Quote Originally Posted by truthpaste View Post
Dawkins is certainly intelligent. But there can be a chasm between knowledge and wisdom.
I don't have time (atm) to address all your points and will return to your comments when time allows, but I would ask why (apart from eternal convenience) you like to label the bible "unproven myths" - are you suggesting that none of it contains accurate science and history (as we understand both those disciplines today)?

Also, could you explain this statement >> "Those who are interested in science (and which means truth)" << in more detail please?
I don't really want to get into the religious stuff as it gets nowhere - as what believers consider to be proof does not pass the threshold of being proof as understood by the majority of educated people.

I merely wanted to comment on the misinterpretation of Dawkins' comment.

As far as the meaning of the word 'science', the etymological root comes from Latin ('Scientia' meaning 'knowledge/to know something) and came to English via Norman-French.

It's true that the modern usage has narrowed down to what the Oxford Languages Dictionary describes as 'the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained.' - but it's still about knowledge and the search for it, albeit in certain fields.