks copy from previous texts.... [W]e do, I think, have the right to be both astonished and ashamed by the century of mindless recycling that has led to the persistence of these drawings in a large number, if not a majority, of modern textbooks!"<ref name="haeckel">[http://www.creationism.org/wakefield/haeckel.htm "Another Evolution Fraud Exposed"] - Creationism.org, INVESTIGATING GENESIS SERIES.</ref>}}

{{cquote|"Haeckel’s forceful, eminently comprehensible, if not always accurate, books appeared in all major languages and surely exerted more influence than the works of any other scientist, including Darwin…in convincing people throughout the world about the validity of evolution... Haeckel had exaggerated the similarities [between embryos of different species] by idealizations and omissions. He also, in some cases — in a procedure that can only be called fraudulent — simply copied the same figure over and over again.…Haeckel’s drawings never fooled expert embryologists, who recognized his fudgings right from the start. Haeckel’s drawings, despite their noted inaccuracies, entered into the most impenetrable and permanent of all quasi-scientific literatures: standard student textbooks of biology... Once ensconced in textbooks, misinformation becomes cocooned and effectively permanent, because…textbooks copy from previous texts.... [W]e do, I think, have the right to be both astonished and ashamed by the century of mindless recycling that has led to the persistence of these drawings in a large number, if not a majority, of modern textbooks!"<ref name="haeckel">[http://www.creationism.org/wakefield/haeckel.htm "Another Evolution Fraud Exposed"] - Creationism.org, INVESTIGATING GENESIS SERIES.</ref>}}

==== Evolution and just so stories ====

==== Evolution and just so stories ====

[[File:Question-Evolution-Campaign.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|The [http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign] by [[Creation Ministries International]] is a worldwide campaign which poses 15 questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer.<ref>[http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign] by [[Creation Ministries International]]</ref> The 15 questions posed to evolutionists can be found [http://creation.com/15-questions HERE] ]]

[[File:Question-Evolution-Campaign.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|The [http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign] by [[Creation Ministries International]] is a worldwide campaign which poses 15 questions that evolutionists cannot satisfactorily answer.<ref>[http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign] by [[Creation Ministries International]]</ref> The 15 questions posed to evolutionists can be found [http://creation.com/15-questions HERE] ]]

The [[Question evolution! campaign]] poses 15 questions for [[evolution]]ists.<ref>[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]</ref>  

The [[Question evolution! campaign]] poses 15 questions for [[evolution]]ists.<ref name="15 questions for evolutionists">[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]</ref>  

Question 12 is:

Question 12 is:

{{cquote|Why is evolutionary ‘just-so’ story-telling tolerated? Evolutionists often use flexible story-telling to ‘explain’ observations contrary to evolutionary theory. NAS (USA) member Dr Philip Skell wrote, “Darwinian explanations for such things are often too supple: Natural selection makes humans self-centered and aggressive—except when it makes them altruistic and peaceable. Or natural selection produces virile men who eagerly spread their seed—except when it prefers men who are faithful protectors and providers. When an explanation is so supple that it can explain any behavior, it is difficult to test it experimentally, much less use it as a catalyst for scientific discovery.”<ref>[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]</ref>}}

{{cquote|Why is evolutionary ‘just-so’ story-telling tolerated? Evolutionists often use flexible story-telling to ‘explain’ observations contrary to evolutionary theory. NAS (USA) member Dr Philip Skell wrote, “Darwinian explanations for such things are often too supple: Natural selection makes humans self-centered and aggressive—except when it makes them altruistic and peaceable. Or natural selection produces virile men who eagerly spread their seed—except when it prefers men who are faithful protectors and providers. When an explanation is so supple that it can explain any behavior, it is difficult to test it experimentally, much less use it as a catalyst for scientific discovery.”<ref name="15 questions for evolutionists">[http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions for evolutionists]</ref>}}

For more information please see:

For more information please see:

''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and Rabbi Shmuley Boteach]] and [[Atheism and Debate]] and [[Atheism and cowardice]]

''See also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and Rabbi Shmuley Boteach]] and [[Atheism and Debate]] and [[Atheism and cowardice]]

[[Image:2402173645 c8e6168fe7.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins|thumbnail|200px|right|Richard Dawkins ]]

[[Image:2402173645 c8e6168fe7.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins|thumbnail|200px|right|Richard Dawkins]]

