As a devout humanist, I must protest the presentation (The Utah Humanist, October 1998) of Dawkins' theory of memes a s though it were fact rather than science fiction--and that, too on the heels of a discussion of the scientific method.

Judging by that method, Dawkins' notions are no more scientific than creation myths, unsupported as they are by a single shred of objective evidence to verify the existence of "units of information analogous to genes which transmit ideas..." But to build at length upon this unsupported ideas is to make kissing cousins of pseudo-science and religion.

The one factor above all that distinguishes humanists from true believers and philosophers is their insistence upon evidence. See Carl Sagan as quoted by Brenda Wright: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Neither Dawkins nor his redactor supply that, yet the piece, like religions masquerades as fact. The difference between what Dawkins thinks and what he knows should have been made unmistakably clear.

--John Hendrickson