Dawkins is clearly a fading star in a world in which modern science, technology — and especially computational and information theory — have relegated him to the status of a vestigial remain of the 19th century.
Richard Dawkins: Science doesn’t yet know how everything started. And as I said last time, they’re working on it.
Dawkins’ logic and grammar are strangely confused. Science is not a person, and therefore doesn’t “know” anything.
Of course, “they” are still “working on” how inanimate matter spontaneously generated complex information-processing software and hardware, just as the alchemists were “working on” how chemical reactions could turn lead into gold.
The only problem is, lead can’t be turned into gold with chemical reactions; it doesn’t work that way. And non-living matter can’t be made to come alive without design, engineering, and an infusion of information that must come from a mind. These are the lessons that legitimate science has revealed in the latter-half of the 20th century, and which will eventually propel Dawkins and his prophet Darwin to the summit of the ash heap of the history of junk science.