When I was a boy I looked to God. And then I was introduced to Charles Darwin. I realised that if such a simple theory could explain so much. I reasoned it could explain everything! I became an atheist.

In the third episode of The Genius of Darwin Richard Dawkins turns once more on the ranks of religious fundamentalists who disagree with him despite having made at least two big steps of faith in his extrapolation that evolution could explain everything and secondly to become an atheist. Dawkins is reasonable, we are unreasonable. End of story.Dawkins meets John Mackay who challenges him for having faith since evolution in unobservable in a human lifetime, or even the time since Darwin.

"The refusal to believe in anything you can't see is absurd" says Dawkins.

In America Dawkins enjoys being a rockstar and when asked if he's religious quips 'do I look religious?' before he descends to high-brow argument by reading his hate mail. His crusade against the condemnation of children to ignorance continues. He's accused of being a closed minded censor of arguments and differing views... to which he says they're blind to the beauty of the evolution of the reptile jaw! And then on to the evidence in DNA and scare tactics 'would you let this man teach your children science...' he says of Nick Cowan.

It's not that I mind Dawkins getting a hearing - I find him quite entertaining really as he takes moral highground over everyone who differs from him repeating again and again 'Evolution is a fact.' and like a modernist Dinosaur in a supposed postmodern age...

'Somethings are just true. They're not a matter of opinion'

The leaps of Darwin and Dawkins from evolutionary thinking to anti-God determination reveal their presuppositions. He berates multicultural Britain for defending faith views and avoiding offence in the classroom by not forcing children to believe Darwinism. He says people should see evidence and evaluate it. I'd agree. The teacher says we believe it because we're scientists and so evidentialists. But, Dawkins says - no it's not because you're a scientist it's because of the evidence. The prof is seriously blind to his presuppositions. A brief anti-Relativism rant helpful 'it's a pretentious cop-out'. before he cites his creed again: Evolution is the plain truth, you don't decide to accept it or not, it just is.

Dawkins is a preacher who sermonises his audiences with statement after statement, rather than putting together persuasives arguments. He does the same things that most of those he picks to argue with do, and shuts down debate.

In considering Darwin he reveals the original evolutionist's hatred of Christian doctrines, particularly of hell. A doctrine that one who isn't a Chritian has a vested interest in trying to demolish. It's hear that the underlying issues become clear (if they weren't already) - he can't settle for a God & Science combination because God must be eliminated and excluded not just science advanced. Moderation wont do for the professor.

Dawkins says the central doctrines of Darwinism declare of relatedness to everything and proudly boast that our ancestors were winners. This consoled Charles Darwin in suffering - though what comfort is it to know your children are being culled by evolution, dying young as failures...

The alternative is the Christian view that there is a God to whom we can relate who will accept the humble. Darwinism is the religion of the proud, Christianity of the humbled.