Dr. Richard Dawkins is not a Biologist.
He is Zoologist.
This is applied science of describing animals and their habitats.
What would any zoologist know about mircobiology of Genetics and their mutations.
They should stick to the zoos.
Richard Dawkins was cornered on BBC by Jeremy Paxman. During the interview Dawkins admitted that after all there is chance God might exit.
The Professor's admirers are said to be highly embarrassed.
Hi Rayback, you're new since I last prowled here. welcome to the broth. Keep stirring. Nice to see a new and enquiring mind in the process of formation (otherwise you wouldn't be here).
Richard Dawkins embarrasses no one except his critics. his supporters stand four-square behind him and applaud his objective fairness.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpcvJ6oPpWkYou're obviously not a scientist, are you, and yet you seek to comment on aspects of science, particularly Zoology and Micro-biology. You don't seem to know how the scientific method works or even how anyone with half a mind might acquire bone-fide scientific knowledge (ie That which has been scientifically tested and peer reviewed) by reading and discussion of the requisite papers and with involved individuals.
It takes a little bit more than the vested utterance of a high ranking scientist to establish a scientific fact (unlike a high ranking religious potentate of course).
Zoology is a lot wider than the narrow defn. you have given and, for the record, all Zoology courses contain or demand some precursor microbiology courses so that every zoologist, even quite ill-read ones like myself, know something more than the Average Joe about micro-biology.
As for the Paxman interview - You'd have to have a religious agendum to stretch if you imagined that Paxman 'cornered' Dawkins at all. It looks like a very fair interview to me and, as you'd expect, Dawkins, being the objective scientist he is, leaves open the possibility that, someday, someone might do some peer-reviewed experimentation that might lead to a theory that some overarching deity might exist (no one's done it since humans evolved 'consciousness' several thousand years ago, so don't hold your breath).
Evolution is an accepted fact and has been for over a hundred years: it is Darwinian evolution, ie, by natural selection acting on random mutations, that was in doubt. Anyone following the scientific arguments and debates over recent decades will know that the problems inherent in that, acknowledged by Darwin himself at the time he published 'Origins..', have been largely overcome.
So be aware! You will discover that religion closes all doors except one and science chooses to look inside every one.
Topic: New Research Demolishes Evolution by Harun Yahya