Why was Mr Dawkins Stumped and Fumbled around on a question by Creationists?

Question

Check out the Youtube for yourself.

Richard Dawkins is dumbfounded after being asked to "give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome" - quite a reasonable question that one would expect Oxford University's Professor for the Public Understanding of Science - so adamant in his belief in evolution - could and would provide an answer for.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaKryi3605g
When will Atheists stop trying to outsmart GOD?
Don't they know when they have lost misreably?

Answer 1

if theres one thing that science proves its that people dont have everything figured out ...

Answer 2

The problem is not Mr Dawkins answer, but rather, the question. It is a stupid question. This is not a snide put down but rather an accurate assesment of the question. The question is asking for an explanation of "genetic mutations" and "an evolutionary process" at the same time - two different questions posed as one! And, what does the questioner mean exactly by the phrase "increase the information in the genome"? I highly doubt the questioner even knows what this means. A 'genome' for one thing, is not a single entitiy like a table or a chair. Additionally, 'information' contained in our genetic make up is not like information in an encyclopedia, like a number of letters or sentences or statements but is rather much more subtle and fluid. It is like asking "How much gasoline is there in a trip to Chicago?" By what route? What type of vehicle is it? Etc etc... The question itself makes little sense. Dawkins' response is notably very intelligent as he is attempting to honestly answer the questioner by explaining what evolution actually says, which is a far cry from the assumptions made in the question. This is one of the key problems in questions about evolution - they don't know enough to ask a sensible question. IE - "If we descended from apes why are there still apes?"

Answer 3

> give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome

Polyploidy in plants. True-breeding triticale and corn are both results of these processes.

Enjoy your tortilla, knowing that it came from a process involving an increase in the information in the genome.

Answer 4

Though Mr. Dawkins is a bright man, he is NOT a genetic engineer or biologist.
If atheists have "lost miserably" then why has the atheist community quadrupled in the last ten years?
I cannot outsmart god, because you cannot outsmart something that does not exist.
Also, bet you didn't know that the video was edited to make him look like this did you? Just another sneaky, dirty little trick by Christians.

Answer 5

I watched that, and I thought the question was poorly worded.... I'm no dummy either, and had to think of "what is it that this question is trying to ask?"

So, hon, I thought he answered the question quite well, since he had to straighten out what the questioner had taken as an assumption... that fish today are not modern critters.. the idea of a common ancestor was overlooked by the questioner, and he needed to find the error in her question before he could answer the assumption... easy one. And skalite tells you what really happened..........

And no, non-believers just use logic, not gods.

Answer 6

You really got your question answered on this one, big time, didn't you hon? My sympathies to your lack of education. Stay in school, hon, and open up your mind. This little question betrays the fact that you are either unintelligent , or for sure uneducated... No one who understood sophomore biology would ever do anything so self-embarrassing......

That you to asked such a smug question, and made a wholesale conclusion says lots about how little you know about religion, or about science.... sorry for you hon.

Answer 7

The short answer is, the video is edited. (You can visibly see that.)

The long answer from TalkOrigins:

1. According to Dawkins, he paused because the question revealed that the interviewers were creationists, that he had been duped about their motives. He paused to think about how to handle them, and the change of subject occurred due to the several minutes when he confronted them being omitted from the video (Dawkins 2003).

2. The question is equivalent to asking how complexity could evolve, which Dawkins has covered in at least four books (The Blind Watchmaker, River Out of Eden, Climbing Mount Improbable, and A Devil's Chaplain). He has answered the question at great length.

3. The ability of a single person to answer a question is largely irrelevant. The scientific literature is rife with examples of information increasing.

Answer 8

Well, because questions like that aren't something you generally answer off the top of your head. Oh, and he'd written book length answers to the question. That's what the books he writes answer.

I don't see what this incident has to do with the rest of the vast body of evidence for evolution. This small incident doesn't mean that atheists "lost." And you can't outsmart something you don't think exists.

Answer 9

The inability to come up with an "example" of this in no way discounts the certaintly that such an event has occured many times. The fossil record stands before us as a testimony.

Answer 10

I don't know why he might have had trouble with this, as he addressed it quite thoroughly and correctly in his book [ref. 1]. (Possibly you were not paying attention.) But creationism is useless, because the theory can predict nothing, and evolution is now a proven fact. (Proof details available on request.) As for god, the concept is fiction [ref. 2].

Answer 11

It's a shame they cut the video before he answered. They show him thinking, but not when he answered (typical Creationist editing).

I don't know what example he used. Here's my favorite: