
Most British scientists feel Richard Dawkins misrepresents science - danielam
http://news.rice.edu/2016/10/31/most-british-scientists-cited-in-study-feel-richard-dawkins-work-misrepresents-science-2/
======
nabla9
Religion, when it conflicts with other people in society, is politics.
Dawkings tries to actively change people's minds. It's political crusade. Not
scientific one.

Politically influencing people is not scientific presentation. There is
tension between representing facts and effect. If Dawkins wants to have
maximum political effect, he must optimize his fact/demagoque ratio for
maximum impact. It's probably enough for Dawkins to be just little more
accurate and convincing on his critique than opposition to turn the minds of
people and win arguments.

I have always understood that when Dawkins talks about religion, he is not
representing scientific approach. It's not even his field of research. It's
unfortunate if he is conveying the false impression of solid science. He uses
valid scientific arguments, but his writings as a whole are not coherent
scientific argument against religion.

------
lordCarbonFiber
What a terrible title. 137 interviews, of those 48 scientists mentioned
Dawkins (unprompted) of those 80% felt he "in some way misrepresented science
or the scientific process".

It's also unclear if they have a problem with the man's scientific work (he
is/was an evolutionary biologist first) or is hardline stance against
religion.

Nothing to see here, just click bait at work.

~~~
dzdt
Yes. Really: most of a self-selected group of scientists who chose to bring up
Dawkins as an example brought him up as a negative example.

------
cyphreak
Science is becoming too politicized

~~~
Esperaux
Science has always been too politicized

