Peter Robinson is the greatest interviewer I have ever seen. An intense listener, and a mind so agile that he can receive almost ANY new contention and turn it into a point of clarity.
Another fantastic show--thanks for having them on! Meyer (PhD Cambridge) and Tour (Rice chemistry prof, >650 research papers, >200 patents, H-index > 170) are highly intellectually credible. They deserve to be heard! So let's ignore the pro-cancellation comments from folks who want to suppress academically credible people like Meyer and Tour simply because they disagree with the majority. Let's stop the viewpoint suppression of dissenting scientific voices!
They are being refuted. Because their research papers and ideas have no substance and are constantly found to be lacking. They are led by faith and not evidence. If they had credibility, then they would be listened to by the general scientific community. They are as credible as Terrance Howard.
I love the dynamic of having Dr Meyer and Dr Tour on the same panel. They're both quite brilliant but really have a unique approach to debating the questions of origin of life. Dr Meyer is more measured while Dr Tour is more polemic. I had to pause at Dr Tour "a stinking pond" and laugh a little while I get ready for the rest of this.
When Steven Meyer and James Tour arrive in heaven, God is going to say to each, "Well done, thou good and faithful servant." These two men have taken such abuse for stating the obvious. Such courage is inspiring, amazing and worthy of honor and respect.
I have tons of respect for both of these men. And no one can match Peter as a host. Dr. Tour said what he hoped is that a younger generation will lay aside the prejudices of rank materialism and move in a more scientific direction. But I ask how can this happen so long as they are all immersed exclusively in the classroom with a single materialist cause for the origin of life.
In the mid 40s, I remember the proverbial "primordial soup" model of life origin when I was still in grade school. No one questioned it. Same in high school science and biology classes of the late 40s and early 50s. In college, however, I just went on and studied mathematics, chemistry, physics, and electrical engineering. I like Dr. Meyers' statement about "undirected processes" which abound in the natural world versus the processes which occur in laboratories and manufacturing facilities. I think that point is central to all the origin of life questions. As an 89 year old retired engineer and mechanical guy who spent a lot of his lifetime fixin', repairin', buildin' old autos, auto engines, electric motors, washing machines, desktop computers, and my house. I have one pretty consistent observation from my years of getting stuff from auto junkyards. The stuff that's been in the junkyard the longest has rusted or deteriorated the most. Always reminded me of a fundamental "law" - No matter what you start with, if it is left without something continuously or repeatedly added in some organized ("directed") manner, it will decay, run down, stop working and absolutely end up becoming less than what you started with. Have never observed any exception to this.
How does this discussion challenge scientific convention. No one is claiming to be able to explain how the cell evolved. What scientific convention are they challenging? This is just arguing against nothing and proposing nothing. Can he ask them both what their alternative is ? No because it would immediately shut down this discussion.
I want to thank the three of you for an extremely lucid discussion about the most amazing subject in the universe: Life. Long will it remain a mystery, and the subject of study.
One of the best, if not the best, UK episode I have yet watched. Peter Robinson is an excellent interviewer. Meyer and Tour are 2 fantastic minds and make for an excellent episode.
Best part is at 44:30 where Tour explains that we still don't know what makes a call function. The top scientists can't explain what is "lost" from a cell seconds after the cell "dies" because it still has all the chemical components, yet something is lost. That something is not found in DNA or anywhere else. Its like "the force" in star wars because we don't know what it is, we just know it makes things tick.
@@bionanoscienceThis is a pure strawman. Tour says we need a better theory of the origin of life. We’ll never get it if we just keep saying this and stay at the same place.
This chemical engineer hit the nail on the head, the scientist in the field of origin of life keep it going for the funding. To believe in intelligent design takes out the science. But it doesn’t, it still gives man a goal to unravel how it works. We may not figure out who designed life until we die, but faith helps get past that.
Easily the most profound and important issues facing today’s study of origins. Yet the willingly ignorant majority of the science community will proceed straining at gnats while swallowing camels because that’s where the research funding is focused. Bravo to all three of you for shining the light into the darkness and demonstrating the emperor of this world truly is naked. You all rock!
James Tour is so Great by the highest standards and yet he is still trying to tell everybody about Jesus Christ.. that’s incredible and it totally Strengthens my faith
The fact is that the universe screams out that there's a designer, this is something that was 100% obvious in the far past until recently some scientists began to convince us that a garden had no gardner, a code had no coder and a car had no machanical engineer.
Thank you so much for this amazing discussion. Thank you for your courage and honesty. All three of you are using the talents given to you by your Designer to the utmost.
Peter, well done !! What a program you have made with Estelar guests and how much you know about the subject at hand. No layman there !! Mazal Tov !!!!!
