christians, im sorry that we, the educated, dont have all the information we ever need in 1 book. he thought about his answer. thats the difference between a theist and atheist; we atheists will think about our retorts, consider all things, and be ready to change our opinion on a matter at the presentation of evidence that pushes us to do so.
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
that makes no sense i never said i believed in god, im open to any possibility im agnostic. But his actual answer is not relevant to the question, he simply doesnt know an example...it doesnt mean there is a god, but it also means that hes quite arrogant for demanding that there is not one either. atheists and religeous people are as closed minded as each other, we should all be open to any possibility.
his answer is in the video at 0:33 and its completely irrelevant to the question, i thought the footage had been tampered with to make him look worse but it turns out this is the real footage, he makes a right cock of himself
@postmasterw00t this is not doctored Richard Dawkins admit it but again he made such excuses that he didnt know that "creationists" were going to interview him
@peyupsgurl The video you are seeing has been manipulated making him look "stumped". If you check the original video you see how they've played around with the audio Fox News-style.
This video has evolved so much, its an audio swap, in the original interview he was asked a completely different question and he answered it, this "pause" you see here is actually when he was getting told the question. He was waiting for the person to finish the question so he could make a reply, silly christians
Funny that he would have been stumped since he had just written a book in which he devoted an entire chapter on the subject. Not likely. I'll take him at his word when he says he was debating whether or not to throw them out after they lied about not working for creationists.
I'm actually not surprised that you posted this video with the intention of it being an argument against atheism. After all, we atheists have to remember - most theists are not familiar with the concept of "Thought" and will therefore mistake contemplation for confusion.
By the way, as immature and imbecilic it is to post a video of Richard Dawkins thinking for an answer, I do not believe that this has been edited. I've studied it very closely and can't find a sign of a cut anywhere.
Wow. This is just embarrassing. I had trust in people like you, that one day, people like you would grow up and stop acting like little children, but no; you're so insecure that the best attempt at an "argument" you can come up with is to repost a video of AN atheist pausing for thought... seriously, this is just the most pathetic, sad attempt ever. GROW UP.
@comali2212 actually if you had put this video into context this is a Dawkins in horror that he has just let a creationist film crew into his house, while at the same time trying to think of a way to explain "increasing information in the genome" in a way that wouldn't take half an hour.
mean while, as i type this, creationists all over the world jump to defend their imaginary master. lol pitty.
You see that... ... he's thinking. He could be just like a christian and simply say "I just have faith." Oh... okay. Thats an acceptable answer. Get outa heeeerree!!!!!
heavily edited video in which he probably did answer the question, but as he didn't, the answer is trinomy 21, or downs syndrome. wherein the chromosome number is increased to 47. got that from another video. =] all credit to it.
Dawkins has explained this video quite clearly. It was a tv-crew from New Zealand, I think it was, and they had asked him for an interview. What they didn't tell him was that they were creationists. This clip is when he realised that, and he is not stumped by the question, but considering whether he should go on with the interview, knowing that it would most likely be quote mined..And look and behold, it was.
What a ridiculous answer, especially from a scientific point of view. #1. In order to come to the statement of fact that Mr. Dawkins has proclaimed, he has to be able to prove it. Well, a) there's no physical proof of where a fish came from and b) Mr. Dawkins wasn't there to witness the evolution of the fish.
I've always found it interesting that he makes statements of facts backed by no scientific data whatsoever and people buy it. He's not as logical as illogical people believe he is.
@capitalismforever no one was there NO SHIT but we have the evidence. if thats your reasoning then i say no one saw creation. tiktaalik go look at it. better yet go look up shawnerd and look at his video about evolution and then STFU
@patrickledford420 LOL, "no one was there to witness it"...thats the best. There are also no such thing as mountains, because no one saw them made...which means no plates in the earths crust. I will tell you what I did witness....God dying in an ally. If you didn't see it happen, it didn't happen??? Im glad that guy is a thiest, because I don't want him on my team.
@capitalismforever "I've always found it interesting that he makes statements of facts backed by no scientific data whatsoever." Well he has to make it accesible. We aren't all scientists.
@capitalismforever This video is edited; what he says isn't his answer to the original question. Not only that, there ARE mutations that add information to the genome. Try daemonowner's answer :)
@capitalismforever Just because we weren't around to observe something doesn't mean we can't know it happened. That thinking is asinine. Take for example finding a muderer. If we arrest someone, with a motive, who's personal gun was left at the scene, with both their's and their victims DNA on it, only their finger prints on the gun, and blood spatter on their clothes which are found in their closet, we can conclud 100% it was him, without anyone observing the act.
I got news for you, God got raped and died in an ally near my house...he wimpered like a little whiny bitch for 3 days, and then I cut his throat with a dull utility knife so I could get some god damn sleep.
@PsychoSymantic 'bullshit?' seriously? what proof is there that evolution is true? there is none! there are so many aspects of science and just using logic and common sense that prove that creation is true. i cant even begin to describe the evidence of creation. just look up the evidence, its so obvious. so what if the video is a hoax? im not saying that it is, but i dont think thats any more so called "evidence" for proving evolution, just saying
@LProck4everGD1 seriously? this just proves you've never looked or just read "answers in genesis". There are tons of experiments demonstrating evolution, amoung many other areas, evolution is not merely a logical idea, it is a testable, proven theory that can be proven wrong. The people that say there is no evidence havent looked. We are DROWNING in evidence. Just because your pastor disaggrees with accredited Biologists doesn't mean evolution isn't true.
this is a hoax, he didnt know they were creationists and if he did he wouldnt have excepted the interview... theres a full article of him explaining himself... face it this is nothing compared to how many people hes made look like complete retards
Did anyone wonder why Professor Dawkins starts thinking of an answer before the question is even asked?
This is a cheap-shot by pathetic religious people loosing their grip in the "battle of minds". If you can't win a debate - make the other guy look stupid. Good job Christians! Your one way ticket to Hell awaits you!
What you see here is Dawkins trying to control his rage when he realizes this isn't a legitimate interview but a feeble attempt by creationists to trap him.
There's a comprehensive article on the net written by Dawkins that explains the answer to the question. The definition of "information" takes pages and without that the question has no meaning. The short answer is there are hundreds of demonstrable examples of increased information in genes through random mutation.
Arguing with a creationist is like playing chess with a pigeon. They knock all the pieces over, shit all over the board then fly away claiming victory...
In your case I don't need to say anything. You make my point better than I could and a complete fool of yourself.
You're as simple as you you are annoying...It's not a law until we discover it you ignorant freak! Before we discover something it just is. Something could be around for a billion years before it's discovered, then it becomes a law. That's why there's no such things as supernatural, only the natural we don't yet understand....You're so thick you think you're winning an argument you don't even have...Seriously, you're a waste of fucking space!
