Freethought & Rationalism Archive

jediguy · 09-17-2002, 01:22 AM

I have been presented with a question (by a Creationist) that reads:

Quote:

The question put to Dawkins by Gillian Brown, filmed for the documentary From A Frog To A Prince, was this:

"Professor Dawkins, can you give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome?"

Now, I remember reading an article in which either Dawkins or someone else outlines the shoddy circumstances surrounding this "documentary" and also gives the answer he gave to that particular question.

Does anyone know what this article is or where I can find it?

Thanks in advance.

seanie · 09-17-2002, 01:40 AM

<a href="http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/brownresponse.htm" target="_blank">http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/brownresponse.htm</a>

This has some information on it.

I think the story is that Dawkins was duped into doing the documentary.

He thought it was a straightforward documentary not a creationist propaganda exercise. The point where he was 'stumped' is actually the point where he realises who he's dealing with and he's actually just very, very annoyed.

jediguy · 09-17-2002, 01:45 AM

Exactly what I was looking for. Thank you muchly.

Peter Soderqvist · 09-17-2002, 02:00 AM

The Information Challenge By Richard Dawkins

Quote:

In September 1997, I allowed an Australian film crew into my house in Oxford without realising that their purpose was creationist propaganda. In the course of a suspiciously amateurish interview, they issued a truculent challenge to me to "give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome." It is the kind of question only a creationist would ask in that way, and it was at this point I tumbled to the fact that I had been duped into granting an interview to creationists - a thing I normally don't do, for good reasons.

In my anger I refused to discuss the question further, and told them to stop the camera. However, I eventually withdrew my peremptory termination of the interview as a whole. This was solely because they pleaded with me that they had come all the way from Australia specifically in order to interview me. Even if this was a considerable exaggeration, it seemed, on reflection, ungenerous to tear up the legal release form and throw them out. I therefore relented.
<a href="http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/dawkins1.htm" target="_blank">http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/dawkins1.htm</a>

Quetzal · 09-17-2002, 02:01 AM

I'm not sure if this is the one you were talking about, but here's another Dawkins article on information: <a href="http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/dawkins1.htm" target="_blank">The Information Challenge</a>

[edited to add: Damn - cross posted with Peter!

]

[ September 17, 2002: Message edited by: Morpho ]

scigirl · 09-17-2002, 08:54 AM

Who cares what Dawkins says? What does a molecular biologist say in answer to that question:

Gene or genome duplications are genetic mechanisms that increase genetic information.

NEXT QUESTION. . .

scigirl

tgamble · 09-17-2002, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by scigirl:
Who cares what Dawkins says? What does a molecular biologist say in answer to that question:

Gene or genome duplications are genetic mechanisms that increase genetic information.

Only if you define information on your atheistic, evolution assumeing, anti christian, bible bashing terms! There is no mechanism that can produce REAL new information!

Valentine Pontifex · 09-17-2002, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by seanie:
<a href="http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/brownresponse.htm" target="_blank">http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/brownresponse.htm</a>

This has some information on it.

I think the story is that Dawkins was duped into doing the documentary.

He thought it was a straightforward documentary not a creationist propaganda exercise. The point where he was 'stumped' is actually the point where he realises who he's dealing with and he's actually just very, very annoyed.

And the question was not hard either. Much of the answer has been known since the 1960s.

Doubting Didymus · 09-17-2002, 03:11 PM

Barry williams from our skeptics wrote a scathing condemnation <a href="http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/crexpose.htm" target="_blank">here.</a>

I consider my countries record cleared.

jediguy · 09-18-2002, 04:28 AM

Thanks, that Australian Skeptics link is great reading.

09-17-2002, 02:01 AM	#5
Quetzal Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Ecuador Posts: 738	I'm not sure if this is the one you were talking about, but here's another Dawkins article on information: <a href="http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/dawkins1.htm" target="_blank">The Information Challenge</a> [edited to add: Damn - cross posted with Peter! ] [ September 17, 2002: Message edited by: Morpho ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-17-2002, 01:40 AM	#2
seanie Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Edinburgh. Scotland Posts: 2,532	<a href="http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/brownresponse.htm" target="_blank">http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/brownresponse.htm</a> This has some information on it. I think the story is that Dawkins was duped into doing the documentary. He thought it was a straightforward documentary not a creationist propaganda exercise. The point where he was 'stumped' is actually the point where he realises who he's dealing with and he's actually just very, very annoyed.

09-17-2002, 01:45 AM	#3
jediguy Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 7	Exactly what I was looking for. Thank you muchly.

09-17-2002, 08:54 AM	#6
scigirl Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Seattle Posts: 4,261	Who cares what Dawkins says? What does a molecular biologist say in answer to that question: Gene or genome duplications are genetic mechanisms that increase genetic information. NEXT QUESTION. . . scigirl

09-17-2002, 03:11 PM	#9
Doubting Didymus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: East Coast. Australia. Posts: 5,455	Barry williams from our skeptics wrote a scathing condemnation <a href="http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/crexpose.htm" target="_blank">here.</a> I consider my countries record cleared.

09-18-2002, 04:28 AM	#10
jediguy Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 7	Thanks, that Australian Skeptics link is great reading.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.