Denis Noble debates Richard Dawkins: Is Dawkins 20-30 years behind?

February 5, 2023February 5, 2023 NewsComments(4)

Spread the love

LIVE DEBATE Oxford professor Denis Noble locked horns with Richard Dawkins in June at the How the Light Gets In UK conference. Is The Selfish Gene holding back medicine and cancer cures? The world’s most incendiary evolutionary biologist asks if we need to rethink DNA.
The debate was both cordial and revealing. One thing that is quite clear from this debate is that Dawkins’ knowledge of biology and genetics lags 20-30 years behind current research.
“Denis Noble Debates Richard Dawkins (full video)” at Evolution 2 (December 22, 2022)

Here’s an excerpt:

Here’s the whole debate.

Hat tip: Philip Cunningham

4 Replies to “Denis Noble debates Richard Dawkins: Is Dawkins 20-30 years behind?”

1

martin_r says:

February 6, 2023 at 7:59 am

I watched this debate few weeks ago at Perry Marshall page (the $10M OoL prize sponsor).

some user commented as follows:

Dawkins really did get blindsided towards the end. When he asked “how many generations?” It was a dead giveaway. The only test of Darwinian evolution is that a genetic change lasts and alters the population frequency. But the population frequency is affected by the lasting genetic change. Noble has to be right… the cell utilizes the gene…not the gene the cell. There is no preferred biological frame of reference. It’s systems within systems within systems. All interdependent and all intimately involved in the cell’s informatics.

to which Perry Marshall replied as follows:

Yes sir. And, not on this video, there was some audience Q&A at the end where Dawkins was even more puzzled. Dawkins fans in the audience were incredulous that he fared so poorly.
2

AnimatedDust says:

February 6, 2023 at 8:29 am

I was just amazed to see RD in any kind of debate. I thought he had forsworn them after Lennox et al beat him so badly more than ten years ago. It was more of a cordial discussion, in my view.
3

bornagain77 says:

February 6, 2023 at 8:43 am

Here is a link to the full debate on Perry Marshall’s site:

Denis Noble Debates Richard Dawkins (full video)
https://evo2.org/denis-noble-debates-richard-dawkins-full-video/
4

Papa_Giorgio says:

February 6, 2023 at 11:11 pm

I included your comment Martin_r in my post of the above: https://religiopoliticaltalk.com/richard-dawkins-is-30-years-behind-the-curve/

You must be logged in to post a comment.

RAM Querius, A lot of words in your reply. (And, of course, I've heard all of it before. I used to... – Otangelo Grasso’s new book, Confirming Yeshua
kairosfocus CR, we may not know everything about a designer, especially a contingent being designer, but one thing we do know.... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
Origenes CR @ So, it’s well adapted for the purpose of designing bacterium. A designer is "adapted" by who? And whose... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
critical rationalist Consciousness, the free rational person, the intelligent designer, cannot be explained by mindless physical stuff. Already addressed. "We don't know... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
asauber Jerry, ID does have something to do with religion in the sense that everyone (literally) has religious views about their... – Otangelo Grasso’s new book, Confirming Yeshua
kairosfocus CR, how you love loaded terms. By obvious definition, a successful designer is CAPABLE of carrying out said design. Reginald... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
jerry I bought the book and it is expensive, $29 for kindle version. It has from what I can see nothing... – Otangelo Grasso’s new book, Confirming Yeshua
kairosfocus F/N: Observe, Willard and heirs: To have knowledge in the dispositional sense—where you know things you are not necessarily thinking... – L&FP, 67: So-called "critical rationalism" and...
critical rationalist … that will not change the point that the relevant information, knowledge, design decisions, system architecture etc would have been... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
kairosfocus Origenes, reduction of rational, intuitive, imaginative and creative thought to computation on a substrate fails. Not least, as computation is... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
kairosfocus CR, why not do an in page search for say, "in the intelligence"? You will find for example 302: As... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
Origenes KF @416 … the underlying incoherence is dismissiveness to the observed and/or experienced. Once self evident first truths are denied,... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
kairosfocus CR, the FIRST -- branch on which we all sit [so of first principle character] -- fact of experience is... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
kairosfocus L&FP, 67: So-called “critical rationalism” and the blunder of denying [defeat-able] warrant for knowledge – L&FP, 67: So-called "critical rationalism" and...
critical rationalist @KF Drumbeat repetition of an answered assertion, pretending that it was not answered repeatedly. Ok, then which comment(s)? Please quote... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
critical rationalist If consciousness is fundamental and cannot be explained by something else, then this is where we must base our explanations... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
kairosfocus Origenes, the underlying incoherence is dismissiveness to the observed and/or experienced. Once self evident first truths are denied, chaos is... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
critical rationalist I wrote… If the recipe for a bacterium is one of these entities that exhibit reliable signs of design, and... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
jerry I do not like to discuss religion here because ID has nothing to do with religion but an interesting new... – Otangelo Grasso’s new book, Confirming Yeshua
kairosfocus CR, do you understand what you clipped? Notice, ". . . A class of machine we have analysed since 1948,... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...
Origenes CR @405 First, if conciseness cannot be explained, then it’s unclear how this reflects any more of an explanation for... – L&FP, 66: String -- yes, s-t-r-i-n-g...

4 Replies to “Denis Noble debates Richard Dawkins: Is Dawkins 20-30 years behind?”

Leave a Reply