You really live in a fantasy don't you...You're either 12, or on the mental and emotional level of a 12 year old....OK I'll indulge your stupidity...The Laws of Physics came from Newton, but I think you mean the origin of physics, or the first self replicating gene...The answer is surprising simple. Just because we don't know everything, doesn't mean we know nothing...Or believe in bronze age mythology, like a FREAK! An answer for everything is an answer for nothing!
Well that's the delusion...You either except the evidence there is, and realize that believing in religious scripture is like believing in any bronze age mythology, or put your celestial dictator in his rightful place, with Thor, Zeus and Baal, back in the box!
The question that answers everything answers nothing....and you have nothing to go by other than bad science and remedial logic.
Probably not millions, but several thousand...And it seems logical to assume he existed, but how you get from there to a celestial dictator sent his son to die etc, is leap of astronomic proportion....And science is constantly in motion and updating itself. It doesn't mean what was said before was wrong. just the best we knew at the time. Science has to cross check itself countless times before something is considered fact...Religion is trying to get from A to X and stopping at B!
" sent his son to die etc, is leap of astronomic proportion"
Not if, as an ardent lifelong Atheist you find yourself, against every instinct of your own logic and understanding, you find yourself humbled before His awsome presence.....i now know there is life after death, meaning i have certainty, therefore peace.
whereas Science is just one long set of excuses and arguments unashamedly aimed at preserving and ensuring it's own methodical progression....to where?
How do you know there is life after death? That's an incredibly bold claim. Maybe you just want peace so you've found what you wanted to see?
Unless you live in a tree, you owe everything to modern science, from the food you eat to who cures you when you're sick. I've know many bright people convert so I'm not patronizing you, but I feel it was just a case of filling a hole...If it works for you, fine, but don't talk as if your inner conviction could compete with scientific fact.
The reason you know about any of the things you've listed, is because of advances in modern science. We can now start to make sense of the universe....If left to religion, we'd still believe it possible to fit two of every animal species in a boat, that rainbows are a message from God or that thunder was God angry...Don't confuse observing life to studying life.
A major element of the Scientific process is observation, without the ability to observe Science would be baseless. I could refer you to ancient Greece, Rome, Egypt, India, etc....all aquired a surprisingly vast amount of knowledge about the natural world without the ability to reference "modern Science".
just because you say you have certainty in life after death entitles you to be called an idiot. There is no certainty, especially concerning these issues.
...And atheism isn't an ideology you can label...So that's a massive fail. There is no central dogma. You can believe what you want but you must present the evidence. It frees you of the burden of believing you are always right....In science being proved wrong, simply gives you more determination to find out. It isn't the intention of atheism to prove religion false...It just is! Darwin offered a predictive alternative 150 years ago, and EVERYTHING we've found out since confirms he was right.
Are you capable of making a lucid point? You don't seem to realize you make the case for you being a moron every time you open your mouth...Say something intelligible, if you can!
What is your mission, exactly? To make people "see the light" and break free from the shackles of religion, or behave like some aggressive, would-be elitist who goes around insulting people for holding beliefs which differ from yours?
Well, if you read the comments I'm replying to that would be clear....There is a huge difference between someone humbly having their own beliefs and a brainwashed troll that feels they need to tell people they are going to hell...Which one are you?
I read the comments. You appear to have responded to a three week old comment by insulting another user, which kicked off the entire "argument". I'm not religious myself, but I appreciate the views of others. As for all your talk of intellect: perhaps you could use your great mind to do something more constructive than engaging in small-fry slanging matches on Youtube.
There is a difference between having a view, and mindlessly spouting bullshit, as I'm sure you know. I'm not going to apologize for other people's stupidity... I appreciate any view that's been thought about... Going AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH like a rabid monkey doesn't constitute a view...In my opinion.
My grandfather thought he was back in the war on his deathbed...I don't build my worldview on it. Why is it you religionuts are on the intellectual level of a tree stump? I can barely read your childish gibberish...And considering you actually believe the Bible (or whatever) you're all amazingly hateful! ... If you believe that pile of medieval poetry. then go back to your grief-hole and pray, and let the adults talk! Your argument is null and void...You lost, now go and die quietly!
If you actually watch the video, he starts thinking long before the question is finished. This was taken from a completely different video...If you watch his lectures and debates, you often see out-takes where he is finding his place... If the best you can do is badly edit a faked question over footage of a man thinking, then you really are scraping the barrel.
What are you...An infant? He even talks about this in his lecture, showing several different edits. You babbling like a retarded freak is hardly helping your already pathetic argument....There are scientists that disagree with Dawkins, but no theist, creationist or religious 'scholar' has come close to debating him in an intelligent way....Yeah I'll "deal with it'"..Just as I'll deal with the fact you delusional throwbacks are clinging onto your dead faith like an iceberg in the sun.
The video is fake...I've seen the same piece of footage with about ten different questions dubbed over...It just goes to show the desperation shown by the failed 'science' of creationism, which is on the intellectual level of a tree stump...It will take you a 1000 years to catch up with modern science, and even then you'll only have bronze age mythology to go by...
and stop posting about a subject you have no reasearch background in -- once you have gone to school and done a bit of studying in biology then see if your ideology remains.
till then its like telling a catholic priest to have sex with little boys...oh wait, never mind
It's been stated many times that the interview in question in this video was a changeup style question where he wasn't given time to prepare himself for such a question. As he would know now (this is a rather old interview by now), and has explained numerous times both in his books and his shows, the argument presented in the video is easily disproved, even in the case of humans.
Chromosomal fusion accounts for an increase in chromosome pairs, and is the simplest answer to the question.
Don't make me laugh. You would be absolutely destroyed. You'd be like the little idiot who asked him, "what if you're wrong?" at Liberty U and was kicked into the pavement.
That's true, although I'm a creationist(Christian) the man is quite intelligent, he is trained to give an answer for every question, unfortunately I've seen him answer a question with a question (many times). Sometimes he speaks like an Atheist and sometimes as a Agnostic, he's also selective in his research which is disappointing since you can debunk him quite easily.
It's not so much that he's trained to have an answer for every question, it's that people trying to argue a case for religion making much sense don't have a leg to stand on. I've heard him answer questions with questions, too, and they were great answers.
He's been through enough arguments, the man didn't come out of nowhere, eventually you can train yourself to come up with logical answers o any question since it only deals with one topic religion vs Atheism, unfortunately most Christians are just regular people with little or no knowledge of Science, this makes them perfect targets.
For example, when you ask a stupid question like, "what if you're wrong?" then the flaws of concentrating on that idea with only atheists needs to be pointed out. Sometimes it's very nicely done with a question, like. "what if YOU'RE wrong about Zeus or any of the other gods?"
If you ask him do you believe in a eternal God, he would simply state that he doesn't and reply do you believe that a man lives on the sun, a question to question scenario, he sways the question all together. In Quantum physics in order for that singularity of the big bang to happen something that has no regards for time or space had to have existed something eternal, I read this from a Science magazine, the bible does call God "The Eternal God" makes you think.
