I've browsed through the UK Apologetics site and articles and, I must say, I'm very disappointed with the amount of misinformation and poor research. You claim Darwinism is "bad science" yet offer no proof for your assertion. Has it occured to you, that even if evolution is false, that doesn't prove creation is true? Maybe both are untrue. Also, your remarks on Dawkins are unkind. In your review of his book, The God Delusion, you never really answered his arguments or addressed his thesis. You only harped on and/or split hairs on trivial grammatical issues. It sounds like you really couldn't counter any of his brilliant and stunningly well-researched arguments.
Perhaps it would be nice to allow readers to post comments on articles. Allowing comments would go a long way toward remedying the bias on your site and cleaning up the many factual inaccuracies you post. I'm sure God won't mind if you adopt a less arrogant attitude. Also, I think atheists aren't your main audience. A lot of Christians are reading your articles and are wondering why you're so conceited and so snotty about stuff?
Jesus saves, but he also gave us brains. It appears you're afraid of using yours. Have you really let Dawkins get to you? It seems like you can't successfully rebut his arguments and now are just blustering blindly.
Thanks and God Bless.
UK Apologetics Reply:
Okay. You say that you have, "browsed through the UK Apologetics site," but you do not appear to have actually read very much!
In fact, we are well-known for being a Christian Apologetics site which has considered not only evolution in general terms but many of its specific claims and arguments at great depth! Therefore it is obvious that you have read very little on our site. More likely, as a keen evolutionist, you have started out with a prejudiced mind which has then coloured everything. In contrast to you, our site has been visited by a few people who actually earn their living by lecturing on facets of evolution and several of these people have privately admitted to me that the whole structure of modern evolution teaching is flawed. I tell them that they should 'come out' and admit just that, but they tell me that their careers would be ruined by doing so.
You appear to be a disciple of Dawkins ("brilliant and stunningly well-researched arguments" in 'The God Delusion'?? You must be joking! Sometimes Professor Dawkins has indeed produced a few good arguments, but never in that book!) You have to understand that Richard Dawkins is primarily a propagandist for atheism and, frankly, a disciple of hatred towards Theism. But many evolutionists (to their credit) are embarrassed by things he has said, as have been some atheists. I should add here that though you talk of my review of his book, 'The God Delusion,' I never claim to have reviewed that book, although I have certainly reviewed other books, including one book which critiqued the Dawkins approach. On our site we have about two reviews of 'The God Delusion,' including, as I recall, one from Alister McGrath, a one-time atheist, now generally considered to be possibly Britain's senior evangelical theologian. Certainly, I have made a few comments about the poor logic in the 'God Delusion' but the two reviews of that book which are on our site are from other people.
As philosopher Alvin Plantinga has stated,
"'The God Delusion' is full of bluster and bombast, but it really doesn't give even the slightest reason for thinking belief in God mistaken, let alone a "delusion." The naturalism that Dawkins embraces, furthermore, in addition to its intrinsic unloveliness and its dispiriting conclusions about human beings and their place in the universe, is in deep self-referential trouble. There is no reason to believe it; and there is excellent reason to reject it." (From 'The Dawkins Confusion' by Alvin Plantinga, Books and Culture, March/April, 2007. It may be found in full here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/002/1.21.html).
Contrary to your (unfounded) assertion that we are critical of evolution without ever explaining where it is wrong, or offering alternative explanations, one may find a wealth of articles exposing the fallacy of macro-evolution on this page alone. You are entirely wrong, we have gone into this thing at depth and we always encourage others to do so!
Further, you apparently would like us to turn our site into a 'blog' site in which anybody can come along and add comments; we have looked at that possibility in the past but rejected it, and we will continue to reject it. We want UK Apologetics to represent the very best Christian Apologetics, the latest thinking, the very best resources. We have no intention of going down a road in which various people - who would be unknown to us - could add comments which would then have to be continually monitored and checked. We do know of a Christian site which went down that very path, a path which eventually led to a whole site having to be deleted. We want to teach, we want to educate, but we have no intention of setting up a sounding board for argumentalists.
Your attack on our website, and on our opposition to evolution, concludes with some very contradictory things. You say, "Jesus saves..." and then your final comment to me is, "Thanks and God bless." But I do not want the blessing of your 'god,' a 'god' whom, I must imagine, probably looks something like a cross between Charles Darwin and Richard Dawkins. In complete contrast, My God, Who furnishes His people with many blessings, is the God of the Holy Bible.
I actually welcome positive criticism in which visitors suggest where our site could improve, and we have acted on several of these over the last few years but I would prefer you not to waste our time with insulting and derogatory comments which only reveal that you know nothing of our work. You are obviously blinded by the 'light' of Darwin and Dawkins, well, you may have them, but you should never offer criticism based on inadequate knowledge and/or poor research.
Robin A. Brace. April 28th, 2011.
Dawkin's Delusional Dogma Defeated is our 2007 review of Alister McGrath's book which critiques 'The God Delusion.'
In 2009 I also wrote Should Christians Be Naive and Simplistic, which does refer to Professor Dawkins in passing.