Yours is one example of clear logic among few, and I agree. Objective truth exists. But Dawkins himself states his convictions about evolution as a BELIEF, not an absolute truth:
"'I believe, but I cannot prove, that all life, all intelligence, all creativity and all 'design' anywhere in the universe is the direct or indirect product of Darwinian natural selection,' said Prof Dawkins."
His disciples think they can slam themselves into the front seat of education in the name of objective truth, when in fact their belief is just as much subject to scientific prodding and questions as that of ID'ers.
Yours is one example of clear logic among few, and I agree. Objective truth exists.
Thank you.
But Dawkins himself states his convictions about evolution as a BELIEF, not an absolute truth:
So?
His disciples think they can slam themselves into the front seat of education in the name of objective truth, when in fact their belief is just as much subject to scientific prodding and questions as that of ID'ers.
ROFL!!! Nice try, but no. What you're missing is that Dawkins's belief (about the validity of evolutionary biology) is based on a vast amount of evidence and testing, whereas that of the ID'ers not only is not, it has already been falsified in many respects.
So no, as much as you'd like to play the usual creationist card of, "it's all just beliefs, so ours might be just as valid as yours", it just doesn't fly.
Not all beliefs are created equal. There are informed beliefs, there are well-tested and well-supported beliefs -- and there are also flawed beliefs which don't stand up to close examination.
While no many may have a handle on Absolute Truth(tm), the former is vastly more likely to be much closer to Truth than the latter.