One mroe book of Dawkins's to fnish up my set of reviews, and this one was awful! Just kidding. No. Richard dawkins write and awful book? never! This was another excellent one. The title refers to idiotc creationist (is that a tautology?) William paley and his claim that if he found a watch lyign onthe ground eh woudl assume an intelligent creator had made it. he woudl not assume that it arose through mutation and such over time, btu his anaology is flawed, as Dawkins shows.
Dawkins goes on then to completely undermine the creationist claim that complexity cannot arise by itself (it actually doesn't - it arises from the alws of physics and chemistry!) by tackling their prize argument - that of the eye. There is actually a short documentary - which may be on You Tube by now, for all I know - and which takes its title and content from this book. In it, a very young-looking Dawkins makes the same argument with video support. I don't think it's his best documentary, but it's worth a look if you're a Dawkins fan.
In the video he demonstrates the "biomorphs" which he discusses in this book. I was never very impressed with those visually, but in the underlying workings, they do handsomely demonstrate how a small tweak in one "dimension" (the biomorphs have eleven, if I recall, one for each of their 'genes') can have disproportionate effects on the overall appearance - something the creationists simply don't get - along with everything else they don't get about evolution.
So overall, I commend this book as well worth reading.
