Again With The Dawkins Video

Question from Mido:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W4e4MwogLo
What is the response to this? Does this refute evoulution?
Please give me a detailed explanation.

Answer by SmartLX:
This crops up every now and again, as if we’re not supposed to have seen it before. Every time it’s an opportunity to shed light on it for more people.

Richard Dawkins let an Australian film crew into his home for an interview. When they asked the question in the video (how does nature create new genetic information) he immediately realised they were creationists in his home under false pretenses and stopped the interview. He let it resume afterwards, basically because they begged him.

The video has been edited by many different creationist propagandists to make Dawkins’ moment of realisation and quiet anger look even more like he was stumped. (Some even insert themselves as the interviewer.) When Dawkins got wind of this, he put out an article explaining what had happened and comprehensively answering the question, to dispel any doubt that he could if he’d been inclined to indulge the creationists that day.

Whether or not you believe Dawkins’ explanation, he’s given the question an answer which you must judge on its own merits by reading his article. If you don’t accept it, comment and tell me why.

11 thoughts on “Again With The Dawkins Video”

  1. SLY CREATIONISTS, I would not even bother to talk to and with them, but Richard knows better, and so does SmartL.

    Basically, creationists are of lower IQ and educational level and kind, than atheists, especially in sciences, so, how can a highly educated and intelligent atheist be expected to talk to a creationist, bearing in mind the general stupidity and level of basic knowledge of creationists, in physics, chemistry and biology.

    Nevertheless, I would suggest to all of the creationists suckers to start with DAWKINS’ SELFISH GENE and to have in their minds the enormous time evolution took to take place, leave alone the even much greater time needed after the big bang and the appearance of matter from energy in the Universe to start with for cosmic bodies to develop from dust after the big bang…
    One that knows all that, and CAN IMAGINE the time needed for both of these processes in the Universe, can easily grasp the notion of evolution. For the rest, it’s just impossible because they know nothing about nothing of energy and matter in the Universe. For them these are Chinese letters. But, we atheists speak Chinese, so to say. I pity them.

    These notions are unimaginable to their poor minds, so they find the way out of the labyrinth in creating ‘god’, who is supposed to have created the Universe out of nothing. And, what’s ever worse, they don’t see the logical fallacy of their thinking, they say nothing can become of nothing, nevertheless they created god that created something from noting. I would tell them then, that if god could do THAT, create something from nothing, why would this something not be able to have been come from nothing. Actually, it is not even so, the Universe is not empty, never have been, nor will be, so, it is quite possible that the something we see around us and are part of it, has become of something that the Universe is full of, and matter still pops out all the time out of apparent nothing. We don’t need god to explain the origin of matter. It is energy, and energy has no origin because the UNIVERSE IS ENERGY.

    Hard stuff to fathom if you are stuck to Aristotelian logic, not even knowing of him. That nothing becomes of nothing. But it does all the time, because this nothing of yours is not Aristotelian nothing. It is something, and it has always been there, without your silly god to explain its origin. Something simply IS in the Universe. Never become. Just changes forms.

    1. Niki, did you even read the response that Mr. Dawkins left on his website. It only increased the wonder that Mr. Dawkins set forth when he was stumped when the question was first asked. At no time did he list any examples to answer the question first asked. He still could not provide the examples. He blew air, trying to hem and haw, around the question.
      And the lack of an example is even more powerful when you think that he could not even provide one. Now if he gave one and then went blank, one would have been better than none. And this is the basic premise of evolution. That information was added so that all kinds of other organisms could have been evolved into. Yet he, especially he could not give one.
      Now you can rant and rave all you want, but this along with many other quotes and admissions from other atheists and evolutionists, added to the many Christians who are scientists, who themselves give evidences and EXAMPLES OF THOSE EVIDENCES, which contradict the speculation of evolution.

      You know, you and SmartLx, would be better off, by just admitting that it is really harder than you first off to support Evolution. If Mr. Dawkins has so much problem, providing these examples, then it is not really such a poor reflection upon you. Except if you continue supporting such a dying concept. You are making yourselves to appear as the many Republicans, especially those in the White House, who continue to put the support behind this our President, Mr. Trump.

      2. Preacher Gerald writes: [Niki, did you even read the response that Mr. Dawkins left on his website.]

        It’s obvious you didn’t, Gerald. Dawkins gave very detailed and specific examples in his article that explain why natural selection is a gain in information for a species’ genome. He also mentioned other examples he had already noted in previous publications, including some of the books he has written. Not surprising given your history of activity at this website, you either did not comprehend his writings, ignored what was written, or didn’t actually read it at all. Whatever the reason, your continued ignorance is completely on yourself. The information is readily available out there for anyone that wants to learn. You just don’t want to learn…

        1. Tim, I believe he did, but comprehended nothing of it, thus he seems to ignore the info Dawkins gave there. He misunderstands it all.

          But, he seems to be not just a FOOL, but a GENTLE one, having no whatsoever idea what real science is.

          Thus, he believes that ANYONE, meaning HE, too, being literate, that is, knowing how to read and write English, can understand what he reads.

          Unfortunately, most of creationists and generally religious people belong to this group, the fools, but not all have NICE MANNERS as he does, we must give him credit for THAT one, something that cannot be said for me, I am afraid, I am too angry at idiots Greeks I live among, being semi Greek myself, but having been born and grown in Serbia, as a hard core atheist from birth, well, Greeks, that are religious to stupidity level, that I cannot and won’t hold my sharp tongue back. It’s too much.

          Thank you for your support, and why don’t we hear from you more?

          1. Niki, it’s strictly a time issue for me. Sometimes I just don’t have am opportunity to get on and post things. Many of my answers require research on my part because I often respond to the postings of others, and I want to be able to accurately and completely discuss or react to whatever it is that the other person wrote. I’m certainly not going away however, and I will be on here as often as I can 🙂

            1. Ok, but give it a try, because I feel lonely here, having only SmartLX and now you as my fellow thinkers. I know people read this, but I think it is kinda ‘selfish’ to just enjoy the site without giving anything to it…

      3. This is an ATHEISTS’ site, not a religious one, and certainly not Christian, as you seem to think, ignoring the fact that there are another 2 major religions, I gather this from your promoting your BABBLE whenever you can, but, have in mind that the site is here to explain to the religious folks why SCIENCE is almost sure that THERE IS NO GOD, so, please stop promoting any religion, yours including. This is not an advertising for Christianity site, it is an atheists’s site, to help you understand how nature works. I am begging you, stop talking nonsense here, or, at least, stop talking to me. I cannot stand you. You are an insult to human species. Dawkins said that much to a geologist who said that he recognized the Earth is million years old, nevertheless he believes in young earth. This is of course crap and bullshit and you know it. Please, get off of my back. you are unnerving me…except if THAT is exactly what you want. In that case, I will draw LX’s attention to YOU, as being a TROLL.

  2. You are hardly competent, from your IQ and EDUCATIONAL LEVEL and KIND, to understand and discuss such scientific question. I am very sorry.

  4. As with any ‘gotcha’ video, if comments are disabled, you know straight away there is more to the story than is being told, but that would get in the way of the story being weaved, so better not let anybody point that out. Read the full piece Dawkins wrote about the attempted ambush rather than just the snippet highlighted and you’ll get a much better idea of what was going on. However, even if He was as completely floored by the question as creationists would like you to believe, that still doesn’t prove creationism.

Comments are closed.