Since the turn of the millennium, a new militancy has arisen among religious skeptics in response to three threats to science and freedom: (1) attacks against evolution education and stem cell research; (2) breaks in the barrier separating church and state leading to political preferences for some faiths over others; and (3) fundamentalist terrorism here and abroad. Full Story »
Posted by Leo Romero
This make nice article strikes me as an attempt to reassure religious subscribers that they don't necessarily accept these writers' views; in so doing it makes the relationship of science and this commercial magazine a little fuzzy. After all, Dawkins is a scientist and if they don't accept his scientific credentials they should say so. Otherwise this is having it both ways--claiming that they are not polite enough is not what you call scientific and, given that we have a president and politicians who have no respect for anyone with a contrary opinion, I find the 'letter' gratuitous advice and damaging to Scientific American's credibility. dci
