Reply to comment
Sagan, not Dawkins
July 23, 2007 by K-Fed (not verified), 2 years 17 weeks ago
Comment id: 24317
Reply
About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.Recommended
Andrew Sullivan Dan Sullivan Doug Arellanes Emmanuelle Richard Faith Sullivan Fred Bortz Heather Havrilesky Henry Copeland Kate Sullivan Ken Layne lagreenbean.com LAist.com Maggie Sullivan Matt Welch NewYorkology Opinion L.A. Ron Kaye Slashdot Steve Elzer & Family TheNewsroom.org Thor Garcia Tony Pierce Wonkette OlderThanks CNET for naming Science Blog one of your Blog 100!
That quote is actually Car; Sagan, who was quoted by Dawkins. I don't know if it could be said to reflect Dawkins' sentiment. Sagan was lukewarm to Pandeism, but wouldn't rule it out (and of course Pandeists say that quote is supportive of Pandeism). But Dawkins would say that even Pandeism (or any other Deism) introduces a useless God into the equation, and that Pantheism is no God at all.