mp,

Dawkin's newest book is a must read for anyone who gives any credence at all to the Creationist theory. Also, he does always stick to science. The fact is he believes that
science and religion are at odds with each other is to my mind indisputable. Any criticism of religion will be perceived by religious people as an "attack" and this is a misinterpretation of Dawkins and his intent. The "attackers" are the defensive religionists
who probably doubt their own beliefs deep down so find it necessary to accuse those who reject their claims as "attackers". No one is being attacked here. Maybe you could make the argument that outmoded ideas of religion which have no basis in reality are being "attacked" in the same way that drug addiction or prostitution is being "attacked". But this has nothing to do with personal attacks on any one. This idea of "attacking" is a specious argument that begs the question and is an ad hominem as well.

I personally know a lot of religious people and wouldn't dream of attacking them in any way however I don't agree with their religious views. Many are fine and decent people in my book and I respect some and love others. This is not a war about people. It's a war of ideas and should remain on that level otherwise the discussion degenerates into name-calling. It is unfortunately a war that is instigated by religious people in power who want to enforce their ideas on everyone else. National Day of Prayer for example by the US Senate and Congress. What was Billy Graham doing advising presidents? His son is now an advisor to the Tea Party. BTW, take "god" out of the Pledge of Allegiance since this discriminates against non-believers. Take it off of our coins, as well.

"Cell biology has more in common with the ideas of Lemarck than Darwin."

Not true. Evolution was presented as a dramatically different idea when it was presented. Studies of DNA and RNA confirm Darwin's great theorum. It's too bad he didn't live to see them materialize.

Lamarck apparently bypassed any genetic information which was not available at the time of his suppositions. Now, with knowledge of genetics, Lamarck's theories are disqualified. The stretching of giraffe's necks have to do with genetics, not totally environmental factors.