* RSR's List of Evidence Against Richard Dawkins: We invite you to read this brief page and join those who've learned that Richard Dawkins is not a scientist building an argument from evidence, but rather, a promoter of a theory that grew out of the greatest possible bias.
* The Richard Dawkins 3-to-1 Evolution Challenge: Research in preparation for an upcoming debate led Bob Enyart and his associate Will Duffy to Oxford University in the United Kingdom. With the success of Real Science Radio's PZ Myers Trochlea Challenge (see the popular evolutionist's reply here), the guys decided to hand deliver a copy of this Dawkins 3-to-1 Challenge to the office of professor emeritus Richard Dawkins, who lectures there for a course titled, Science Literacy: Evolution for Non-Scientists.
Text of Dawkins 3-to-1 Evolution Challenge: Let's ignore all the wild complexity of the genetic code and try to give a Darwinian explanation for one of the simplest aspects of our DNA. Richard Dawkins, drawing on your lifetime of studying evolution, can you describe, in as vague terms as you'd like, how the 3-to-1 pattern could arise by a non-directed material process, such that three genetic letters code for one amino acid?
Because we are creationist here in Denver at Real Science Radio, we can readily acknowledge that the laws of physics have no symbolic logic functions. Thus, a half century of trying by naturalists was doomed to fail, because just as you will have no answer to this challenge, there is no conceivable answer, because it cannot ever happen, even given infinite time.
* Dawkins Defining "Nothing": Many secularists claim that nothing created everything. Pretending that atheists have made progress in explaining how the universe could arise from "nothing", in this 2-minute clip, Dawkins tries to explain what "nothing" must be...
* ORIGIN the Film: RSR interviewed Lad Allen, producer of ORIGIN, which presents cutting-edge research examining the question that has baffled secular science: How did life on Earth begin? Most researchers insist it arose through simple chemistry that—without direction or plan—transformed inanimate matter into the first living cell. Yet, this explanation is devoid of evidence and unsatisfying, even to many of its most ardent supporters. As ORIGIN exposes the flaws of materialistic theories, you’ll travel through a molecular universe to encounter extraordinary biological engineering fundamental to the survival of every organism that has ever existed, engineering that points clearly to intelligence and mind.
* Dawkins Answers Ben Stein About God: Dawkins (regarding biology) and Stephen Hawking (regarding physics) both admit that their own areas of study exhibit what appears to be design. Yet when Ben Stein asked Richard Dawkins what, after death, he would say to God if he met him, Dawkins quoted another atheist, "Sir, why did you take such pains to hide yourself?" Huh? Dawkins accuses God of hiding Himself. Yet he and virtually the entire atheistic world admits that to maintain their own disbelief that they have to explain away a world full of evidence:
- Dawkins: "Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed..."
- Hawking: "The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron. ... The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life."
- Paul: "Since the creation of the world God's invisible attributes are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made..."
- Stein & Dawkins: See Ben Stein ask Richard Dawkins about God in the following excerpt from RSR's Fine Tuning film. They'll appear within two minutes from where this clip starts. Just click Play...
Dawkins wrote his acknowedgment in his signature book, The Blind Watchmaker (page 1), and Hawking in his A Brief History of Time (page 125). Anticipating their admissions, 2,000 years earlier the Apostle Paul wrote that God is "clearly seen" as the Creator, "being understood by the things that are made" so that unbelievers "are without excuse" (Rom. 1:20). Consider two lesbians who "marry" while dressed in a tuxedo and a gown, affirming even in the midst of their rebellion what Jesus taught, that God "made them male and female" (Mat. 19:4; Mark 10:6). So while atheists will claim that evidence for God's existence is lacking, they spend their careers trying to explain away the overwhleming evidence that they openly admit appears everywhere they look.
* Dawkins Sneaks "Intelligence" into his Weasel and Biomorph Software: As apparently always happens with "natural selection" computer simulations designed to prove evolution, in his Blind Watchmaker weasel (see below) and biomorph software, Dawkins sneaks in goal seeking. He does this even though the only non-negotiable about evolution is that it is nondirected. (The very concept of theistic evolution, by the way, as a guided unguided process, is inherently contradictory.) Materiallistic natural selection processes, as defined, lack look ahead. The intelligent (and perhaps, dishonest) software designer claims that he's created a simulation of processes that demonstrate design without intelligence. The pro-Darwin evolution simulators have attempted to show that biological function can arise apart from intelligence, yet they demonstrate the exact opposite. In the 1980s, having already studied AI at Arizona State University and having worked in the simulation department at McDonnell Douglas Helicopter Company, while reading Watchmaker, Bob Enyart nearly gagged at the repulsive scam of Dawkins' weasel "simulation", seeing it as even more absurd than his biomorphs...
Meanwhile, creationists have made available online the stunning Mendel's Accountant evolution simulator that doesn't hide but makes explicit the assumptions which evolutionists are invited to set as favorably to their theory as they want to. And see also the 2012 nine-hour effort that required 128 computers to simulate a cell division of the simplest known single-celled organism. Welcome to Real Science Radio!
