BLUE VIEWPOINT
Richard Dawkins wrote a book called The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution. In this book he posits circular reasoning and presents arbitrary statements without example or logic as reasoning, but presents no evidence that clearly shows that his "history-deniers" (those who believe the world was created by God and all that entails) are really as ignorant as Dawkins claims they are.
"O.K., but what are you saying?"
I mean, really, does rambling on about processes and tests constitute proof? Does the fact that you tediously ran a laborious experiment showing that some bacteria are larger than others constitute a proof that evolution is real and "proves" that God doesn't exist or at least wasn't needed to create the world and all the creatures living on it? Why does he feel the need to run a "thought experiment" to prepare the minds of his readers to receive some lame idea that follows, unless his premise will not stand up to reason? In his book, he addresses the evolution of:
Dogs
Regardless of the convolution of the monologue, the dogs are still all dogs.
Flowers and pollenaters
These plants and insects did not become birds or rabbits.
Kabuki masks and crabs
No inferred relationship exists between Kabuki masks and crabs. Have you ever seen a "whale" or a "puppy" in the shape of a cloud?
Clocks and measurements, tree rings, radioactive clocks, and carbon dating
These all have a predictable rate of progression, but with no foundation of when the degradation began or what initial levels existed, there is no way to get to a consistent answer.
Lizards
They are still lizards and suggesting that they mutated into birds, whether gradually or suddenly, insults the reader.
Bacteria and guppies
These are still bacteria and guppies and do not change with imagination.
Missing links
These myths still do not, in my opinion, exist regardless of the interpretation of a newly found modern skeleton. I have seen living people who resemble some of the models that scientists make from a single pig's tooth.
Out of the sea and back again?
How is this anything other than a wishful tale to confuse our children? Whale evolution concepts have no basis in science, regardless of the unimaginable concepts of mutation. Just because a penguin has no hands on their upper appendages does not directly translate to flying at some distant time in the past. But, boy! They sure can swim well.
Also, calling God's designs "mistakes" or describing them as poor design does not make it so. By the way, doesn't preparing for the Greatest Show on Earth, the circus, require a lot of planning and effort? Ridiculing the Creator of the universe, without a feasible explanation of how it could have happened by a series of mistakes (and quite a long series at that), can only serve to prepare a place for one's self in a very uncomfortable place. But, Mr. Dawkins is probably not worried about that.
Disagree? Find an error? Contact us at glenjjr@gmail.com and give us your view.