Well, I don't know if you think Dawkins belief in a big bang is supposed to be some kind of absolute, but it isn't. He simply believes it's the best theory we have at present. I want to go back to something you said earlier, about sometimes sounding atheistic, and sometimes agnostic. Um... That's because most atheists ARE agnostic. Atheism is simply not having a belief in any gods. Agnosticism is believing that whether a god exists or not is ultimately unknowable. I don't know if he's (CONT)
agnostic or not, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if he is. But if by agnosticism, you mean "middle of the road", choosing not to take a side on the issue, than he is by no means agnostic, AT ALL. I realize the theistic interest in polarizing atheists and agnostics, but more and more of them are beginning to realize that the majority of them fit into the same camps; they are simply using different names, exlusive of each other, when no such exclusivity is necessary. Sorry for the alt name.
Dawkins is a brilliant guy but he's shown time and time again he's not good at speaking off the cuff. This was ambush journalism of the worst kind, he was lied to and not told that this interview was part of creationist video until he realized with the loaded questions they were asking what they were trying to do.
The story of this video is that the people asking questions entered Dawkins' house under false pretenses. Dawkins had said he didn't want to conduct any religious interviews in his home. The question shown answered in the video was asked first, the "first" question was actually the second asked and Dawkins' pause was a moment of aggravation after which he kicked them out of his house.
In other words, he wasn't stumped. These people came to him under false pretenses and he booted them out.
My big question is why was he writing and what was he writing that was so important that he do so in the middle of the interview. Seems kind of strange.
Through the wonders of editing indeed they pretty much cut him off. He is a smart person, bit militant to my taste but he is smart. And he would have a rebuttal, the rebuttal of course cut of.
Or in this case when someone needs just a few seconds to think about what the hell was asked. *cut* longer videos of this one are posted. Very probably in the similar videos even.
Look at the related videos on the right. They clearly hoaxed this. He answered the first question, then they asked him another question, then edited it to make it seem like he didnt answer the original question.
you guys do know that he did answer the question right? he basically said "yes, and this is how" and then he went on to explain the misconception that people have about evolution, and that sure you can tally the amount of info in the genome, but that is not the point, the point is that gradually there will be a different animal, better suited to the environment, regardless of genome size.
The video is an example of deceptive editing. Dawkins realized with this question that he was an unwitting participating in a Creationist propaganda video. A phrase like "no new information" is a phrase that's pretty much exclusive to the Creationist vernacular. Ever wonder why the rest of the video was never released?
Creationism is the worlds greatest lie and makes Christianity look dishonest.
If you're so sure he is stumped, why remove ratings? I mean, the title shows that you are so sure that there is no way you could argue against this, but you a way in which people can make up their own minds about it.
i almost cried laughing at the ignorance of "the way of the master videos". why do creationists try to use this argument that we should be able to see a lizard head on a bird beginning to form? evolution happens over millennia not decades...
He even wrote about himself that he was not good at debates. He always gets his ideas afterwards. That is why he usually does not participate in debates.
haha so fake, the simplest answer is yes. An Addition mutation. an example is a mutation in suffers of cystic fibrosis where a mutation leads to an addition of an N-linked oligosaccharide chain at the C terminal end of EL4.
look, i dont like being called names, and niether does any body else. im srry that creationists tried to ruin a name that is good in society. i think that its really stupid to do things like this. its extremely hypocritical. and very childish... dont be stereotypical about this cuz i wouldnt have done that, and the strongest Christians i know wouldnt have edited something like this either... btw, y do u believe in evolution? plz dont yell at me, im really am just wondering
the original video was done by a man and they had arrived at his house under a different reason, and when they asked him a question that anybody who had ever taken a 10th grade science class could answer, he realised what they were there for, and started considering whether or not he should ask them to leave, and yes it is doctored to make it look as though he took longer to answer.
Yes, clearly this video is doctored. What I want to know is why this guy spends all his time trying to convince the religious people that they are wrong. If their religion brings them happiness, or peace, or confidence, or whatever, why not let them be content? Most of the religions speak of peaceful and loving behaviors (with notable exceptions). For me, people like this are easier to work with. Why is there so much anger in this topic? Live and let live.
I dont get it. Maybe its the editing of the video but he didn't answer the question asked.
And it's a trick question anyway, impossible to answer. The only situations where DNA is modified in the genome is when bad DNA is present, like a disease. And no matter how you argue, that's not evolution because it's a negative effect. It's what happens when you inbreed too much in a trailer park. Doh!
Actually, one of the answers to the question is down syndrome. Dawkins knows that, he just normally doesn't grant theists audience (because they do shit like this), so he was trying to decide whether to talk to them at all or to leave. That's why he said, at first, "can you just stop the tape." What you see afterward is when they ask him to describe evolution, and then they edit the clips together with typical creationist fashion, to make him look dumb.
However, I see your point with the trailer park reference,and I have to say, you are right. That is not an example of evolution at all, because that gene doesn't survive to reproduce. It's simply a negative effect. Bad DNA is what it boils down to. Again, typical theist fashion; Relying on those who don't have a clue about the subject to just go along and say "OOOHHH SNAP!!! Dawkins got schooled!!!"
Clearly a dirty edit-trick. That question is easy to answer, nothing difficult about it. Silly creationists need to lie more and more to sabotage the science that's incompatible with their believes
Who ever said mutations increase the information in the genome? They sometimes do, they sometimes just change it...which is what the word mutation MEANS. And anyway, I think this video is actually very illustrative of the types of cheap tactics creationists use against those who disagree with them, which I've taken to calling gotcha arguments. It basically consists of saying or asking somethign so ridiculously idiotic that the person is stumped, then claiming they can't "explain" themselves.
So, salvationflogger, let me ask you a question: Which version of Creation in the Bible do you like best? Genesis Chapter ONE, which has the same developmental sequence as Evolutionary theory teaches? Or chapter TWO, in which man was created before plants and animals? Chapter ONE, in which Adam and Eve were created at the same time? Or chapter TWO, in which Adam was created before the plants and Eve was created after all the animals?
This video bears false witness, it has been exposed as a deception in other videos, look them up. Bearing false witness is a sin, even if you think you're lying for god. Why the deception? Isn't bearing false witness supposed to be a sin? Stop lying in the name of god!
Hey Alpha, variation in a kind actually happens. We have variation in us, of course. How else could we tell each other apart? But not all scientists are evolutionists, you should know that by now. In fact, many great minds were not atheistic in attitude or rationale.
Tell me, what theories do I hold to? Since you seem to know...
Another question I like to ask my Darwin-minded professors, and classmates from time to time is "what's an example of a recent beneficial mutation?" The truth is, there is no answer to this question. Any information that is not useful, according to Darwin's own theory of natural selection, is likely to be lost in the future. Virtually every mutation ever recorded has proven to be harmful.
Big, the statement you just made proves pretty conclusively that you're no scientist. As any scientist will tell you, evolution is about as scientific as we can get. There's more evidence for evolution than there is for about 80% of theories you believe in.
