Richard Dawkins - Charles Darwin - Michael Shermer - Neil deGrasse Tyson - Wendy Richards - Darwin's Struggle: The Evolution of the Origin of Species TV - BBC Horizon - Ancient Aliens TV - Carl Sagan - Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman TV - William Paley - George Greenstein - Tommy Rodriguez - Bob Russell - Manfred F Schieder - David Attenborough TV - Kenneth Miller - Philip E Johnson - George W Bush - Ilya Prigogine - Christopher Hitchens - Peter Hitchens - David Hume - Clarence Darrow - Betrand Russell - W B Yeats - John Wheeler - Father George Coyne - Kenneth Miller & Eric Rothschild & Judge John E Jones - Jan Michl - Douglas Adams - Sheri S Tepper - Fred Hoyle - Paul Davies - 50 Academics Speaking About God TV - Another 50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God TV - Jonathan Miller & The Atheism Tapes & Steven Weinberg TV - James Burke TV - Joseph Conrad - Robert Tressell - Irreducible Complexity Cut Down to Size 2012 -
2,644. The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference. (Science & Universe & Intelligent Design & Creationism & Anthropic Principle) Richard Dawkins
53,048. Darwin made another really contribution which was to put forward the evidence for the fact of evolution much more cogently than anyone had before. But as you say the theory of natural selection was his greatest contribution ... How the fantastically complicated illusion of design that living creatures have could have been produced ... by an automatic undersigned unplanned process. (Charles Darwin & Evolution & Creationism & Intelligent Design) Professor Richard Dawkins, Radio Ulster 2008
5,681. Meet the Reverend William Paley. An old enemy of evolution. He put forward the most lucid argument to the existence of a creator. And his argument has been used ever since to try and shoot down Darwin. Paley likened all living things to a clock or watch. Random forces, he said, cannot explain how who all these beautiful springs and gears came together to tell time, nor can they explain the organs of living things. No purposeless process could ever fashion such intricate detail. No blind leap of chance could ever construct such complex machinery. (Evolution & Creationism & Intelligent Design & Analogy) Professor Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, Horizon 1987
5,682. Not vision, no foresight, no sight at all. If it can be said to play the role of watchmaker in Nature, it is the blind watchmaker. (Evolution & Creationism & Intelligent Design & Analogy) ibid.
5,683. The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity. (Evolution & Creationism & Intelligent Design) ibid.
5,684. Natural Selection ... has no vision, no foresight, no sight at all. If it can be said to play the role of watchmaker in nature, it is the blind watchmaker. (Evolution & Creationism & Intelligent Design & Analogy) Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker 1986 ch1
5,687. Charles Darwin turned our world upside down. His theory of evolution by natural selection is one of the most profound and far-reaching ideas in human history. It’s also, alas, one of the most controversial. Science now has the evidence that proves evolution is true, yet today, incredibly, the opposition to Darwin is more fiercely vocal than ever, denying plain facts in more and more elaborate ways. (Evolution & Creationism & Intelligent Design & Charles Darwin) Professor Richard Dawkins, God Strikes Back: The Genius of Charles Darwin
5,697. The eminent astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle has pointed out that it’s just about as unlikely that any complex living structure could spring into existence suddenly by luck alone. He said it’s rather like taking a junkyard and letting a hurricane blow through it and the hurricane has the luck to spontaneously assemble the Boeing 747. (Evolution & Creationism & Intelligent Design & Analogy) Dr Richard Dawkins, lecture 3 Climbing Mount Improbable
5,703. Darwin’s great insight was that life evolved steadily and slowly, inching its way gradually over four billion years. Natural selection, not a divine designer, was the sculptor of life. So evolution driven by Darwin’s motor of natural selection gets us to the top of mount improbable. From primeval simplicity to ultimate complexity. The design hypothesis doesn’t even begin to do that. Because it raises an even bigger problem than it solves. Who made the designer? (Evolution & Life & Creationism & Intelligent Design & Charles Darwin) Professor Richard Dawkins, The Root of All Evil? The God Delusion
5,707. The Reverend William Paley writing half a century before Darwin put the case with his famous watchmaker argument. Imagine, Paley said, taking a walk on a heath. If you came across a rock you wouldn’t be surprised. The rock might have lain there for ever. It doesn’t need explaining. But a watch on the heath would demand an explanation. Its existence and complexity would require a big explanation ... There must be a divine watchmaker. (Evolution & Creationism & Intelligent Design & Analogy & Watch) Professor Richard Dawkins, Why We Are Here
53,161. What this does to Science is it wastes a lot of time of scientists who could be getting on with their work. (Creationism & Intelligent Design) Professor Richard Dawkins, interview Horizon: A War on Science 2006
53,162. When one says that in America Intelligent Design is getting a hold – it is not getting a hold in the scientific community, in the intellectual community. It is getting a hold only among those parts of the population who don’t know anything. (Creationism & Intelligent Design) ibid.
53,163. Design needs to postulate an entity as least as complicated, at least as high information content, at least as irreducibly complex, as that which it is supposed to explain. It is therefore a total lack of explanation. It doesn’t explain anything because it can’t explain itself. (Creationism & Intelligent Design) ibid.
53,164. Intelligent Design explains precisely zero. (Creationism & Intelligent Design) ibid.
53,165. I don’t like giving them the oxygen of respectability, the feeling that if they’re up on a platform debating with a scientist, there must be real disagreement. One side of the debate is wholly ignorant. It would be as though you knew nothing of physics and were passionately arguing against Einstein’s theory of relativity. (Creationism & Intelligent Design) Professor Richard Dawkins, Times online article 19th July 2008
53,166. The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference. (Creationism & Intelligent Design & Evolution & Meaning of Life & Luck & Cruelty & Starvation & Suffering) Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life
53,215. It’s enormously damaging if the world’s leading economic power was subverted and undermined by this kind of anti-scientific tendency. Professor Richard Dawkins
53,216. Intelligent design explains exactly nothing. Professor Richard Dawkins
53,217. Intelligent design is not an argument of the same character as these [evolutionary science] controversies. It is not a scientific argument at all, but a religious one. It might be worth discussing in a class on the history of ideas, in a philosophy class on popular logical fallacies, or in a comparative religion class on origin myths from around the world. But it no more belongs in a biology class than alchemy belongs in a chemistry class, phlogiston in a physics class or the stork theory in a sex education class. In those cases, the demand for equal time for ‘both theories’ would be ludicrous. Similarly, in a class on 20th-century European history, who would demand equal time for the theory that the Holocaust never happened? Professor Richard Dawkins & Jerry Coyne, The Guardian article 1st September 2005 ‘One Side Can Be Wrong’
5,717. The Blind Watchmaker – which would set the stage for his role as a defender of science against the claims of Creationists. (Evolution & Science & Creationism & Intelligent Design) Beautiful Minds: Professor Richard Dawkins