The [[New Atheism|new atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]] had a debate with Rabbi [[Shmuley Boteach]]. Rabbi Shmuley Boteach was named the London Times Preacher of the Year 2000 and is the author of 20 books.<ref>http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref>  

The [[New Atheism|new atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]] had a debate with Rabbi [[Shmuley Boteach]]. Rabbi Shmuley Boteach was named the London Times Preacher of the Year 2000 and is the author of 20 books.<ref name="beliefnet.com">http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref>  

Recently Rabbi Shmuley Boteach wrote:

Recently Rabbi Shmuley Boteach wrote:

{{cquote|...Dawkins attacked me on his website and denied that he and I had ever debated. My office quickly posted the full footage of a two hour debate which took place on October 23, 1996, a debate which Dawkins actually lost after a vote taken by the students as to which side, science or religion, caused more students to change their minds. In my article on the subject responding to his attack I was extremely respectful of Dr. Dawkins and was therefore shocked to receive a letter in return in which he accused me of speaking like Hitler. Had the noted scientist lost his mind? Hitler? Was this for real?<ref>http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref>}}

{{cquote|...Dawkins attacked me on his website and denied that he and I had ever debated. My office quickly posted the full footage of a two hour debate which took place on October 23, 1996, a debate which Dawkins actually lost after a vote taken by the students as to which side, science or religion, caused more students to change their minds. In my article on the subject responding to his attack I was extremely respectful of Dr. Dawkins and was therefore shocked to receive a letter in return in which he accused me of speaking like Hitler. Had the noted scientist lost his mind? Hitler? Was this for real?<ref name="beliefnet.com">http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref>}}

[[WorldNetDaily]] offers the following quotes of Rabbi Boteach about debate and the initial denial by Dawkins that the debate never took place:

[[WorldNetDaily]] offers the following quotes of Rabbi Boteach about debate and the initial denial by Dawkins that the debate never took place:

"In a vote at the end of the debate as to how many students had changed their minds after hearing the arguments, Dawkin's side was defeated and religion prevailed, which might account for his selective memory," he wrote.<ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61565</ref>}}

"In a vote at the end of the debate as to how many students had changed their minds after hearing the arguments, Dawkin's side was defeated and religion prevailed, which might account for his selective memory," he wrote.<ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61565</ref>}}

[[File:Shmuley Boteach.jpg|thumbnail|150px|left|Shmuley Boteach

[[File:Shmuley Boteach.jpg|thumbnail|150px|left|Shmuley Boteach

 

<small>(see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RebShmuley.jpg license agreement])</small> ]]

<small>(see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RebShmuley.jpg license agreement])</small> ]]

Rabbi Boteach reported at Beliefnet:

Rabbi Boteach reported at Beliefnet:

{{cquote|I also gave Dr. Dawkins the opportunity to even score by accepting a further debate, at the time and place of his choosing (within reason, of course), to which he has yet to respond.<ref>http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref>}}

{{cquote|I also gave Dr. Dawkins the opportunity to even score by accepting a further debate, at the time and place of his choosing (within reason, of course), to which he has yet to respond.<ref name="beliefnet.com">http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Judaism/2008/05/Richard-Dawkins-Shameful-Attack.aspx</ref>}}

A video of the debate that Dawkins lost to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach is available at Rabbi Schely Boteach's website.

A video of the debate that Dawkins lost to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach is available at Rabbi Schely Boteach's website.

''See also:'' [[Atheism and morality]]

''See also:'' [[Atheism and morality]]

Not possessing a [[Religion|religious]] basis for [[morality]], which can provide a basis for [[Objective morality|objective morality]], [[Atheism|atheists]] are fundamentally [[Moral_relativism|incapable]] of having a coherent system of morality.<ref>

Not possessing a [[Religion|religious]] basis for [[morality]], which can provide a basis for [[objective morality]], [[Atheism|atheists]] are fundamentally [[Moral relativism|incapable]] of having a coherent system of morality.<ref>

*[http://www.paulcopan.com/articles/pdf/God-naturalism-morality.pdf God, Naturalism, and the Foundations of Morality] by

*[http://www.paulcopan.com/articles/pdf/God-naturalism-morality.pdf God, Naturalism, and the Foundations of Morality] by

Paul Copan

Paul Copan

{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}

{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}

[[Category: Atheism]]

[[Category:Atheism]]