All the NPC sheeple hate the scientific method as it destroys their belief in the establishment propaganda pushed as 'science', so they choose to avoid anything that upsets them.
I'm a 45 years young Canadian. I hand write like that, I learn it in elementary school. It's not common anymore? And it's a real and honest question (I have no kids) 😁
@@benjamindover5676 Firstly, we're still in the hole. Secondly the scientific method has only been applied by scientists like Sr Malone and Dr McCullogh pointing out the data that shows how flawed the approach to Covid by govts is and how dangerous the vaccines are.
Uh what? Global warming is an observable phenomenon. Global temperatures are rising. The guess or theory is Greenhouse effect. This conforms to the scientific method to a t
Well the world must be jam packed with scientists that don't know how science works right? Well either they went through this process and are still all wrong, and also naive... OR you are... hmmm... I wonder which? I think I'll side with science and not random idiots to be honest...
@@FlabbyPigLegs Except all the main predictions of AGW have been wrong. None of the original IPCC predictions have been met, and none of the predictions included "The Pause." So we do not see observation match theory, and rather than re-examine the core theory AGW seems to run on a tautology - GIVEN: mankind is causing warming PROOF: Prove man-caused warming. This means it is not operating as a normal subject of scientific inquiry -- which makes it more akin to Lysenkoism than Science.
We can model the big bang, and we can compare it with things like the WMAP experiment. There are alternative theories that also have merit, like the 4D hyperblackhole that was featured in Nature last week.
@@snuffeldjuret In climate science, one has to compare prediction to observation, and for the past 40 years, the numerous predictions have not been borne out by observation. Indeed, the IPCC do not predict things, but rather they project things, because they know that the many predictions have been shown to be wrong time and again.
@@richardverney6702 this is patently, absurdly false. One would only need to look through google scholar over the past 100 years to find papers upon papers upon papers of evidence for climate change, but I suppose that's hard work...
@@lindocalrissian0926 So why did the temperature go steadily down for the next 40 years after the 2nd WW while we were putting millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere? So much so that the climate prediction (in the 70's) was the coming ice age? And if CO2 is the so called control knob of climate why does no one ever offer a simple 1 way ANOVA that clearly rejects the Null Hypothesis? Sure that would go a long way to settling the matter.
Richard Feynman lecture from probably the early 1960s, considered one of the greatest Physicists of all time, developed the theory of Quantum electrodynamics. His awards in Physics include - Albert Einstein Award (1954), E. O. Lawrence Award (1962), Nobel Prize in Physics (1965), Foreign Member of the Royal Society (1965), Oersted Medal (1972), National Medal of Science (1979)
Except for the fact that we've been able to observe evolution, such as the a population of E.coli evolving the ability to metabolize citrate. So.. there's that.
This interpretation of the scientific method has many fatal flaws that were exposed by Karl Popper last century. Here's Popper's scientific method: 1, problem (usually rebuff to existing theory or expectation); 2, proposed solution, in other words a new theory; 3, deduction of testable propositions from the new theory; 4, tests, i.e. attempted refutations by, among other things (but only among other things), observation and experiment; 5, preference established between competing theories.
If that's the world's smartest man, God help us. -His mother, Lucille Feynman, after Omni magazine named him the world's smartest man; as quoted in Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman (1992) by James Gleick (;
Where did Dawkins say this? I think you are making broad statements without looking at the consensus. If you can show us a nice big glaring falsity in either theory scientists would love to see it. Like a modern rabbit in the jurassic fossil record. Perhaps a magic ability to see into the creation of the universe?
Right like I said think for yourselves. Your theorys are dunb. And there many definitions of evolution. Im talking about the part where a rock makes life.
Dawkins said himself. The universe was more likely intelligent designed than the big bang theory. Big bang and evolution are not testable and wrong. Duh.
Dawkins said that? Any citation? (Not that Dawkins is an authority over the validity of the big bang, just curious) The big bang is a proven scientific theory. Evolution is not only proven, but observed. And you are wrong.
