Phil Plait - Don't be a dick

Of course, PZ had to chime in."There is a fair point being made, that there are multiple strategies that work to convince people to rethink bad ideas, and they don't all involve punching people in the faceand many of the best strategies do involve politely listening and criticizing. But I think the best ideas involve a combination of willingness to listen and politely engage, and a forthright core of assertiveness and confrontation tactical dickishness, if you want to call it that."
The Dick Delusion

I enjoy the comedy of it as well. However, I think we can all agree that while PZ is right on many things he can also be a dick, and unapologetically so. While Plait never named names I think we can all agree that he had PZ (or someone like PZ) in mind when he made those comments. PZ knows the buttons to push, and theists are all too willing to produce the reaction that PZ is looking for.

And that is exactly what we have in the form of peer reviewed scientific papers. They are ignored, both by creationists AND the general public. What is even worse is that the popular press tends to mangle the science found in the primary literature, even though they may have the best of intentions.People are not Vulcans. We are not convinced by logic and reasoning alone. There does need to be an emotional connection. While ridicule is one of the baser emotions, it does work. Like PZ said, perhaps "tactical dickishness" is the way to go. Science with a few barbs attached.

Actually, evolutionists are trying to figure out how species change over time and how we ended up with the biodiversity we see today by using the scientific method. That's it. We leave the "truth" to philosophers and preachers.In a more general sense, there are those of us who think science is important to the progress of our culture. We also think that there are no sacred cows. All natural phenomena are open to investigation. This includes species diversification, the origin of life, and how universes are produced. We also believe that human curiosity is a very important human attribute, and the scientific method is one of the best tools we can use to complement this curiosity. We believe that gaining knowledge just for the purpose of knowing is a noble enterprise. Knowing that there are massive black holes at the center of galaxies may not improve a pesticide, but does that make it any less important?What we have a problem with is that some theists believe that certain topics are off limits based solely on their religious beliefs. We balk at this, and I think rightly so. We are against the idea that knowledge is a bad thing because it may conflict with belief. We think that a belief that can not stand up scrutiny is not one worth having. Because the fence-sitters vote, and those votes can influence science education. For those of us who see science as a positive influence on the progress of our society this it is important to preserve science education. If you disagree, then please tell us how we would be better off with a generation of children who receive a sub-standard science education. Do you really think the Dover school board would have introduced ID into the school curiculum if it weren't for the support amongst the people who voted for them? Ahh yes, falling on your sword I see. You disparage others with the thing that is most important to your worldview. Creationists are so fond of the Polish Firing Squad. Yes, it is very similar to the sport of not playing golf, or the hobby of not collecting stamps.

The question here is whether or not atheism is a religion. Convincing others of your conclusion is not a religion. It is called discussion and debate.