Is this from AiG? I ask because it uses their standard scheme of introducing a lie early on, in this case at about 1:50 through to two minutes.
The interviewee talked about a sleight of hand, but she’s engaging in a smokescreen. She has a point, but not what I suspect the video may be aiming at.
Then at 11:38 or so she states another lie – either that or she’s ignorant enough to get a very basic item wrong!
Around 13:20 the interviewer injects a smokescreen by asking about “proof”. And the interviewee proceeds to lie by omission: she went from some experiments where genetic information was lost and pretends that’s the whole story.
At about 16:00 she may be right about Australia, but not about the U.S.; mutations came in sixth grade just after Mendel in fifth (or fourth, I hear, these days).
16:29 is a flat lie; mutations can and do add information. She spins that into a lie about natural selection.
Halfway through and I’ve caught three definite lies and two that could be explained from ignorance and/or differences in educational system.
The part about dice and birds is void in the first place because it was defining the parameters in which changes could be made, plus they started with what could be considered an optimal design and proceeded to make alterations that would almost by definition be detrimental.
She’s right saying they should be teaching evolution, but she’s shown by the lies and misrepresentation that she’s not one who could do it – she wants it done “in an honest manner” but she hasn’t been honest.
Typical YEC stuff – pull some lies and smokescreen and pretend you’ve told the truth.