And I don't know why he is. He is considered somewhat of a hero amongst the atheist and darwinist communities, but I'm afraid I find his arguments to be quite shallow, his reasoning faulty in many places, and some of his logic to be contradictory and even downright dishonest in places. If not dishonest, at least suffering from a kind of intellectual tunnel vision.
Here is one more example of his speaking out of both sides of his mouth, or thinking out of both sides of his brain, and not letting one side know what the other is thinking.
He insists throughout his book (The God Delusion) that God (if He exists) must be very complicated to have created the universe and everything in it because the creator, he argues, must necessarily be more complex than its creation.
But then, on page 117, he says this:
That scientifically savvy philosopher Daniel Dennett pointed out that evolution counters one of the oldest ideas we have: 'the idea that it takes a big fancy smart thing to make a lesser thing...' Darwin's discovery of a workable process that does that very counter-intuitive thing is what makes his contribution to human thought so revolutionary...
Of course, he does not see, and cannot admit, that the existence of God is also a 'workable process' that accomplishes, and indeed has accomplished, the very same thing. Counter-intuitive? Perhaps, but here he counters his very argument against the existence of God.
Emporer Dawkins, I'm afraid, has no clothes. At the very least he is walking about in his underwear.