Clearly this is an example of creative editing. It is sad what creationist have to stoop too for their argument to be even plausible for the uneducated.
christians, im sorry that we, the educated, dont have all the information we ever need in 1 book. he thought about his answer. thats the difference between a theist and atheist; we atheists will think about our retorts, consider all things, and be ready to change our opinion on a matter at the presentation of evidence that pushes us to do so.
capetorial 1 day ago
HOAX!!!!!!
FactualCommentor 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given 2 the profane masses is another useful idiot 4 Jesuit machinations
Jesuitical; pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuit Order completely altered the education system 2 suit their Evo-Hoax Agenda to discredit the Bible
Papal Rome cant have their Counter Reformation 2nd Dark Age DESPOTISM until Bible is destroyed
SpencerBenedict2nd 4 months ago
This is a hoax which has been proved long ago. I don't understand why this is still on the internet.
Cambrand 11 months ago
@Cambrand
his asnwer is bullshit anyway even though its doctctored footage his actual answer is shit
postmasterw00t 7 months ago
@postmasterw00t Yes, bullshit if your way of thinking goes "I dont get it ---> god"
Cambrand 7 months ago
@Cambrand
that makes no sense i never said i believed in god, im open to any possibility im agnostic. But his actual answer is not relevant to the question, he simply doesnt know an example...it doesnt mean there is a god, but it also means that hes quite arrogant for demanding that there is not one either. atheists and religeous people are as closed minded as each other, we should all be open to any possibility.
postmasterw00t 7 months ago
@postmasterw00t
what is his actual answer?
bleeah 4 months ago
@bleeah
his answer is in the video at 0:33 and its completely irrelevant to the question, i thought the footage had been tampered with to make him look worse but it turns out this is the real footage, he makes a right cock of himself
postmasterw00t 4 months ago
@postmasterw00t this is not doctored Richard Dawkins admit it but again he made such excuses that he didnt know that "creationists" were going to interview him
peyupsgurl 2 weeks ago
@Cambrand who told you it's a hoax? Richard Dawkins admit it in his website..
peyupsgurl 2 weeks ago
@peyupsgurl The video you are seeing has been manipulated making him look "stumped". If you check the original video you see how they've played around with the audio Fox News-style.
Cambrand 2 weeks ago
Fossils? :)
sillymoney1 1 year ago
richard dawkins slips and slides peanutbutter coated bananas in his loose anus
ObamaSucks12345 1 year ago
This video has evolved so much, its an audio swap, in the original interview he was asked a completely different question and he answered it, this "pause" you see here is actually when he was getting told the question. He was waiting for the person to finish the question so he could make a reply, silly christians
lbIeesel 1 year ago
Funny that he would have been stumped since he had just written a book in which he devoted an entire chapter on the subject. Not likely. I'll take him at his word when he says he was debating whether or not to throw them out after they lied about not working for creationists.
foxlake02 1 year ago
I'm actually not surprised that you posted this video with the intention of it being an argument against atheism. After all, we atheists have to remember - most theists are not familiar with the concept of "Thought" and will therefore mistake contemplation for confusion.
Vreicher 1 year ago
Maybe he was thinking the easier way to make it simplier for stupid people who doesn't understand anything about science :)
mopethelion 1 year ago
By the way, as immature and imbecilic it is to post a video of Richard Dawkins thinking for an answer, I do not believe that this has been edited. I've studied it very closely and can't find a sign of a cut anywhere.
FibonaziProductions 1 year ago
Wow. This is just embarrassing. I had trust in people like you, that one day, people like you would grow up and stop acting like little children, but no; you're so insecure that the best attempt at an "argument" you can come up with is to repost a video of AN atheist pausing for thought... seriously, this is just the most pathetic, sad attempt ever. GROW UP.
FibonaziProductions 1 year ago
Crazy Christians never learn do they?! - because if they did then they would probably be agnostic or atheist!
johncbayliss 1 year ago
There is a differance between thinking and searching for an answer to a question he cant answer.
SuperGareth007 1 year ago
Look how the confused atheists jumped to defend their confused master Lol pitty
comali2212 1 year ago
@comali2212 actually if you had put this video into context this is a Dawkins in horror that he has just let a creationist film crew into his house, while at the same time trying to think of a way to explain "increasing information in the genome" in a way that wouldn't take half an hour.
mean while, as i type this, creationists all over the world jump to defend their imaginary master. lol pitty.
LucyInk121 1 year ago
lol, this video's still up? even with all the other videos showing this was faked?
I guess we shouldn't be too surprised. It's just more theists acting the same way they've been acting for years.
KevinLounsberry 1 year ago
OH MY GOD HES THINKING! HE'S clearly been stumped.
Theists clearly have never seen thought in action.
OmJarr 1 year ago
You see that... ... he's thinking. He could be just like a christian and simply say "I just have faith." Oh... okay. Thats an acceptable answer. Get outa heeeerree!!!!!
PFCKurt 1 year ago
heavily edited video in which he probably did answer the question, but as he didn't, the answer is trinomy 21, or downs syndrome. wherein the chromosome number is increased to 47. got that from another video. =] all credit to it.
daemonowner 1 year ago
Dawkins has explained this video quite clearly. It was a tv-crew from New Zealand, I think it was, and they had asked him for an interview. What they didn't tell him was that they were creationists. This clip is when he realised that, and he is not stumped by the question, but considering whether he should go on with the interview, knowing that it would most likely be quote mined..And look and behold, it was.
OddityDK 1 year ago
What a ridiculous answer, especially from a scientific point of view. #1. In order to come to the statement of fact that Mr. Dawkins has proclaimed, he has to be able to prove it. Well, a) there's no physical proof of where a fish came from and b) Mr. Dawkins wasn't there to witness the evolution of the fish.
I've always found it interesting that he makes statements of facts backed by no scientific data whatsoever and people buy it. He's not as logical as illogical people believe he is.
capitalismforever 1 year ago
@capitalismforever no one was there NO SHIT but we have the evidence. if thats your reasoning then i say no one saw creation. tiktaalik go look at it. better yet go look up shawnerd and look at his video about evolution and then STFU
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@patrickledford420 LOL, "no one was there to witness it"...thats the best. There are also no such thing as mountains, because no one saw them made...which means no plates in the earths crust. I will tell you what I did witness....God dying in an ally. If you didn't see it happen, it didn't happen??? Im glad that guy is a thiest, because I don't want him on my team.
tubiejonny 1 year ago
@capitalismforever very true
LProck4everGD1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@capitalismforever "I've always found it interesting that he makes statements of facts backed by no scientific data whatsoever." Well he has to make it accesible. We aren't all scientists.
garamification 1 year ago
@capitalismforever This video is edited; what he says isn't his answer to the original question. Not only that, there ARE mutations that add information to the genome. Try daemonowner's answer :)
brdy 1 year ago
@capitalismforever Just because we weren't around to observe something doesn't mean we can't know it happened. That thinking is asinine. Take for example finding a muderer. If we arrest someone, with a motive, who's personal gun was left at the scene, with both their's and their victims DNA on it, only their finger prints on the gun, and blood spatter on their clothes which are found in their closet, we can conclud 100% it was him, without anyone observing the act.
