Enjoy.

__________________
J. M. - Baptist - Ontario, Canada - Feileadh Mor

"Nothing is more seductive for man than his freedom of conscience. But nothing is a greater cause of suffering."
The Brothers Karamazov

He didn't ever answer the question and I know that I, myself, have never thought that evolution was as he described the misunderstanding to be. I have a percetly sufficient elementary understanding of it and do not now, nor have I ever, attempted to paint the theory as one that explains origins of "modern" animals out of other "modern" animals, to use his terminology.

It's sad that there's so little substance to him, that such a basic question can't be answered.

__________________
Andrew DeShazo, Deacon, Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, Memphis, TN
"All of us stumble in many ways, but if anyone is never at fault in what he says, then he is mature, able to control his whole body."(James 3:2)

I think he did try to answer the question. It appears he didn't, because he didn't use the same vocabulary as she did.

__________________
Dan Pemberton
Vacaville, CA

Member, First Baptist Church San Luis Obispo
Formerly ABUSA (We left, so I guess that makes us American Baptists Unleashed!)

He, at best, evaded it. He didn't really answer the question. The question was whether or not we have any examples (emperical evidence) of Evolution adding information to the genome in successive mutations.

Instead of answering that question he only stated that, basically, what we have now is what we have.

In other words, he may be correct in asserting that we should not be looking at the current fish genome, comparing it to the current lizard genome, and assuming that the lizard genome is an addition to the current fish genome.

But, all he did was overawe the scientifically illiterate here. "Oh, Richard, you're sooo smart. Can you use more words for me...."

The very basis for his assertion that there is no God is rooted in emperical observation. Yet, at the very starting point of his argument for evolution he cannot base this in empericism.

An honest, emperical answer would be: "No, we have no examples of this...."

Because, at the basic point of substantiating their claim, Evolutionists depart from a Naturalistic worldview that insists that all assertions must be emperically verifiable. His theory, on its most basic level, is simply offered on point of bare assertion: "We have no examples of information being added to the genome in successive generations but, trust us, this happened billions of years ago. Just look: we have a fish genome and a lizard genome. For there to be these "cousins", there must have been a time in the past where a genome evolved from a simple state to a more complex state. This must be true because Evolution is true."

__________________
Rich
Okinawa, Japan

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I am sure that Windows Vista and Windows XP must have evolved from an unobservable, unverifiable common ancestor through random mutation too. How do I know? Look at the Window's logo, they look the same!

__________________
Polo
Layman, Chinese Evangelical Church/Independent
San Diego

For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. (Romans 11:36)

This is from 'From a frog to a prince' video. Highly amusing no doubt, but this was obtained by deception as any evolutionist will quickly point out. Dawkins was not aware who he was talking to or what their agenda was.

But it is very, very funny. And it is a question that cannot be answered without sophistry.

__________________
Jonathan Hunt

Preaching Elder
Cheltenham Evangelical Free Church (Confessionally Based)
Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, United Kingdom

Logic is a systematic method of coming to the wrong conclusion with confidence.
-- Thomas Elsworth

I think I just saw Dawkins evolve into a deer in the headlights.

__________________
Richard H. King
Providence PCA
Lubbock, Texas
"No matter how far a man goes, he eventually finds out God's already there." John Wayne - the last line in "Chisum"

His imagination is more developed (evolutionarily speaking) than mine. He pictures fish coming out of the water and becoming amphibians. I picture fish coming out of the water and suffocating. How can such a smart man believe such (IMHO) nonsense?

__________________
Bob Howes
Framingham, MA

A reoccurring thought:

Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

__________________
Bill Brown
Elder
Grace Baptist Church
Anne Arundel County, Maryland

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I think he did give an honest answer to the question that, unfortunately, deceives the ignorant into thinking there is empirical evidence for evolution when in fact his answer denies the fact that there is such evidence nor that there ever can be. What he is doing is essentially answering 'no', but this simple 'no' is wrapped up in the answer as to why we will not ever be able to demonstrate the critical evidence in question.

This is exactly why evolution will always remain a theory. If he could answer the question in a clear affirmative and provide proof, evolution would be on its way to becoming a 'law'.

Since such proofs will always be elusive, evolution will remain in the category of faith. The thing is, the Christian worldview provides answers to the fundamental questions whereas evolution is a 'leap of faith' from the very beginning. It does not honestly deal with the world as it truly is whereas the Bible does. This is one of the fundamental truths that lead to my conversion over 15 years ago.

__________________
Robert Truelove
Pastor
Christ Reformed Church
Lawrenceville, GA

LOL.

__________________
~Gloria G.~
Bride of Warren G.
Member of Trinity Presbyterian Church, PCA, Southeast Georgia

"Turn my eyes from looking at worthless things; and give me life in your ways." Psalm 119:37

I heard this as well. A "fast one" was pulled and is being used in deception to discredit his position. In all fairness (I guess) he was blind sided. Nevertheless, it was interesting seeing him look at the ceiling for so long. He must have blinked a hundred times in that short span.




This is hilarious!

__________________
--chRis
Psalm 115:1

Christopher Reeder
Husband to Kara, Father to Abigail (7), Caleb (6), Grace (4 1/2), Zoë (2 1/2), Elijah (1) and Baby Girl due 8/6/08

Member: Pilgrim Presbyterian Church (OPC), Raleigh, NC

Why would this be blindsiding? Sounds like a legitimate question to me. If, as evolutionists submit, there are "new" oraganisms evolving from old, would that not mean there would be an addition to and increase in the genomic data? And if it happened "long,long ago", why isn't it happening demonstrably now?

Would the truth of his answer change depending on the one asking the question?

I'm sorry, but exposing this God-hater's intellectual nudity was not blindsiding...if the "facts" are there, as Dawkin's says...and if Christians are as stupid as he says we are, a simple "elementary fact" necessary for evolution ought to have some evidence he can point to.

__________________
Craig French
Married and father of a beautiful daughter.
Member of Christ The Word, PCA
Toledo, OH

MY BLOG

I must have missed something. Where did the idea come from that he was blind-sided or deceived?

__________________

HaigLaw, ruling elder
Grace PCA, Shreveport, LA
http://www.xanga.com/HaigLaw

I must echo Haig. Why is this question unfair in any sense? I don't know where I heard this quote from (might have been Bahnsen) but it hits the nail on the head: "Atheists don't need evidence, they need repentance." And our prayers.

__________________
Daniel Franzen
Church Creek Presbyterian (PCA)
Charleston, SC

From what I understand, Dawkins refuses to grant interviews to creationists. When he heard this question, he suspected that the interviewer was a creationist which is why he asked to stop the tape. He apparently questioned the group about their affiliations and decided to continue with the interview.

__________________
Scott Roper
Member, Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA): "A bunch of hippie Calvinists"
Winston-Salem, NC

That's interesting. While I can understand not wanting to have interviews with religious-folk who are just going to want to fight and make jerks of themselves, I wonder why he won't have interviews with creationists altogether.

I think you just saw why. There are intelligent creationists who can ask questions that will point out the holes in the evolutionary theory. They do not wish to be embarrassed themselves; they merely wish to do the embarrassing so as to keep the origins monopoly intact.

__________________
Tom Albrecht
Member, Covenant URCNA, New Holland, PA.

"I'm not a famous man. I'm just a simple country doctor with horse sense."