And then suddenly Dawkins starts to muse. He wonders sometimes, he says, why all DNA has such a deliberate signature to it. It's almost as if someone, or something, put their â€œstampâ€ on it, and maybe even placed the seeds of this DNA, in cellular form, on the Earth, on purpose, intending that it would reproduce itself and spread. Dawkins wonders at who this â€œintelligenceâ€ might be. Aliens? From another planet? Heâ€™s shy when he says it, blushing like a schoolboy, because he knows that he sounds a little silly. Yet he is not afraid to admit he thinks itâ€™s possible that someone, or some THING, more intelligent than we are, made us on purpose. And how fascinating is that?
Cut to Ben Stein, feigning a perplexed look: "Did Richard Dawkins just say he accepts the possibility of Intelligent Design?"
It's Stein's ultimate "Gotcha!" moment.
Well, that's not how Dawkins describes the incident;
Richard Dawkins writes:
Toward the end of his interview with me, Stein asked whether I could think of any circumstances whatsoever under which intelligent design might have occurred.It's the kind of challenge I relish, and I set myself the task of imagining the most plausible scenario I could...
I was aware that the leading advocates of Intelligent Design are very fond of protesting that they are not talking about God as the designer, but about some unnamed and unspecified intelligence, which might even be an alien from another planet...
bending over backwards to make the best case I could for intelligent design, I constructed a science fiction scenario...
I still hadn't rumbled Stein...
I patiently explained to him that life could conceivably have been seeded on Earth by an alien intelligence from another planet (Francis Crick and Leslie Orgel suggested something similar -- semi tongue-in-cheek). The conclusion I was heading towards was that, even in the highly unlikely event that some such 'Directed Panspermia' was responsible for designing life on this planet, the alien beings would THEMSELVES have to have evolved
I have to say that some of the comments attributed to him in the article cited in the OP just don't sound like Dawkins.
Heidi Martinuzzi writes:
He wonders sometimes, he says, why all DNA has such a deliberate signature to it. It's almost as if someone, or something, put their â€œstampâ€ on it, and maybe even placed the seeds of this DNA, in cellular form, on the Earth, on purpose
Not sure I quite believe that one. It sounds like the last thing that Dawkins would say, it's certainly pretty far removed from his well-known opinions on ID. I suppose that we'll have to wait for the film to be released (or become available on Youtube or P2P) to know for sure what definitely was said, albeit edited by the Expelled crew.
Overall, Martinuzzi seems to have fallen for most of the fibs and exaggerations in the movie (that we know of so far), but at least she isn't daft enough to have fallen for the whole "Evolution=Hitler - YOU EVO'S LOVE HITLER!!! SAY IT! SAY YOU LOVE HITLER!!!" bit. Disappointing that anyone falls for any of it really.
Edited by Granny Magda, : Added section from article for clarity's sake.