Jantles 1 year ago
Oh god, who tought these Jesus freaks to use the internet?!
CDiddy51 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I got news for you, God got raped and died in an ally near my house...he wimpered like a little whiny bitch for 3 days, and then I cut his throat with a dull utility knife so I could get some god damn sleep.
tubiejonny 1 year ago
@tubiejonny good one lol these creationist are fucking pathetic they show no evidence for there claims other then quote mining /\ and other nonsense
patrickledford420 1 year ago
actually this video is a hoax. the timing goes off.
search richard dawkins stumped hoax.
creationist bullshit at its finest.
PsychoSymantic 1 year ago
@PsychoSymantic 'bullshit?' seriously? what proof is there that evolution is true? there is none! there are so many aspects of science and just using logic and common sense that prove that creation is true. i cant even begin to describe the evidence of creation. just look up the evidence, its so obvious. so what if the video is a hoax? im not saying that it is, but i dont think thats any more so called "evidence" for proving evolution, just saying
LProck4everGD1 1 year ago
@LProck4everGD1 i just love when creationists claim theres no evidence for evolution, yet in the same breath they offer none for creation.
evolution evidence.
1 thousands of transitional fossils
2 living transitionals (lung fish, angel shark)
3 italian wall lizard experiment
4 fact that we share 96% of genes with chimps, 90% with cats
5 virus becoming immune to vaccines, when the vaccines used to be effective.
what do you have? oh ya a stupid book about sky fairies.
PsychoSymantic 1 year ago
@LProck4everGD1 seriously? this just proves you've never looked or just read "answers in genesis". There are tons of experiments demonstrating evolution, amoung many other areas, evolution is not merely a logical idea, it is a testable, proven theory that can be proven wrong. The people that say there is no evidence havent looked. We are DROWNING in evidence. Just because your pastor disaggrees with accredited Biologists doesn't mean evolution isn't true.
Jantles 1 year ago
Wow, did you post this expecting people to agree with you? And you're on the internet? Fuck!
P.S. Just because it was a bestseller doesn't mean you HAD to buy it. (the Bible)
EHSGirlScout 1 year ago
Dawkins Isn't GOD,
jesus! did you expect him to know everything.
lmao...
Muusicca 2 years ago
HOAX VID
longcatisloooooong 2 years ago
this is a hoax, he didnt know they were creationists and if he did he wouldnt have excepted the interview... theres a full article of him explaining himself... face it this is nothing compared to how many people hes made look like complete retards
Trevor10 2 years ago
PEOPLE!!! This video is not real. It is a hoax. Anyone who posts such things should do a better job of checking their sources.
dbradusc1 2 years ago
what do you mean?
I'm the winning team by the way, atheism.
Muusicca 2 years ago
He answered the question to it's true intent, rather than it's underhanded attempt at garnering a bad quote.
The question itself falls in with the informal fallacy of begging the question because both mutation and evolution add information to the genome.
I'd also rate the video, but I doubt this comment passes your screening.
natholomew 2 years ago
Did anyone wonder why Professor Dawkins starts thinking of an answer before the question is even asked?
This is a cheap-shot by pathetic religious people loosing their grip in the "battle of minds". If you can't win a debate - make the other guy look stupid. Good job Christians! Your one way ticket to Hell awaits you!
LuigiPeach 2 years ago
exactlly... I am 100% certain that christians who loose every single debate against this great man, made this out of pure desperation... :)
dooowde 2 years ago
What you see here is Dawkins trying to control his rage when he realizes this isn't a legitimate interview but a feeble attempt by creationists to trap him.
There's a comprehensive article on the net written by Dawkins that explains the answer to the question. The definition of "information" takes pages and without that the question has no meaning. The short answer is there are hundreds of demonstrable examples of increased information in genes through random mutation.
Creationists; BAH!
warren52nz 2 years ago
Nothing says "confidence in your own video" like disabling ratings.
This is a quote-mine you sorry piece of shit. Show the full segment.
SexyMelon 2 years ago
HOAX VIDEO
ronpaulspanish 2 years ago
Arguing with a creationist is like playing chess with a pigeon. They knock all the pieces over, shit all over the board then fly away claiming victory...
In your case I don't need to say anything. You make my point better than I could and a complete fool of yourself.
rogan71 2 years ago
You're as simple as you you are annoying...It's not a law until we discover it you ignorant freak! Before we discover something it just is. Something could be around for a billion years before it's discovered, then it becomes a law. That's why there's no such things as supernatural, only the natural we don't yet understand....You're so thick you think you're winning an argument you don't even have...Seriously, you're a waste of fucking space!
rogan71 2 years ago
You're sooooo smart. You have all the answers. No matter what I ask you the answer is clear...god did it. Thank you O wise one.
goonodeath 2 years ago
You really live in a fantasy don't you...You're either 12, or on the mental and emotional level of a 12 year old....OK I'll indulge your stupidity...The Laws of Physics came from Newton, but I think you mean the origin of physics, or the first self replicating gene...The answer is surprising simple. Just because we don't know everything, doesn't mean we know nothing...Or believe in bronze age mythology, like a FREAK! An answer for everything is an answer for nothing!
rogan71 2 years ago
" Just because we don't know everything, doesn't mean we know nothing..."
Oh i'm afraid it does rogie......Einstein and Bohr are still worlds apart my friend.....accept it, God is smarter than us....there's no shame in that.
:)
IrresponsibleAtheism 2 years ago
Well that's the delusion...You either except the evidence there is, and realize that believing in religious scripture is like believing in any bronze age mythology, or put your celestial dictator in his rightful place, with Thor, Zeus and Baal, back in the box!
The question that answers everything answers nothing....and you have nothing to go by other than bad science and remedial logic.
rogan71 2 years ago
Okay millions of people have witnessed Jesus at first hand, yeah?
Even the historical record absolutely confirms the existence of Jesus, so we know He's real.
On the other hand if Einstein's theory of Relativity is wrong(and it is), how much of that "bad Science" will have to be torn up and re-written?
Please stop doing the "if Dawkins believes it then it must be true" thing.
IrresponsibleAtheism 2 years ago
Probably not millions, but several thousand...And it seems logical to assume he existed, but how you get from there to a celestial dictator sent his son to die etc, is leap of astronomic proportion....And science is constantly in motion and updating itself. It doesn't mean what was said before was wrong. just the best we knew at the time. Science has to cross check itself countless times before something is considered fact...Religion is trying to get from A to X and stopping at B!
rogan71 2 years ago
" sent his son to die etc, is leap of astronomic proportion"
Not if, as an ardent lifelong Atheist you find yourself, against every instinct of your own logic and understanding, you find yourself humbled before His awsome presence.....i now know there is life after death, meaning i have certainty, therefore peace.
whereas Science is just one long set of excuses and arguments unashamedly aimed at preserving and ensuring it's own methodical progression....to where?
