Why the evidence reveals how he reads the evidence
Reading this book shows how far some will go with 'just-so' stories and hypothetical 'explanations' that substitute for expositions of what really happened. Having a plausible, Occam's Razor sort of alibi for every miraculous emergence that cannot be rationally explained without CreatorGodWhoCares doesn't make evolution really so; it's 'just so'.The question begging to be answered at book's end is: given that one chooses to believe all we observe arose from evolution, where did evolution itself come from? Dawkins admits evolution evolves, so please tell us why the evidence reveals not Creation ex nihilo, but Creation ex creatio? All the apparent design is blind, dumb, mindless designation imposed coincidentally on our evolved brains to notice that all the apparent design needs a rational explanation or explaining away?Poof! Everything nested solo from scratch?If so, think, Braille, think: there is a catch -Can we deny First Hatcher given hatch?