Creationists and Evolutionists:Do you think the answer was correct or ever relevant?

I'm by no means a biology expert, so I'm afraid I can't give you an example for your question. I've watched the clip... and no, the answer is irrelevant.

...

So really then, what's your point? Do you think that the fact he couldn't draw an immediate answer means anything? And let's say he really was clueless: is that sufficient evidence to disprove evolution? Evolution is a theory: it cannot be proved in any way (btw, so are Newton's second law and the first law of thermodynamics, but somehow you don't hear much opposition to those physics' laws). There are countless pieces of evidence that support evolution (seriously, read about it) and NONE that disclaim it. As with every theory, once you show me a credible piece of evidence that disclaims it, another theory will be thought of.

And that, my friend, is how science works.

in my view, my adventure is that the common guy or woman interior the creationist camp does no longer even desire to communicate approximately it, different than to "testify" that God is a creationist too. on the different hand, there are some creationists who know very lots of scientific and technical counsel concerning carbon courting, archeology, paleontology, genetics, anthropology, and evolution, and those are very prepared to have interplay in a communicate, yet no longer for studying's sake. They do it for the point of attacking the technological know-how at the back of evolution and for helping their dogmas. If an evolutionist isn't arranged for a withering debate (crammed with data mingled with errors, and good judgment mingled with fallacy), the evolutionist is the guy who will land up looking like the fool. p.s. via Mariel for this sort of nicely reported answer!

i dont feel like lookin at the link.

i am no scientist. evolution has lots of evidence. but apparently there is a missing link in human evolution. this missing link is the mystery. somewhere modern humans separated from other humanoids. where and when was this separation. there have been books on what may have happened. Chariots of the Gods says that aliens came and did genetic interference.

Read Chariots of GOds by erik von daniken

this book explains a lot on this topic

It is a relevant issue....I can show you and document all of the incremental changes which have occurred in the evolution of the automobile in the past hundred years but where is it shown for the evolution of man from a common primate ancestor? Exactly how many mutations or other mechanisms took place and what are the names for each one of them? No one has ever documented this...it's simply a conceptual model based around possible examples.

I've seen the clip before and also read Dawkins explanation of it on a blog/website...that he realized he was being "tricked" into a Creationist propaganda interview and that is why he paused and pondered on whether to continue...which he did. But his answer in the clip evades the simple question. If Dawkins did realize he was being "tricked" , why didn't he offer his best explanation of mutations increasing "functional" information instead of skirting the issue? He is a biologist after all.

His rebuttal essay or explanation is here......

http://www.skeptics.com.au/publications/articles/t...

As others have pointed out, we do have examples where point mutations and gene duplications can increase "information"...the question is whether that is "functional" and "beneficial' information which leads to evolution. Simply adding information is not enough. And one would expect or predict the genomes of more evolved organisms...such as man... to have a much larger content from all this gene duplication than lesser evolved ones and that is not what we find in many cases. And beyond that, we know of at least 17 copy-protecting mechanisms or enzymes...such as editase...which prevent copying errors from accumulating.

This article describes the problems with Dawkins assertions and increasing functional information..........

http://trueorigin.org/dawkinfo.asp

Here is a book written by a Cornell geneticist which shows how genomes deteriorate over time.....

"Dr. John Sanford, a retired Cornell Professor, shows in Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome that the "Primary Axiom" is false. The Primary Axiom is the foundational evolutionary premise - that life is merely the result of mutations and natural selection. In addition to showing compelling theoretical evidence that whole genomes can not evolve upward, Dr. Sanford presents strong evidence that higher genomes must in fact degenerate over time. This book strongly refutes the Darwinian concept that man is just the result of a random and pointless natural process. "

http://www.amazon.com/Genetic-Entropy-Mystery-Geno...

Ands there is evidence from secular scientists...not Creationists...that have observed dormant or viable bacteria, DNA, proteins, red blood cells, heme, and soft tissues in fossils which are presumably dated to be tens or hundreds of millions of years old according to radiometric dating methods.....things which clearly could not have survived intact for that long..a few thousand years perhaps.There is no known, scientifically valid metabolic process which can account for dormant bacteria surviving that long...metabolic rates do not drop to zero in dormancy and DNA cannot survive more than 10,000 years according to observed disintegration rates.

People can "believe" that if they want but then you have stepped outside of observable, repeatable science and entered into a belief system.

These evidences show that fossils and the rocks that contain them could not be millions of years old which falsifies all radiometric dating methods which generally agree with each other as it pertains to long ages and the assumptions that decay rates have remained constant in the past ....and the theory of biological evolution as well as the origin of the earth and solar system. If the rocks on earth cannot be billions of years old, the solar system could not have formed in the manner described by accretion models or nebula hypothesis'.

Any scientific theory is open to alteration or abandonment if the observations and evidence falsifies it...that is why Newton's theory of gravity is supplanted by Einstein's space-time theory of gravity when it comes to outer space or why we no longer adhere to the miasma theory of diseases such as malaria being caused by "foul air".

Scientific sources in the links........

Immortal? bacteria and old DNA.....

http://fusionanomaly.net/immortalbacteriaspores.ht...

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhy...

The evidence is out there....it's simply not taught or critically questioned and examined in classrooms or textbooks in order to maintain the flawed theory of neo-Darwinian evolution.

This video is a hoax.