Who knows where?
IrresponsibleAtheism 2 years ago
How do you know there is life after death? That's an incredibly bold claim. Maybe you just want peace so you've found what you wanted to see?
Unless you live in a tree, you owe everything to modern science, from the food you eat to who cures you when you're sick. I've know many bright people convert so I'm not patronizing you, but I feel it was just a case of filling a hole...If it works for you, fine, but don't talk as if your inner conviction could compete with scientific fact.
rogan71 2 years ago
"Unless you live in a tree, you owe everything to modern science"
Does that include the air we breathe?
The water we drink?
The animals of the Earth?
The trees and plants needed for the sustenance of life?
The fine tuning of the Universe with all of it's improbabilities?
God is able!
IrresponsibleAtheism 2 years ago
The reason you know about any of the things you've listed, is because of advances in modern science. We can now start to make sense of the universe....If left to religion, we'd still believe it possible to fit two of every animal species in a boat, that rainbows are a message from God or that thunder was God angry...Don't confuse observing life to studying life.
rogan71 2 years ago
A major element of the Scientific process is observation, without the ability to observe Science would be baseless. I could refer you to ancient Greece, Rome, Egypt, India, etc....all aquired a surprisingly vast amount of knowledge about the natural world without the ability to reference "modern Science".
Peace
IrresponsibleAtheism 2 years ago
just because you say you have certainty in life after death entitles you to be called an idiot. There is no certainty, especially concerning these issues.
LuigiPeach 2 years ago
@rogan71 HA!!
NOMCCBAMA 2 years ago
...And atheism isn't an ideology you can label...So that's a massive fail. There is no central dogma. You can believe what you want but you must present the evidence. It frees you of the burden of believing you are always right....In science being proved wrong, simply gives you more determination to find out. It isn't the intention of atheism to prove religion false...It just is! Darwin offered a predictive alternative 150 years ago, and EVERYTHING we've found out since confirms he was right.
rogan71 2 years ago
@rogan71 fucking religious wackos huh? haha
might as well worship them all if your gunna worship one of them lol
METALisRELIGION 2 years ago
you're worth this much attention!
rogan71 2 years ago
Are you capable of making a lucid point? You don't seem to realize you make the case for you being a moron every time you open your mouth...Say something intelligible, if you can!
rogan71 2 years ago
What? Don't waste my time with a retarded bubblehead? I agree. It's not like you're likely to get it!
rogan71 2 years ago
What is your mission, exactly? To make people "see the light" and break free from the shackles of religion, or behave like some aggressive, would-be elitist who goes around insulting people for holding beliefs which differ from yours?
tobyobrie 2 years ago
Well, if you read the comments I'm replying to that would be clear....There is a huge difference between someone humbly having their own beliefs and a brainwashed troll that feels they need to tell people they are going to hell...Which one are you?
rogan71 2 years ago
I read the comments. You appear to have responded to a three week old comment by insulting another user, which kicked off the entire "argument". I'm not religious myself, but I appreciate the views of others. As for all your talk of intellect: perhaps you could use your great mind to do something more constructive than engaging in small-fry slanging matches on Youtube.
tobyobrie 2 years ago
There is a difference between having a view, and mindlessly spouting bullshit, as I'm sure you know. I'm not going to apologize for other people's stupidity... I appreciate any view that's been thought about... Going AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH like a rabid monkey doesn't constitute a view...In my opinion.
rogan71 2 years ago
My grandfather thought he was back in the war on his deathbed...I don't build my worldview on it. Why is it you religionuts are on the intellectual level of a tree stump? I can barely read your childish gibberish...And considering you actually believe the Bible (or whatever) you're all amazingly hateful! ... If you believe that pile of medieval poetry. then go back to your grief-hole and pray, and let the adults talk! Your argument is null and void...You lost, now go and die quietly!
rogan71 2 years ago
If you actually watch the video, he starts thinking long before the question is finished. This was taken from a completely different video...If you watch his lectures and debates, you often see out-takes where he is finding his place... If the best you can do is badly edit a faked question over footage of a man thinking, then you really are scraping the barrel.
rogan71 2 years ago
What are you...An infant? He even talks about this in his lecture, showing several different edits. You babbling like a retarded freak is hardly helping your already pathetic argument....There are scientists that disagree with Dawkins, but no theist, creationist or religious 'scholar' has come close to debating him in an intelligent way....Yeah I'll "deal with it'"..Just as I'll deal with the fact you delusional throwbacks are clinging onto your dead faith like an iceberg in the sun.
rogan71 2 years ago
The video is fake...I've seen the same piece of footage with about ten different questions dubbed over...It just goes to show the desperation shown by the failed 'science' of creationism, which is on the intellectual level of a tree stump...It will take you a 1000 years to catch up with modern science, and even then you'll only have bronze age mythology to go by...
rogan71 2 years ago
This is ridiculous. He's trying to figure out how to explain something very scientific to someone very uneducated about genetics.
GroverGee 2 years ago
coward, play the whole video
and stop posting about a subject you have no reasearch background in -- once you have gone to school and done a bit of studying in biology then see if your ideology remains.
till then its like telling a catholic priest to have sex with little boys...oh wait, never mind
arp76 2 years ago
It's been stated many times that the interview in question in this video was a changeup style question where he wasn't given time to prepare himself for such a question. As he would know now (this is a rather old interview by now), and has explained numerous times both in his books and his shows, the argument presented in the video is easily disproved, even in the case of humans.
Chromosomal fusion accounts for an increase in chromosome pairs, and is the simplest answer to the question.
snoman99991 2 years ago
there is nothing called "Evolution''.
sasaguan125 2 years ago
dawkins is an absolute moron....I'll debate this guy any day on worldwide LIVE tv.....he needs retakes and coaching....what a loser.
