Charlie Brooker's Screen Burn

Charlie Brooker is not a scientist. But he revels in science, and in the Philosophical Materialism that is hawked by Richard Dawkins: not exactly science, but Atheism with phony scientism overtones. The latest from Dawkins during this “Year of Darwin”, apparently is his “documentary” video called “the Genius of Darwin”, a paean to the father of the evolutionary movement. Brooker’s article is intended to call attention to Dawkins video, presented on TV.

I have not found the video to be available in my region, but it will undoubtedly become available at some point since it will likely contain a damnation of religion in general and probably specifically of Christianity. These are always popular subjects with TV producers. I have not seen it, but I have read Dawkins and I know that he is unable to discern his religious agenda from scientific methodology and its limitations. His affection for science is far exceeded by his hatred of religion, especially Christianity, and this imbalance reflects in everything he says and does. In other words, objectivity cannot be expected from one with a worldview skewed toward such hatred.

But back to the author of the article in question. Brooker is not content with current myths concerning how evil religion is so he makes some up. His three best points are as follows:

”1) Scientists want to fill our world with chemicals and killer robots;

2) They don't appreciate the raw beauty of nature, maaan; and

3) They're always spoiling our fun, pointing out homeopathy doesn't work or ghosts don't exist EVEN THOUGH they KNOW we REALLY, REALLY want to believe in them.”

This serves to prove that those who are skeptical of Dawkins and his agenda are

”Many people [who] find bald, unvarnished truths so disturbing, they prefer to ram their heads in the sand and start dreaming at the first sign of scientific reality”

It is unfortunate that the Guardian allows publication of articles based primarily on juvenile nonsense rather than on rational content. It is apparent that Dawkins has had an intellectual affect on the writer; Brooker easily adopts the Ad Hominem tactic of ridiculing those who disagree, and setting up absurd positions by which to mock all who differ in opinion. This is one of the main intellectual approaches used in Atheist campaigns. PZ Meyers posted, “Ridicule Works”, and mocking is the main feature of his “science blog”. Dawkins calls his followers “brights” and his sceptics “fleas”. He has ridiculed Antony Flew rather than answer to the issues involved in Flew’s conversion to deism from his life-long Atheism.

Since the “bald, unvarnished truths” to which Brooker refers are undoubtedly the standard forensic and theoretical “just so stories” lamented by Stephen J. Gould - yet standardized as "fact" in biological circles - there is a definite dichotomy between what Brooker believes and actual reality. Brooker in no way questions any of the "evidence":

"Since Darwin's death, Dawkins points out, the evidence confirming his discovery has piled up and up and up, many thousand feet above the point of dispute.

Having accepted in advance the Philosophical Materialism espoused by Dawkins and Darwin, not to mention the extrapolated story-telling, Brooker posits no thoughts of utility in analyzing what Dawkins presents. In short Brooker shows all the signs of being an Atheist scientism groupie, agog at the radiance of the celebrity of Dawkins and Darwin, and content to engage in mockery rather than mental exercise.

But that doesn’t mean that the video by Dawkins should be ignored. It should provide a decent look into the agenda of an Atheist hiding behind an unproven science while declaring it to be truth. It’s what Dawkins is paid to do.