Like I said, Dawkins is not out to prove a God doesn't exist. He merely feels the argument has no place in scientific debate.

Now... his views on religion are somewhat strong. But as I said, he is not out to prove a God doesn't exist. If you read his works, and I have read just about the lot, you will see he is most taken, as many of us are, by Einstein, who I will paraphrase, not to twist it, but can't be arsed to find the exact quote;

"I am not an atheist. That would mean accepting chaos. The laws of physics hold in every event, and so if f=ma today yesterday, today and tomorrow, it cannot be chaos, and so atheism falls at the first hurdle."

Dawkins has issues, like any rational person, with accepting one or more of the flavours of established religions. I note that he has no issue with Einstein's take on atheism.

I suppose Dawkins and I have something in common if I can be bold enough to make comparisons between my fuddled brain and the insight of a genius; neither of us would segregate based on genetic makeup.