I give you Mr Peter Hitchens:-
Taken from here:-Why do they need to be so rude?
The arrogant rudeness of the materialists in any discussion of Darwinism is astonishing, and indicative of a lack of confidence in their case. One cannot even see anything wrong in equating Christianity, the foundation of our civilisation, and the reasoned basis on which man has sought to understand the universe, with Holocaust denial. Really, must we sink to this level? If people don't like Christianity, then let their objections to it at least be respectable ones. If one thing has convinced me that this controversy is worth pursuing, it has been the invariable discourtesy and pride of the dogmatic Darwinists, which reminds me so strongly of my own attitude and tactics in my Trotskyist days, when I was concealing my own doubts from myself by rudeness to critics who (I secretly knew) had a point.
If they would substitute patience for impatience, and civility for petulant and superior dismissal, they might learn something from their opponents. They should ask themselves whether their lack of manners is an attempt to defend themselves against any such danger.
The self-proclaimed 'Clear-Thinking' derides as 'weak' my alleged discussion of evolutionary biology. But I don't in fact discuss it. I never have. I am not qualified to do so and cheerfully recognise that. All I discuss is the much simpler question of certainty versus uncertainty. Even the most dogmatic evolutionists concede that they have no idea how the process they believe in began, and most sensible evolutionists realise that there are problems with the later stages of the theory which are not easily solved (hence such concepts as 'punctuated equilibrium' and 'saltation'). If, as I so often say, the theory were settled and proven by its predictive ability, then it would not have at least two contending schools of thought about how the process actually takes place. It doesn't take a biologist to see that there is room for thought here, space which Mr 'Thinking' seems anxious to fill with sneers. I refer him, as I have often referred the increasingly bilious Wesley Crosland, to the recent thoughts of the atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel on 'Intelligent Design'. Professor Nagel loves thought and dispute, and adheres to reason for its own sake, because he knows we're lost without it.
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
A self-confessed ignorance of evolutionary biology in no way prevents him from pontificating on that very subject.