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
Don't make me laugh. You would be absolutely destroyed. You'd be like the little idiot who asked him, "what if you're wrong?" at Liberty U and was kicked into the pavement.
firegod001 2 years ago
That's true, although I'm a creationist(Christian) the man is quite intelligent, he is trained to give an answer for every question, unfortunately I've seen him answer a question with a question (many times). Sometimes he speaks like an Atheist and sometimes as a Agnostic, he's also selective in his research which is disappointing since you can debunk him quite easily.
mackjeez 2 years ago
It's not so much that he's trained to have an answer for every question, it's that people trying to argue a case for religion making much sense don't have a leg to stand on. I've heard him answer questions with questions, too, and they were great answers.
firegod001 2 years ago
He's been through enough arguments, the man didn't come out of nowhere, eventually you can train yourself to come up with logical answers o any question since it only deals with one topic religion vs Atheism, unfortunately most Christians are just regular people with little or no knowledge of Science, this makes them perfect targets.
mackjeez 2 years ago
For example, when you ask a stupid question like, "what if you're wrong?" then the flaws of concentrating on that idea with only atheists needs to be pointed out. Sometimes it's very nicely done with a question, like. "what if YOU'RE wrong about Zeus or any of the other gods?"
firegod001 2 years ago
If you ask him do you believe in a eternal God, he would simply state that he doesn't and reply do you believe that a man lives on the sun, a question to question scenario, he sways the question all together. In Quantum physics in order for that singularity of the big bang to happen something that has no regards for time or space had to have existed something eternal, I read this from a Science magazine, the bible does call God "The Eternal God" makes you think.
mackjeez 2 years ago
Well, I don't know if you think Dawkins belief in a big bang is supposed to be some kind of absolute, but it isn't. He simply believes it's the best theory we have at present. I want to go back to something you said earlier, about sometimes sounding atheistic, and sometimes agnostic. Um... That's because most atheists ARE agnostic. Atheism is simply not having a belief in any gods. Agnosticism is believing that whether a god exists or not is ultimately unknowable. I don't know if he's (CONT)
PokerKing66601 2 years ago
agnostic or not, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if he is. But if by agnosticism, you mean "middle of the road", choosing not to take a side on the issue, than he is by no means agnostic, AT ALL. I realize the theistic interest in polarizing atheists and agnostics, but more and more of them are beginning to realize that the majority of them fit into the same camps; they are simply using different names, exlusive of each other, when no such exclusivity is necessary. Sorry for the alt name.
PokerKing66601 2 years ago
Comment removed
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
ha ha ha ha you cant see it, but you can? ha ha ha he perfectly explained nothing ha ha ha moron. we are and we are not? dork. answer the question.
SPAGHETTIMONSTER1 2 years ago
How is he stumped? He answered perfectly...
NDS525 2 years ago
flagged as misleading.
MrAlanDickinson 2 years ago
Dawkins is a brilliant guy but he's shown time and time again he's not good at speaking off the cuff. This was ambush journalism of the worst kind, he was lied to and not told that this interview was part of creationist video until he realized with the loaded questions they were asking what they were trying to do.
Obviously 2 years ago
This tired old hoax???
Move on kiddies, there's nothing to see here. Search for "Dawkins stumped" and get the truth.
RATINGS DISABLED and 5 stars so far?
I smell a RAT!
C'mon you coward, let's hear what the people think is an appropriate rating!
warren52nz 2 years ago
if anyone actually wants to know the answer to the question asked, without the editing, they can google it.
CorndogMaker 2 years ago
nice editing
MagellansUnderwear 2 years ago
No rating?
no watching!
artyfarty2 2 years ago
Indeed. Those who push the evangelical product don't seem to like being subject to evaluation.
ColtSteele 2 years ago
The story of this video is that the people asking questions entered Dawkins' house under false pretenses. Dawkins had said he didn't want to conduct any religious interviews in his home. The question shown answered in the video was asked first, the "first" question was actually the second asked and Dawkins' pause was a moment of aggravation after which he kicked them out of his house.
In other words, he wasn't stumped. These people came to him under false pretenses and he booted them out.
MightyNeonFraa 2 years ago
I dont see the "stumping"...
Nawledge1 2 years ago
This video has long since been debunked. Check related videos at right.
digger231 2 years ago
My big question is why was he writing and what was he writing that was so important that he do so in the middle of the interview. Seems kind of strange.
Ripley747 2 years ago
HOAX
check similar videos
goauld88 2 years ago
Wooo quotemining
Better then mining for fish
Gotta remember this though using deceptive practices in the ends hurts the goal.
masticina 2 years ago
proof?
SalvationEternity777 2 years ago
Proof of what?
BTW nice name, Eternal Salvation through Dagon I kinda can see the point there.
masticina 2 years ago
where's the proof of qoute mining
SalvationEternity777 2 years ago
Oooh that one!
In the video they stop right where he has to think. Everybody has to think ..
But then he talks more and says things that definitely destroy the whole point of the movement that here tries to destroy him.
Hence by "cutting off the video" it is a quote mine. Now mining for quotes is easier then mining for fish.
masticina 2 years ago
so he makes the rebuttal when they have the video turned off?
SalvationEternity777 2 years ago
Through the wonders of editing indeed they pretty much cut him off. He is a smart person, bit militant to my taste but he is smart. And he would have a rebuttal, the rebuttal of course cut of.
Or in this case when someone needs just a few seconds to think about what the hell was asked. *cut* longer videos of this one are posted. Very probably in the similar videos even.
masticina 2 years ago
But where's your evidence? How do i know you're not making this up?
SalvationEternity777 2 years ago
Look at the related videos on the right. They clearly hoaxed this. He answered the first question, then they asked him another question, then edited it to make it seem like he didnt answer the original question.
Nawledge1 2 years ago
They should ban naming vids like this, caps lock and shit. "DESTORYED" rofl
/
There's a few pages long explanation for this by Dawkins somewhere on the web, but I guess that's too much too read for some people.
Tusek420 2 years ago
you guys do know that he did answer the question right? he basically said "yes, and this is how" and then he went on to explain the misconception that people have about evolution, and that sure you can tally the amount of info in the genome, but that is not the point, the point is that gradually there will be a different animal, better suited to the environment, regardless of genome size.
arvinbahri 2 years ago
lol debunked video dude
MiKeOwNzUrFaCeZ 2 years ago
So he gave a slightly indirect answer to an ambiguous, misinformed question? He must be incorrect in everything he says.
1MN1 2 years ago
His explanation had nothing to do with the question
SalvationEternity777 2 years ago
The video is an example of deceptive editing. Dawkins realized with this question that he was an unwitting participating in a Creationist propaganda video. A phrase like "no new information" is a phrase that's pretty much exclusive to the Creationist vernacular. Ever wonder why the rest of the video was never released?
Creationism is the worlds greatest lie and makes Christianity look dishonest.
JanusChrist 2 years ago
If you're so sure he is stumped, why remove ratings? I mean, the title shows that you are so sure that there is no way you could argue against this, but you a way in which people can make up their own minds about it.
MechanicalSelection 2 years ago
i almost cried laughing at the ignorance of "the way of the master videos". why do creationists try to use this argument that we should be able to see a lizard head on a bird beginning to form? evolution happens over millennia not decades...
BrawnYawr 2 years ago
Why wont you creationists remove these fake "stumped" -videos from the 'tube?
It has been proven that you lied, decieved and manipulated, thus breaking the commandments you live by, and thus committed a sin.
Bearing a false witness against those who disagree with you is not very christian way.
ArmaFennica 2 years ago
lol why didnt this creationist coward block the comments
MeepullStewray 2 years ago
He even wrote about himself that he was not good at debates. He always gets his ideas afterwards. That is why he usually does not participate in debates.