* Dawkins Says Whale Fossils among the Best Evidence for Evolution: Richard Dawkins says that "one of the best examples" of intermediate fossils "is whales." However that the discoverers themselves of the most famous whale "transition" fossils admit their fakery, on video no less. See that at rsr.org/whales in our stunning and bulleted List of Evidence Against Whale Evolution.
* Dawkins' Greatest Show Tanks in RSR's Interview of Jonathan Sarfati: The world's number one creation author Dr. Jonathan Sarfati takes on the world's number one evolution author Richard Dawkins in the battle of the books. See for yourself that Dawkins' latest book, The Greatest Show on Earth is soundly refuted by Sarfati's The Greatest Hoax on Earth! In Don-air discussion with Dr. Sarfati, Bob Enyart re-airs a caller from 1997 who asked about Dawkins and Bob pointed out then that in all Dawkins' books:
...this famous atheist doesn't give evidence for evolution: he only assumes it is true. Dr. Sarfati agrees and quotes from Dawkins own book in which he admits that he had never given the evidence for evolution. Huh! [Update: When BEL obtained audio of Richard Dawkins admitting this very thing, we produced the brief YouTube video embedded below: Dawkins Proves Creationist Right.)
* Dawkins Among the Many Atheists Supposing Life Came Here from Outer Space: Atheists don't even HAVE a theory of origins because increasingly, the things they would need to explain their origins hypotheses merely assume as pre-existing. Richard Dawkinis (see just below), Francis Crick of DNA discovery fame, Fred Hoyle of stellar nucleosynthesis fame, astrophysicst Carl Sagan of Pale Blue Dot fame, Stephen Hawking of black hole fame, NASA's Dr. Mary Voytek of water-is-the-problem fame, along with many exo- and astrobiologists, are among the thousands of materialists making the arguments that are referenced in one way or another on the half-million web pages (as of January 2020) that mention either panspermia or directed panspermia. Water, by the way, is considered the key to originate life only by ignoring what NASA's senior astrobiologist Voytek admitted to us that because water is the universal solvent, it is not the answer but the abiogenesis problem because it ruthelessly dissovles "prebiotic" molecules. The list of abiogenesis killers, that is, the resources that are vital to maintain life but that are destructive of prebiotic molecules, includes water, sunlight, ions, and oxygen. And anyway, as Wikipedia points out, "Panspermia studies concentrate not on how life began, but on methods that may distribute it in the Universe." Point taken.
* Dawkins' Thoughts About Aliens Are Revealing: This is hardly novel, because forensic scientists routinely distinguish between intent and natural causes. But in the excerpt transcribed just below it's fun to see Richard Dawkins, who eschews Intelligent Design, admit that molecular biology may very well be able to identify intentional design in living organisms. Dawkins claims about aliens implies much about alien physiology which seems to undermine the claim that Darwinism is theoretically falsifiable. Consider these two points. First, on Intelligent Design, in Ben Stein's movie Expelled, Dawkins admits that molecular biology could provide the evidence that life on earth was intelligently designed. And if so...
(1) Richard Dawkins' Aliens Validate the Intelligent Design Effort (see transcript) when he was asked about the origin of life on earth and said:
"It could come about in the following way. It could be that at some earlier time somewhere in the universe a civilization evolved, by probably some kind of Darwinian means, to a very, very high level of technology, and designed a form of life that they seeded onto perhaps this planet. Now that is a possibility, and an intriguing possibility. And I suppose that it's possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry and molecular biology. You might find a signature of some sort of designer… And that designer could well be a higher intelligence from elsewhere in the universe." -Dawkins
So Dawkins actually says about life on earth that it could be that it may have originated from a higher intelligence, from somewhere in outer space, with aliens who seeded life on earth. Yet that is what ruins scientists careers and even gets them fired: for saying that genetic evidence might indicate that life did not merely arise on earth but was put here by some intelligent agent. And Dawkins is the world's leading evolutionist, and we have him on film admitting the reasonableness of Intelligent Design. Huh! Dawkins' own complaint about his alien segment is stretched to the absurd by his fellow spin-control atheists who have taken his paraphrase of Stein's question to mean that Stein's actual question was edited out of the film. Oh brother. In reality, Dawkins was engaged in his discussion with Ben Stein. Attending a movie marathon, Bob Enyart watched that scene 15 times, and it is obvious that Richard Dawkins was not manipulated or misquoted. Rather, he showed surprising candor when he admitted that the complexity observed by molecular biologists could be evidence that life on earth originated from a higher intelligence. And like Francis Crick, when Dawkins says that life on earth might be too complex to arise here by chance, then he is just punting when he guesses that it could have originated somewhere else.
(2) Richard Dawkins' Alien Evolution Disproves Darwinist Falsifiability for ostensibly, an alien life form anywhere in the universe (or in the fantasized multiverse) might have no similarity with terrestrial biology, perhaps not even being based on amino acids, sugars, nor even carbon atoms. Thus predictions (which are the stuff of hard science) as used by evolution scientists have no actual real-world specificity, so they cannot even theoretically falsify Darwin's central claim. For in practice, evolution "theory" is pliable enough to account for any observations even if imaginary, like alien physiology. Thus it is treated like a philosophy and not an actual, falsifiable scientific theory.