@@kostantinos2297 He didn't say that at all... I'm guessing he is referring to when he was ambushed in a documentary called "no intelligence allowed" where Ben Stein asked him if he could conceive of an intelligent creator. Dawkins replied something along the lines of , "I guess I could imagine that aliens could be responsible but those aliens would have had to evolve in the first place". The documentary then made a really dishonest cut, twisted what had been said and made one of the most dishonest quote mines ever recorded :)
“Testable” comes in two forms. Observations of nature or experiments. Evolution and BBT come in the former, especially, but not exclusively. Both are empirically supported better than alternative explanations,
"If it disagrees with the experiments it's wrong " a simple statement but is the core of science ❤️
This should have 7 billion views.
All the NPC sheeple hate the scientific method as it destroys their belief in the establishment propaganda pushed as 'science', so they choose to avoid anything that upsets them.
So You're into Sciences?
His students are genuinely enthralled.
You would be too if you got to meet Feynmann
As philosophe Alan Watts beautifully said "Science is the art of prediction" =)
Great video. And not monetized - hurray!
I too I clicked on this just to see some good old fashioned cursive handwriting.
I'm a 45 years young Canadian. I hand write like that, I learn it in elementary school. It's not common anymore? And it's a real and honest question (I have no kids) 😁
Look at his cursive writing.. OMG!!
I clicked on this just to see some good old fashioned cursive handwriting.
Happy birthday, very fine man
we need to be doing with this with Covid-19...
The propaganda would fall apart like a house of cards.
Thanks to the scientific method, we came out the other side of this hell hole called covid 19.
@@benjamindover5676 Firstly, we're still in the hole. Secondly the scientific method has only been applied by scientists like Sr Malone and Dr McCullogh pointing out the data that shows how flawed the approach to Covid by govts is and how dangerous the vaccines are.
Damn he's totally right.
Always link this video to the believers of AGW
+Alberto R. Yep, just did exactly that.
Uh what? Global warming is an observable phenomenon. Global temperatures are rising. The guess or theory is Greenhouse effect. This conforms to the scientific method to a t
Well the world must be jam packed with scientists that don't know how science works right? Well either they went through this process and are still all wrong, and also naive... OR you are... hmmm... I wonder which? I think I'll side with science and not random idiots to be honest...
@@FlabbyPigLegs Models are wrong. So the hypothesis is WRONG. curryja.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/christy_dec8.jpg
@@FlabbyPigLegs Except all the main predictions of AGW have been wrong. None of the original IPCC predictions have been met, and none of the predictions included "The Pause." So we do not see observation match theory, and rather than re-examine the core theory AGW seems to run on a tautology - GIVEN: mankind is causing warming PROOF: Prove man-caused warming. This means it is not operating as a normal subject of scientific inquiry -- which makes it more akin to Lysenkoism than Science.
Amei
Supra2nv loves Feynman
wow there are so many geniuses in these comments its amazing
Or to put it another way, as Lucille Feynman did, there are so many geniuses here in the comments, “God help us”!
We can model the big bang, and we can compare it with things like the WMAP experiment. There are alternative theories that also have merit, like the 4D hyperblackhole that was featured in Nature last week.
Thanks Reddit
Government climate change scientists sorely need this lesson drilled into them.
22
42
Has anyone sent this to "Professor" (Lockdown) Ferguson, who's actually got a degree in Physics?
Degrees are irrelevant or did you not pay attention to what Feynman said.
Who?
Why though?
Sorry phone is freaking out
Did you delete my comment Gkool1988?
Do you mean string theorists or are you just trolling?
if anyone has this shallow thinking, I assume earth is no longer for human.
Haha.
If everyone would follow this very simple scientific approach to look at the world around them, noone would be religious anymore.
I always post this on the global warming pages
I assume you understand the difference between a controlled experiment and an uncontrolled experiment?
