Ubiquitous Cosmological Evidence of G-d Still Not Enough for Some Atheists

Acceptance of Gd, as He is on His terms, and not on your opinion of how G-d should be, is one of most important acts anyone can do. That is what religionists refer to as faith.

Richard Dawkins, probably the foremost atheist in this time concludes that in atheism he has found remarkable Darwinian “grandeur,”

Charles Darwin was not known as a poet, but he produced a lyrical crescendo in the last paragraph of On the Origin of Species.

"Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death,[i] the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved." - Charles Darwin

but then Dawkins deems those same acts of nature to be too horrible for him to consider a deity's involvement.

“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion

That is a verifiable contradiction.

Can anyone see the error of Dawkins' logic?  Logic such that if Hashem creates it, then according to Dawkins, no matter what, it is as if it were created by a hateful, devilish, hideous being, like the picture.



Yet, if there is no Gd, and something becomes created, then according to Dawkins this is surely worthy of remarkable praise, such as in the case of this woman. this:

Is Evolution in the Bible? Yes, it is!

This is where the biblical Garden of Eden story meets science. Specifically, it occurs when G-d punishes the serpent making it crawl on its belly, meaning that G-d caused the transition some of legged reptiles into snakes, which was an effective evolutionary event. As evolution continues, newer species of snakes may continue in the trending evolutionary pattern observed as vestigial anatomy shrinkage followed by elimination of vestigial pelvic girdles.

Bible: Fall of Man Image

I suggest that dinosaurs, notably those in the shape of brachiosaurus with its incredibly long neck and tail are the origin of modern snakes.

Brachiosaurus

Brachiosaurus, for example, was incredibly large (its size is not very important [for example whales are usually considered to have evolved from dogs]) and had an operable pelvic girdle, used for walking (as opposed to slithering.) Notice the serpent's shape, and compare it to that of this brachiosaurus image. The story unfolds.

Python Skeleton w/Vestigial Limbs Compared to Human's

Old world snakes such as pythons still have the vestige of a pelvic girdle, which is comparable to their distant ancestors, the dinosaurs, suggesting that the ancestors of snakes evolved from 4 legged reptiles. There is apparently no value to these vestigial skeletal parts. Hence, in newer species of snake - as opposed to old world snakes such a pythons - the extra bones that make up a pelvic girdle exist no longer because there is no advantage selecting them.

Since the Bible allowed snakes to evolve, I believe that this discussion could happen to any species.  
(Disclaimer: The apple was not the forbidden fruit.)