[Copernicus]

The thread is probably more SMP than politics, but wth.

"He writes, appears on tv and works to advance the scientific knowledge disputing the idea of a creator.. this certainly "interferes with other's beliefs"."

Again, I disagree with the characterization of his works as trying to interfering with other's theistic beliefs. He fully acknowledges that you cannot prove the non-existence of anything, and the beliefs of theism cannot ultimately be disproven, precisely because they are based on faith not facts.

His purpose is not to change those beliefs, his purpose is to not allow holders of those beliefs to erroneously conflate them with science.

Now you may argue that a creationist's "belief" that science supports the existence of god is a "theistic" belief, and that belief is what Dawkins is interfering with. I don't agree with the premise that it is a "theistic" belief though.

Science has rules, axioms, procedures and protocols that are precisely designed to replace "belief" with "knowledge". When a creationist attempts to use science, but does so improperly (albeit unwittingly, since we are discussing his genuine "belief")Dawkins isnt attacking the creationist's belief he is attacking the creationist's science. The bad science in creationism can be exposed without challenging the underlying belief in god.

Its a fine line, certainly, but it is an important one if science is to continue to be done free of the taints of superstition.