@@snuffeldjuret In climate science, one has to compare prediction to observation, and for the past 40 years, the numerous predictions have not been borne out by observation. Indeed, the IPCC do not predict things, but rather they project things, because they know that the many predictions have been shown to be wrong time and again.
@@richardverney6702 this is patently, absurdly false. One would only need to look through google scholar over the past 100 years to find papers upon papers upon papers of evidence for climate change, but I suppose that's hard work...
@@lindocalrissian0926 So why did the temperature go steadily down for the next 40 years after the 2nd WW while we were putting millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere? So much so that the climate prediction (in the 70's) was the coming ice age? And if CO2 is the so called control knob of climate why does no one ever offer a simple 1 way ANOVA that clearly rejects the Null Hypothesis? Sure that would go a long way to settling the matter.
@@snuffeldjuret I assume you understand the difference between if/then and if and only if?
Ally evolution anna food shot alive
what year was this? And when was the junk science lecture?
Richard Feynman lecture from probably the early 1960s, considered one of the greatest Physicists of all time, developed the theory of Quantum electrodynamics. His awards in Physics include - Albert Einstein Award (1954), E. O. Lawrence Award (1962), Nobel Prize in Physics (1965), Foreign Member of the Royal Society (1965), Oersted Medal (1972), National Medal of Science (1979)
Except for the fact that we've been able to observe evolution, such as the a population of E.coli evolving the ability to metabolize citrate. So.. there's that.
This interpretation of the scientific method has many fatal flaws that were exposed by Karl Popper last century.
Here's Popper's scientific method:
1, problem (usually rebuff to existing theory or expectation); 2, proposed solution, in other words a new theory; 3, deduction of testable propositions from the new theory; 4, tests, i.e. attempted refutations by, among other things (but only among other things), observation and experiment; 5, preference established between competing theories.
It's incomplete you mean. Not flawed. And a theory's experimentational results must be reproducible every time.
Seriously, dude?
Wth is so darn funny?
Look for Her(God), She is in your head.(;
If that's the world's smartest man, God help us.
-His mother, Lucille Feynman, after Omni magazine named him the world's smartest man; as quoted in Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman (1992) by James Gleick
(;
Why God help us? Do you believe he's somehow wrong?
Why is the audience so silly? Are they high or what?😂
Where did Dawkins say this? I think you are making broad statements without looking at the consensus. If you can show us a nice big glaring falsity in either theory scientists would love to see it.
Like a modern rabbit in the jurassic fossil record. Perhaps a magic ability to see into the creation of the universe?
The Universe is always in creation mode.
@@joeschmoe119310 years, alive?
Right like I said think for yourselves. Your theorys are dunb. And there many definitions of evolution. Im talking about the part where a rock makes life.
Wolfgang Pauli's famous putdown comes to mind...
Dawkins said himself. The universe was more likely intelligent designed than the big bang theory. Big bang and evolution are not testable and wrong. Duh.
Dawkins said that? Any citation? (Not that Dawkins is an authority over the validity of the big bang, just curious)
The big bang is a proven scientific theory. Evolution is not only proven, but observed. And you are wrong.
@@kostantinos2297 He didn't say that at all... I'm guessing he is referring to when he was ambushed in a documentary called "no intelligence allowed" where Ben Stein asked him if he could conceive of an intelligent creator. Dawkins replied something along the lines of , "I guess I could imagine that aliens could be responsible but those aliens would have had to evolve in the first place". The documentary then made a really dishonest cut, twisted what had been said and made one of the most dishonest quote mines ever recorded :)
“Testable” comes in two forms. Observations of nature or experiments. Evolution and BBT come in the former, especially, but not exclusively. Both are empirically supported better than alternative explanations,
And prayer fails every time. It's like flipping a coin so obviously god is not real.
Well the fact that you can't give us substantive proof that there is a god of any kind I think you should look for help elsewhere. ;P
The world itself.
Aww that's cute, you took an intro to physics class and now you think you know everything.