Smaragdkek 2 years ago
he was by no means destroyed. it is a fairly complex question, and if it takes a fairly complex answer.
morse3388 2 years ago
haha so fake, the simplest answer is yes. An Addition mutation. an example is a mutation in suffers of cystic fibrosis where a mutation leads to an addition of an N-linked oligosaccharide chain at the C terminal end of EL4.
NoPlanB616 2 years ago
Everyone gets stumped on a question once an a while. I also don't see how this proves the existence of god either.
Grievouss117 2 years ago
There is NOTHING about evolution that neither proves nor disproves the existence of God.
JanusChrist 2 years ago
look, i dont like being called names, and niether does any body else. im srry that creationists tried to ruin a name that is good in society. i think that its really stupid to do things like this. its extremely hypocritical. and very childish... dont be stereotypical about this cuz i wouldnt have done that, and the strongest Christians i know wouldnt have edited something like this either... btw, y do u believe in evolution? plz dont yell at me, im really am just wondering
guitargurl37 2 years ago
Looks like he got schooled!!!!
GodIsReal101 2 years ago
Dawkins didn't get schooled. This was debunked numerous times.
Dividend 2 years ago
the original video was done by a man and they had arrived at his house under a different reason, and when they asked him a question that anybody who had ever taken a 10th grade science class could answer, he realised what they were there for, and started considering whether or not he should ask them to leave, and yes it is doctored to make it look as though he took longer to answer.
325982668 2 years ago
Yes, clearly this video is doctored. What I want to know is why this guy spends all his time trying to convince the religious people that they are wrong. If their religion brings them happiness, or peace, or confidence, or whatever, why not let them be content? Most of the religions speak of peaceful and loving behaviors (with notable exceptions). For me, people like this are easier to work with. Why is there so much anger in this topic? Live and let live.
achrispens 2 years ago
You should shut up and read his books to understand why he fights against it. It's better and more effective than asking people on Youtube.
sje46 2 years ago
I dont get it. Maybe its the editing of the video but he didn't answer the question asked.
And it's a trick question anyway, impossible to answer. The only situations where DNA is modified in the genome is when bad DNA is present, like a disease. And no matter how you argue, that's not evolution because it's a negative effect. It's what happens when you inbreed too much in a trailer park. Doh!
brown55061 2 years ago
Actually, one of the answers to the question is down syndrome. Dawkins knows that, he just normally doesn't grant theists audience (because they do shit like this), so he was trying to decide whether to talk to them at all or to leave. That's why he said, at first, "can you just stop the tape." What you see afterward is when they ask him to describe evolution, and then they edit the clips together with typical creationist fashion, to make him look dumb.
heiyoulianglaohu 2 years ago
However, I see your point with the trailer park reference,and I have to say, you are right. That is not an example of evolution at all, because that gene doesn't survive to reproduce. It's simply a negative effect. Bad DNA is what it boils down to. Again, typical theist fashion; Relying on those who don't have a clue about the subject to just go along and say "OOOHHH SNAP!!! Dawkins got schooled!!!"
Creatards...
heiyoulianglaohu 2 years ago
Let's call names because that is funny.
Evostupinary dumb dumb face.........
GodIsReal101 2 years ago
Clearly a dirty edit-trick. That question is easy to answer, nothing difficult about it. Silly creationists need to lie more and more to sabotage the science that's incompatible with their believes
snotverdorie 2 years ago
He didn't know this was a creationist when he accepted the interview, and he was thinking about how to handle the situation.
beaverteeth92 2 years ago
Has anyone actually seen the real video? The original question is super imposed... Anyone, high five? Anyone? =D
TheCraigTM 2 years ago
That was stumped unfortunatly for atheists your role model is ****.
grantapuslafsalot 3 years ago
Can you say invasive? He never even answered the question!
nathanielforgod 2 years ago
Do you mean evasive?
He was never even asked the question by the questioner heard on this video. This video is a widely known, edited fraud.
Dramphooey 2 years ago
Who ever said mutations increase the information in the genome? They sometimes do, they sometimes just change it...which is what the word mutation MEANS. And anyway, I think this video is actually very illustrative of the types of cheap tactics creationists use against those who disagree with them, which I've taken to calling gotcha arguments. It basically consists of saying or asking somethign so ridiculously idiotic that the person is stumped, then claiming they can't "explain" themselves.
ArranoGris 3 years ago
What creationists should know
1. This isn't an intellectually valid question. That is why he realizes its propaganda as he pauses.
2. Dawkins wrote an entire chapter about this before the interview took place. Think he forgot about it?
3. Even if it was true that Dawkins lacked information on a question it doesn't do anything positive for creationism's claims.
I'm not an atheist but posting this as "stumped" is either lying for Jesus or chosen ignorance.
Dark1777 3 years ago
You dishonest christian, it seems like you won't find salvation...
conservativessuckass 3 years ago
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
How sad (not surprising, but sad)
that people will use a lie
to promote..
well, okay, a lie.
I can see not understanding science,
that's a matter of education,
but to not understand honesty and integrity
is just too pathetic.
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
i can understand not believing the bible, but this video goes against the ten commandments, please, for the good of your soul, stop lying.
abassett22 3 years ago
This video bears false witness, it has been exposed as a deception in other videos, look them up. Bearing false witness is a sin, even if you think you're lying for god. Why the deception? Isn't bearing false witness supposed to be a sin? Stop lying in the name of god!
whatwasjimthinking 3 years ago
On these hoax videos made and propagated by supposedly religious people: what does your sacred book say about dishonesty?
ZdPhoenix 3 years ago
the creation argument is for people who are blind to the universe around them!
mediumphill 3 years ago
like you apparently.
itsyourboygreg 3 years ago
Hey Alpha, variation in a kind actually happens. We have variation in us, of course. How else could we tell each other apart? But not all scientists are evolutionists, you should know that by now. In fact, many great minds were not atheistic in attitude or rationale.
Tell me, what theories do I hold to? Since you seem to know...
bigNcube 3 years ago
Dawkins got pwned.
Another question I like to ask my Darwin-minded professors, and classmates from time to time is "what's an example of a recent beneficial mutation?" The truth is, there is no answer to this question. Any information that is not useful, according to Darwin's own theory of natural selection, is likely to be lost in the future. Virtually every mutation ever recorded has proven to be harmful.
Timstuff 3 years ago
What editing? Anyway, evolution is unscientific.
bigNcube 3 years ago
Big, the statement you just made proves pretty conclusively that you're no scientist. As any scientist will tell you, evolution is about as scientific as we can get. There's more evidence for evolution than there is for about 80% of theories you believe in.
Alpha1Bravo1Charlie1 3 years ago
Frameshift Mutation.
spikesmth 3 years ago
Destroyed? ... Stumped? ... The moron posting this sure has some nerve! ... Is this the best you shit for brains can come up with?
FarSideofTown 3 years ago
Clearly this is an example of creative editing. It is sad what creationist have to stoop too for their argument to be even plausible for the uneducated.
NeoTheo2 3 years ago