The first thing to observe is that Mooney and Kirshenbaum are confused about the nature of the problem. The goal is not to get more Americans to merely accept the truth of evolution (or any other scientific theory); the goal is to get them to value the principles of reasoning and educated discourse that now make a belief in evolution obligatory. Doubt about evolution is merely a symptom of an underlying condition; the condition is faith itself—conviction without sufficient reason, hope mistaken for knowledge, bad ideas protected from good ones, good ideas obscured by bad ones, wishful thinking elevated to a principle of salvation, etc. Mooney and Kirshenbaum seem to imagine that we can get people to value intellectual honesty by lying to them.
I point this out because Dawkins still does not understand what Biblical "faith" is. The Bible does not say that God rewards "conviction without sufficient reason, hope mistaken for knowledge, bad ideas protected from good ones, good ideas obscured by bad ones, wishful thinking elevated to a principle of salvation, etc." When I hear people spewing such ignorance, and refuse to be corrected, I find it nauseating. We have to keep explaining it. Hopefully one day, God will open such people minds so that they will understand Hebrews 11:1-2, finally.
1 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
No where does it say that it is wishful thinking, or hope in lieu of knowledge. Why constantly argue and debate against a position that Christians do not hold? Silly me, of course, the definition of faith Dawkins gives is the only one he understands.
Sam Harris on accommodationism - Sam Harris - The Moral Landscape - RichardDawkins.net