Richard Dawkins fancies himself that he has effectively dismissed the argument that the observation of design implies a designer. That is, he, in effect, denies that we can observe creation and infer that we were created by God, as Paul does in Romans 1:20.
Dr. Robert Cargill recently wrote a blog post titled “On Competent Versus Intelligent Design” in which he references Dawkins’ position in a way that indicates he accepts it. I began commenting on Bob’s post here taking issue with the point, and if I didn’t convince him that design does indeed imply a designer and that Dawkins’ refutation fails, I at least gave him pause.
Of course, the point here is not the interaction between Cargill and me, but rather that it is foolish to suggest that a design does not have a designer, that a watch does not have a watchmaker, or that creation does not have a Creator. And that foolishness is not mitigated by how many academic degrees you hold or how smart the rest of the world thinks you are.
God is, and we need to reconcile ourselves to that fact in a productive way: God Wants a Loving Relationship with You