Analysis of the Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit

              The Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit is a counter-argument to modern versions of the argument from design for the existence of God. It was introduced by Richard Dawkins in chapter 4 of his 2006 book The God Delusion, "Why there almost certainly is no God".   The argument is a play on the notion of a "tornado sweeping through a junkyard to assemble a Boeing 747" employed to decry abiogenesis and evolution as vastly unlikely and better explained by the existence of a creator god. According to Dawkins, this logic is self-defeating as the theist must now account for the god's existence and explain whether or how the god was created.

 In his view, if the existence of highly complex life on Earth is the equivalent of the implausible junkyard Boeing 747, the existence of a highly complex god is the "ultimate Boeing 747" that truly does require the seemingly impossible to explain its existence.

     [According to Dawkins, this logic is self-defeating as the theist must now account for the god's existence and explain whether or how the god was created. ]  In this argument, the author is making an assumption that God is created just like other things that are created. Suppose this assumption is true. If god is created by x, x will be created by y and so on to an infinite regress. Hence, the beginner of the creation would not be reached. This would mean that if such an infinite regress were actually present, there would have been no universe as the first maker would never be reached , or simply does not exist. The infinity minus oneth maker also does not exist and this will ultimately mean that the infinity minus (infinity minus 2) th God also does not exist, as its existence would necessitate the existence of an infinitieth god. If we say that the last God also does not exist, we fall into a logical fallacy as the teleological and other arguments prove the existence of God. Hence, there is a god who is uncreated. that is the only explanation of the universe being present. the teleological argument does not apply to god as we do not know what God is? Atheists cannot claim that God is a machine or a human being or more complex or less complex than his crweation. how can dawkins prove that god is more complex than his creation. He is using a false analogy in this case. 

see the video;