pete wrote Dawkins and I read Darwin. What am I like?

Dawkins has the advantage of being alive, being a professor, a scientist and standard text on evolutionary biology and especially genetics.

Darwin has the advantage of being dead hence he knows whether he or his wife got it right.

I wouldn't hold my breath.

Just to take issue with the snail. You can't let science down but you can let religions down. After all,science just is, whilst religions require people to give credibility to man made constructs.

I note that when my thesis was subjected to a viva, I got it with dissent from one assessor. All of us in the room were "scientists" of various claim, but none of us let science down by disagreement. In fact, a key equation of mine has been refined since, and I sat on his viva. I was delighted to accept my oversights.

You can only "let science down" by dishonest research or fraudulent use of the word, "creationist science" being an oxymoron that springs to mind in the latter category.