Insectman Home
Presentations
Contact Us
My Testimony
Articles
Our Links
Get Saved
Exodus Mandate
The Lie: Evolution
 

Articles


Dawkins is Buggy

By Karl C. Priest Completely revised June 25, 2016 (originally composed on 11-9-2008)

Insanity is taught as reality in “public schools”.

“Buggy” is a synonym for “crazy” and “crazy” means “ mentally deranged; demented; insane.” (dictionary.com) That is an apt description of anyone who clings to belief in evolutionism especially after they are advised of the total lack of science behind Darwin’s dogma.

As Dr. Joseph Mastropaolo so aptly puts it : “Evolutionists are out of touch with reality and hallucinate that evolution is true. Such hallucinations, so withdrawn from reality, are the medical dictionary definition of psychosis because evolution is a fantasy, but not the usual straightforward kind of fantasy, like the cow jumped over the moon. It is an inverted fantasy, like the moon jumped over the cow.”

Dr. Richard Dawkins is a prime example of someone who fervently believes that the moon can jump over a cow. Dawkins is certifiably “buggy.

Deluded Darwinian disciple Richard Dawkins wrote The Blind Watchmaker (1986) in which he strives, shedding intellectual drops of sweat, to develop a story of how the appearance of “complex design” (ix) could be explained without giving credit to a Designer.

He claims that the devout “Darwinian world-view” is true (x) and the only explanation for the existence of humans. The book is filled with quotables derived from his spiritual delusions, but this article will focus on his “insects.”

Although Dawkins did not intend to imply that evolution is imaginary, his statement about his goal is insightful. He said there is a plausible way “for complex ‘design’ to arise out of primeval simplicity. A leap of the imagination so large (is required) that, to this day, many people seem still unwilling to make it. That is the main purpose of this book to help the reader makes this leap.” (xii)

His argument is dead before it hatches because he has to use a precisely designed computer to run a program that is based upon an intelligent design. Really buggy people do not allow details like reality to sway them, so Dawkins proceeds to describe the program’s results. As if they apply to real life.

By programming the computer to draw a vertical line and then follow programmed instructions to branch off in various ways (similar to a screen saver you may see on some computers) an observer can distinguish figures that resemble something recognizable (like looking a cloud formations).

Dawkins, acting as a god (though he would never admit it), chooses a preferred “creature” to survive and continue the “evolving” process. He (much to my delight) chose to call his “creatures” insects.

I could not do justice in describing the silliness of what happens during Dawkins’ creative process so I will let him mock himself with his own words.

He credits Darwin for making it possible for him to be an atheist (i.e. “God hater”) and be “intellectually fulfilled.” (5-6).

Trying to refute Paley’s “Watchmaker” analogy, which is even clear to children, Dawkins admits that “Natural selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan the consequences, has no purpose in view.” (21)

To my knowledge, Dr. Dawkins has never published a peer reviewed article about his research supporting evolution. That has not stopped a steady stream of propaganda flowing from his deranged Darwinian mind. In The Blind Watchmaker, Dawkins devotes almost all of chapter three to a (not intended) hilarious description of a computer program he wrote which he believes demonstrates how natural selection works (see “ Let’s Squash Natural Selection ”).

Ignoring the obvious problem of getting something from nothing, Dawkins argues all that is needed is “gradual step-by-step transformations.” (43) Seeking to get around the science of mathematics, he wrote a simple computer program that would demonstrate “natural selection” and devoted the bulk of chapter three to “evolve” some “insects.”

It is acceptable for scientists to use computer modeling. The models are good for making something easier to understand. Making a model of bee navigation techniques and using that knowledge to design better drones is an example of real science done in the real world. Dawkins tries to use a model he designed to make it appear that Darwinism (aka “evolutionism”) could actually be possible.

