A simple challenge for atheists

[Chas]

Please provide a citation for this. Otherwise, it's bullshit.

"The Selfish Gene" 1976 (page 21-22)
"The Blind Watchmaker" 1982 (Chapter 6)

(Yes, I've read both books.)

Dawkins says that the since there is not enough time for the first strand of self-replicating DNA to have assembled by random chance, a plausible explanation that others have come up with says that it may have involved crystals - which are capable of self-replicating.

The only problem is, is that DNA is several orders of magnitude more complex than crystal lattice.
Besides being able to create an exact duplicate of itself, DNA can
perform self-repair for minor errors.
99.9% of human DNA is identical to other humans [1]
Approximately 2 g of DNA could hold all digitally stored information in the world. [2]

[1] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_profiling
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_m...%28data%29

So, either you didn't understand his point or you were dishonestly quoting.
Let's give you the benefit of the doubt and go with you misunderstanding.

DNA didn't just occur - it is the product of evolution. There was evolution before there was DNA.

---

Actually, I seem to recall this from a TED talk. It was about how evolution is not simply "blind mutation," but is instead constrained and shaped by environmental pressures. Once the process of molecular reproduction begins, mutation and development are anything but blind.

So it's an accurate quote, ripped from context to make it seem as if it means something other than what Dawkins was saying. Quelle Surprise.

Dawkins wasn't talking about evolution. He was talking about the beginning of life on earth.

Yes, he was talking about evolution. As soon as there were replicators, there was evolution. Where, precisely, is the line between self-replicating molecules and life?