Richard Dawkin's big blunder

[Alex K]

What DID you imply, if you argue that evolution needs guidance by an intelligence to work, but you don't mean God? Do you want to argue that one can set the initial conditions such that the outcome is exactly what is desired by your deity?

If Dawkins can do it(and he did....but he called it cheating), then God can.

Of course God can, almost by definition, if you imagine it to be sufficiently powerful, it can do anything.

Dawkins "cheat" programme is not a run and forget type of deal, because he has to look specifically at the phenotype or genotype (whatever the sentence is supposed to represent) at each generation and select by comparison with the fixed ideal specifying everything about the "animal" explicitly. That's demonstrably not what happens in nature

The point is that there's no necessity for this kind of setup, nor evidence for it that nature works this way, and much evidence that it does in fact not work this way.