Dawkins developed rules for his program to obey as it drew lines that branched out making creatures he called “biomorphs” which ironically he obtained from the term’s originator who used it in his surrealistic paintings. (55)

As the program, obeying designer Dawkins, progressed through stages, Dawkins encountered, what can only be called, a religious experience. “Nothing in my biologist’s intuition, nothing in my 20 years’ experience of programming computers, and nothing in my wildest dreams, prepared me for what actually emerged on the screen. I can’t remember exactly when in the sequence it first began to dawn on me that an evolved resemblance to something like an insect was possible. With a wild surmise, I began to breed, generation after generation, from whichever child looked most like an insect. My incredulity grew in parallel with the evolving resemblance…Admittedly they have eight legs like spiders, instead of six like an insect, but even so! I still cannot conceal from you my feeling of exultation as first I watched these exquisite creatures emerging before my eyes. I distinctly heard the triumphal opening chords of Also sprach Zarathustra* (the ‘2001 theme’) in my mind. I couldn’t eat, and that night ‘my’ insects swarmed behind my eyelids as I tried to sleep.” (pgs. 59-60)

If a creationist made such a hysterical and unscientific statement, True Believers in Evolutionism (TBEs) would have ranted and raved to high heaven (pun intended).

A two-year old can scribble a more realistic image of an insect!

Dawkins goes on to call his “insects” (quite appropriately), “quasi-biological**” forms and admits that his “eye”*** has done the selecting. He then makes (like TBEs must) natural selection an intelligent entity by saying, “natural selection doesn't choose genes directly, it chooses the effects that genes have on bodies, technically called phenotypic effects.” (60) So he wants his intelligently designed computer program by writing “a very sophisticated pattern-recognition program” (61) to “simulate natural selection.” (62) When the book was published he did not have that skill and hoped for someone to help him. (62)

He said he planned to set his computer in a garden and display his miscellaneous biomorphs in color to see which ones real insects would bump into and therefore “cause the evolution, in the computer, of flowers.” Dawkins truly believes “that bees in the past caused the evolution of bee-orchids.” (63) Dawkins said he would know the answer by the time the book was published. This writer did not research the result because this writer knows whatever TBE Dawkins discovered would have not come minutely close to creating a real life flower.

Dawkins sums up his concept: “I programmed EVOLUTION into the computer, but I did not plan 'my' insects… True, my eyes did the selecting that guided their evolution…” (64 Caps in the original) He said that his “selection 'strategy,'” like natural selection, had no target. Of course, he did not comprehend that he was looking for something that made sense and each change in the form had nothing to do with that shape “surviving” except as gullible Dawkins allowed.

He had not programmed the computer to record the “genetic formulae” and he lost his insects. He unsuccessfully tried to “evolve them again.” (64) Finally he found some “insects” that resembled his originals and said, “I wrote down the genetic formula, and now I can 'evolve' insects whenever I want.” (65) BWAHAHA! Sorry, I just could not contain it any longer.

The chapter concludes with a mention of the mathematics of “Biomorph Land” and tries to rationalize “the evolutionary creativity of natural selection, the blind watchmaker” (66) to design more insects. It’s not the watchmaker who is blind. Dawkins wouldn’t recognize reality if it was a wall six inches from his face! He claims that anything close to a target (goal) is “anything that would improve survival chances.” In his delusional mind, it is possible to get around the “half a trillion to one” “astronomical odds” of getting a “lucky jump” to a target by having “a series of small steps, each one building on the accumulated success of previous steps.” (72) Even middle school students comprehend the math. Dawkins completely missed the fact that his own intelligence and knowledge of what real insects look like was his “natural selection”. His “Blind Watchmaker” could see quite well.

His chapter conclusion says it perfectly. Dawkins hammers the final nail into the construction of his needed padded cell with, “When we are prevented from making a journey in reality, the imagination is not a bad substitute.” (74) To which I would add, When an evolutionist is unable to stretch his imagination he can easily travel into hallucination.

Dawkins goes on for 244 more pages of his delusions.

