Eugene questions Dawkins

Richard Dawkins, in The Blind Watchmaker, explains the evolution of winged creatures:

What use is half a wing? How did wings get their start? Many animals leap from bough to bough, and sometimes fall to the ground. Especially in a small animal, the whole body surface catches the air and assists the leap, or breaks the fall, by acting as a crude aerofoil. Any tendency to increase the ratio of surface area to weight would help, for example flaps of skin growing out in the angles of joints. From here, there is a continuous series of gradations to gliding wings, and hence to flapping wings. Obviously there are distances that could not have been jumped by the earliest animals with proto-wings. Equally obviously, for any degree of smallness or crudeness of ancestral air-catching surfaces, there must be some distance, however short, which can be jumped with the flap and which cannot be jumped without the flap.

Or, if prototype wingflaps worked to break the animal's fall, you cannot say 'Below a certain size the flaps would have been of no use at all'. Once again, it doesn't matter how small and un-winglike the first wingflaps were. There must be some height, call it h, such that an animal would just break its neck if it fell from that height, but would just survive if it fell from a slightly lower height. In this critical zone, any improvement in the body surface's ability to catch the air and break the fall, however slight that improvement, can make the difference between life and death. Natural selection will then favour slight, prototype wingflaps. When these small wingflaps have become the norm, the critical height A will become slightly greater. Now a slight further increase in the wingflaps will make the difference between life and death. And so on, until we have proper wings. -- Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, pp. 89-90.

Here is irrefutable proof of the existence of kamikaze snakes, which, by Dawkins' argument, based on the principle of natural selection, must inevitably evolve into flying serpents:

What use is a paralyzed brain or uncontrollable neurons?
Not much.
How did consciousness evolve?
I'm not sure.
Imagine a time when no animal attained the threshold of consciousness.
I do not believe there was ever such a time. All animals down to the simplest bacteria have a level of consciousness. If the organism reacts to the environment then it is clearly conscious at some level.
I believe that Darwin would have rationalized the history of the grand library by imagining its highly ordered present-day existence to have come about by random and incremental variations.
You seem to think Darwin started with a conclusion. He didn't. He based his conclusion on meticulous observation. If he had been observing a different subject, like a library, he would undoubtedly have arrived at a different conclusion.
Consciousness is a threat detection and reaction mechanism. It's utility to a moving hunted organism should be obvious.