The "origin" of the species?

The “origin” of the species.
BQ: Please look carefully at Figure 1-Origins, as we'll be using it, and  see that it has "The Origin: For Science/Christians/History Channel." Yet the "origin" for science in the picture does not actually show an origin, but a series or progression from something already started. 

Figure 1—Origins

Richard Dawkins, a famous atheist, said,  “I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.”

Q: Is Dawkins able to hold to that principle?

A: Let's think about the aspects of origins. The theory of evolution proposes some mechanisms for change within a species and band-aids that with punctuated equilibrium, but it shies away from genetic entropy within genomes, refuses to adequately deal with irreducible complexities, and, when pressed, makes light of origins saying it is "not concerned with origins."

Wait! Isn't that teaching us to be satisfied with not understanding the world? Let's look at how Dawkins, since he's one of the world's foremost atheists, handles the idea of origins:

BEN STEIN: How did it get created?

DAWKINS: By a very slow process.

BEN STEIN: Well, how did it start?

DAWKINS: Nobody knows how it got started. We know the kind of event that it must have been. We know the sort of event that must have happened for the origin of life.

BEN STEIN: And what was that?

DAWKINS: It was the origin of the first self-replicating molecule.

BEN STEIN: Right, and how did that happen?

DAWKINS: I told you, we don’t know.

BEN STEIN: What do you think is the possibility that Intelligent Design might turn out to be the answer to some issues in genetics or in Darwinian evolution.

DAWKINS: Well, it could come about in the following way. It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe, a civilization evolved, probably by some kind of Darwinian means, probably to a very high level of technology, and designed a form of life that they seeded onto perhaps this planet. Um, now that is a possibility, and an intriguing possibility. And I suppose it’s possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer. ...

And that Designer could well be a higher intelligence from elsewhere in the universe. But that higher intelligence would itself have had to have come about by some explicable, or ultimately explicable process. It couldn't have just jumped into existence spontaneously. That's the point.

Do you notice that Richard Dawkins seeks to escape answering the "origin" of ANY species, and instead relies of option three, "The Origin: For History Channel?" 
(PN214)

Dumb as mud?

Dumb as mud?
BQ: One of my friends said, "you'd have to be dumb as mud to believe in God." Another person said, "science has made religion obsolete." Richard Dawkins claimed, "If children understand that beliefs should be substantiated with evidence, as opposed to tradition, authority, revelation or faith, they will automatically work out for themselves that they are atheists." Are these things true? Does becoming a scientist change one into an atheist? 

A: Francis Collins headed the human genome project and is the current director of the National Institutes of Health. During the HGP, science convinced him that his atheism was misguided, and proved to him that God was real. His predecessor, Jim Watson, who also worked on the project, remained an atheist. 

Both being top-level scientists, we can see that there is a divide, but it is not in their science, which was the same. It is theism vs atheism; there are scientists on both sides. As my former medical director once said, "Med school proved to me that there was a God, though it was trying to do the opposite." 

Saying that intelligent, well educated people cannot believe in God is nothing more than an Emperor's new clothes argument—surely you see them, right? But be careful, because it works both ways! Belief systems often come about as a result of peer pressure, but they shouldn't. 
(PN221)