He believes in the “power of natural selection to put together good designs.” (95)

Dawkins cavalierly dismisses one of the multiple amazing aspects of insects by saying, “the habit of fungus-farming has arisen independently in ants (in the New World) and termites (in Africa).” (107) Once he “stepped aside and contemplated” the amazing behavior of driver ants. (109) It is too bad, and sad, that he really did not “Consider the ant ” and become wise.

He describes life as “information technology” and the queen driver ant as the “central data bank.” Admitting that the storage capacity of a single ant cell is staggering ( 112) he continues to imagine that it “must have arisen spontaneously on the early Earth”. (128) Dawkins rejects God, the Designer, with a wave of his hand by claiming to get away from miracles, major improbabilities, (and) fantastic coincidences.” (141) From there it is page after page of wand waving at mathematical improbabilities with fantastic statements like “evolution has equipped our brains” (162) and once the eukaryotic cell had been invented, a whole range of new designs became possible.” (176)

Much to the dismay of Theistic Evolutionists, Dawkins rejects any attempt to give God the credit for any aspect of evolution. (248) His rejection of God, ultimately leads him to the sick point-of-view that “the abortion of a single human zygote…can arouse more moral solicitude and righteous indignation than the vivisection of any number of intelligent adult chimpanzees!” He claims that humans have no more rights than chimps! (263) The worldview of Dawkins also believes that women should be military warriors and a biological ma n can believe he is a woman. Once, the non-science nonsense of evolution is believed, any insane imagination can be thought of as real and rational!

All Dawkins wants is his “theory of evolution to do is explain complex, well-dsigned mechanisms.” (263 e mphasis added)

He admits that “Living organisms are well fitted to survive and reproduce in their environments, in ways too numerous and statistically improbable to have come about in a single chance blow.” (288) He claims that “Darwinian selection” (read: “Natural Selection”) can explain “every tiny detail” of any amazing part of a living creature. (302)

Admitting that life cannot be explained by “chance” Dawkins truly believes that “infinitesimally graded” intermediates steps will allow him to “derive anything from anything else” and exclude the reality of mathematics. (317) He is more than deluded, he is devilishly deceived as is made clear in his final sentence in the book: Evolution has “the power (By that he means by billions of years and natural selection.) to dissolve astronomical improbabilities and explain prodigies**** of apparent miracle.” (318)

Sadly, Dawkins’ delusions impact sane people. I stumbled upon a blog post by a guy who saw how beautiful insects are and “was awestruck by these wonderful examples of Darwinism in action; for me this was a religious experience.” The blogger then praises Dawkins’ book like a Christian should praise the Bible.

The blogger posted a picture of beetle varieties and compared it to the Dawkins “insects”

Take a look at the real insects in color and, if you are in touch with reality, you will see that Dawkins’ “insects” are not even worthy of Neverland fantasy. Dawkins may as well believe he can talk to Tinker Bell.

Dawkins’ “Biomorph Land” is funnier and farer out than Alice’s “ Wonderland ” . Dawkins is a real life Mad Hatter. Often using the human eye to argue his aberration of evolutionism, Dawkins cannot see how absurd his fantasies actually are. By Dawkins’ logic I can postulate the evolution of a hinge from iron ore.

If The Blind Watch Maker does not open your eyes and convince you Dawkins (and by association with him—all evolutionists) are buggy, then perhaps you have inhaled too much bug spray and you are a fool.

We must not allow our children to be brain-washed and spiritually blinded in “public school” with evolutionism generated from spaced out minds like that of Richard Dawkins!

*Also sprach Zarathustra: a tone poem orchestra composition famously heard at the beginning of 2001: A Space Odyssey .

**quasi: s eemingly; apparently but not really [ quasi-scientific] (oxforddictionaries.com)

***In Chapter 1 Dawkins expounded on the “biological design” of the human eye. (15-18)

****prodigy: something wonderful or marvelous (dictionary.com)

Note: If you do not like my use of asterisks, wait a few million years and they might evolve into footnotes.

-----------------------------

Also see “Dawkins Does a Dance”.