God vs. Science Makes the Cover of Time Magazine

 
Read the "debate" between Richard Dawkins and Francis Collins in the Nov. 13 issue of Time magazine [online version] or see the summary at CNN.com.

It's not much of a debate. Collins mouths all the superstitious platitudes of those who think they are rational believers. His particular schtick is the proof of God by the existence of a universal sense of morals. He asks Dawkins whether he believes in moral law and Dawkins replies, "Even the question you're asking has no meaning to me." Collins replies, "I think that is a fundamental difference between us. I'm glad we identified it."

What? Is Collins really this naive? Does he really not know that atheists reject the idea of a God-given sense of right and wrong?

Here's my favorite part of the debate; Dawkins is answering the following question posed by TIME, "Doesn't the very existence of miracles throw off science?"

If ever there was a slamming of the door in the face of constructive investigation, it is the word miracle. To a medieval peasant, a radio would have seemed like a miracle. All kinds of things may happen which we by the light of today's science would classify as a miracle just as medieval science might a Boeing 747. Francis keeps saying things like "From the perspective of a bliever." Once you buy into the position of faith, then suddenly you find yourself losing all of your natural skepticism and your scientific—really scientific—credibility. I'm sorry to be so blunt.