Re: Dawkins' video

Glenn R. Morton (
Tue, 09 Jun 1998 19:56:04 -0500

Concerning the Video, "From a Frog to a Prince"
My comment on Gillian Brown's response:

First some housekeeping. I would like to thank Ms Brown for the honesty in
admitting the correctness of my observations that the 'interviewer" and
Dawkins were not in the same room. I will stand corrected and correct my
friend who believed that the video came from a CBC broadcast.

Now, I will point out two things. First, the restaging of the question,
which was supposedly audible on the original tape, creates a muddied
situation in which the original record has been altered. And given Dawkins
denial of the event, we now have a 'he-says; she says' situation in which
it is impossible for an outsider now to ever tell the real facts. Hard-core
atheists and evolutionists will believe Dawkins. Hard-core young-earthers
will believe Brown. Who is correct? I don't know. But now there is no
surety. I have re-emailed Dawkins, last Sunday prior to getting the e-mail
from Brown asking him about the tape again but have not heard from him, yet.

There are some things said in the snipped portion that relay information
to me about what happened that does concern me, but I will honor Brown's
request to keep them to my self as that was her instructions. The question
asked by the 'interviewer' was the only time that he asked any of the
scientists on the video any questions. All the other statements by
scientists are simply that statements with no questions having been asked
to them. Dawkins is the only one in who has a question "thrown" to him by
the 'interviewer'. But of course that man never actually asked Dawkins

I would suggest that this 'restaging' of the question, even if it was a
direct restatement of the original question is not an accurate
representation of history and what happened. The viewer is clearly given
the impression that the unidentified 'interviewer' was sitting in the same
room with Dawkins when in fact he wasn't. While many Christians may not
find this wrong, I find it to be very disappointing that Christians would
do what the secular press does and restage events. I am reminded of the
staging of things in the Food Lion Meat shop by one of the networks. Food
Lion nearly went out of business because a producer decided to engage in
staging of events. My recollection was that Food Lion was granted a
considerable amount of money in the subsequent lawsuit.

There is a book entitled 'My Utmost for His Highest'. I do not find
restaging of events to be the utmost we can do for his glory. They would
have been far better off if they had simply left the totally unaltered tape
in tact. It would have made their case more believable. To me the
adulteration of any event or fact is very distasteful.

Concerning the last paragraph which Ms. Brown added. I replied to her.

>>Thank you. I will honor your requests. I would like to note that
information has a very technical definition and by that definition, there
are lots of examples of increase in information by mutation. If you start
with a sequence of 11111111111 or in DNA AAAAAAAAAAA and then mutate it so
that it is
11111211111 or in DNA AAAAATAAAAA you have actually increased the
information. The equation which measures info would yield a higher value
for the second sequence than for the first. While you may not believe this,
I would suggest that your read H. Yockey, Information Theory and Molecular
Biology for technical details.

I would also point to a simpler example where plants of two different
species can produce offspring which cannot interbreed with either of the
parent species but have the entire genetic information from both parent
species. It is called polyploidy and this greatly increases the information
content of the daughter plant. You should go look it up.<<<

Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information