Every theory must be reexamined as new science and studies develop. If something is true it should stand scrutiny. This is the true essence of debate and therefore the cornerstone of a civilized enlightened society.
but nothing has been proven true about the origin of life, that's why research and experiments continue, these 2 are just saying "it's too hard for US to understand, so God or aliens must have created life on earth". Intelligent design is not science, it offers no testable hypothesis.
But if that scrutiny is squeed with mega $$$ being thrown into the questioning process in order to direct the outcome to a predetermined result how can true answers come to light. Scientist know in their heads & hearts the fakery of evolution BUT they must play "the game" so they can get paid on Friday. There's no courage in science. And who suffers ... the next generation being feed the lies and worked into the system.
"James Tour is performing chemical accounting on the OOL researchers." Well said, and it explains their disdain for him revealing that they are cooking the books.
Towards the end, when Stephen mentioned the students saying "no waaayyy" while learning what's happening inside the cell I wanted to laugh out loud, because that was ME in the early 90's, so over 30 years ago, in high school, learning biology. I remember clearly when I learned mitosis and the duplicated DNA chromosomes being pulled apart and then the cell dividing itself in two. That totally blew my mind. And it is just one of the millions of possible examples. As Dr James pointed, it's not just the DNA information storage. The whole thing SCREAMS design, wherever you look. If so many scientists weren't pushing their atheist religious dogmas so blindly, we could be making more progress. But then, would they be willing to confess they just don't know and they are even more clueless about it, the better microscopes get?
"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."--Romans 1:20
Tour and Meyer are brilliant gentlemen, and i like millions of others became a believer (Christian) from a scientific perspective, not indoctrinated as a child (grew up in an agnostic family). The complexity and the evidence of design cannot be denied anymore, something created our species and all life on earth.
We do not seem to hear much mention of the work of Sir Fred Hoyle these days who published his book the "Intelligent Universe" in 1983. .To quote Hoyle: Did life start as a random process? No. "Imagine a blindfolded person trying to solve the Rubik cube. The chance against achieving perfect colour matching is about 50,000,000,000,000,000,000, to 1. These odds are about the same as those against just one of our body's 200,000 proteins having evolved randomly by chance" . Great interview.
Scientist here, I've been saying for years that the evolutionists have put the cart before the horse with their theory. They have built extremely elaborate fantasy castles in the air.
Not really. Biological evolution - Darwinism - is a phenomenon in and of itself, and can be studied and understood without consideration for the origin of life; in the same way that physicists are allowed to study, model and attempt to understand the universe in the absence of an explanation for its origin.
This is the first time I’ve heard someone other than myself make the time objection - the idea that the first structure would be able to survive this supposed primordial soup and form the ability to replicate enough that they all survive and kick off the arc of life seemed ridiculous to me - and stumped every professor of biology and chemistry I had.
I have yet to hear of anyone attributing the inscriptions on the Rosetta stone (discovered by Bouchard) to random processes. To attribute those inscriptions to intelligent agency is not only a scientific observation, but any attribution of these inscriptions to random processes instead would be regarded as laughable. The DNA code in the cell (discovered by Watson & Crick) is far more complex, and FAR more unlikely than the inscriptions on the Rosetta stone. To prefer random processes to explain the DNA code, over the other explanation, that the ONLY known source of code is intelligent agency, is not only laughable, but clearly motivated by deeper imperatives; probably dominance contestation.
As a former materialistic evolutionist and atheist, it was evidence for catastrophic fluvial geomorphology that opened the door for me to explore Genesis from the view that its primarily an historical text. Genetics and microbiology, ancient accounts, the fossil record and so much more points to Genesis as being plain history.
We get an unnerving insight into Darwin's character from an entry he made in his personal ledger during his voyage on the Beagle. While he was journeying through the Argentine pampas in South America there was a bloody slaughter of the indigenous natives taking place, conducted by the rogue General Juan Manuel de Roses, a self proclaimed despot, in 1833. Indian women and children were thrust through with saber and shot down like hunted animals. Darwin traveled through the territory as a guest of the General, and he wrote of the war in his diary: " . . . women who appear over twenty years of age are massacred in cold blood while the children are sold into slavery" however he was also able to write on a lighter note: "This war of extirmination (sic), although carried on with the most shocking barbarity, will certainly produce great benefits, it will at once throw open four or five hundred miles in length of fine country for the produce of cattle." Beagle Diary, by Charles Darwin, edited by R.D. Keynes, 1988, pp.180-181, pp177; and The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, Vol. 1, pp.326, 1821-1861, F.H. Burkhardt and S. Smith ed., Cambridge University Press, University Library, Cambridge, 1983-1984 Practical man that he was, Darwin could definitely see the positive side of this genocide. Perhaps if there had been electric lighting back then Darwin might have also come up with some novel ideas for interior design with the by-products of this slaughter, as some of his followers in the twentieth century did during the holocaust. Desmond and Moore wrote that "Darwin shook a hand soaked in blood" when he struck up his acquaintance with General Rosas, whom he decribed as "a perfect gaucho." Desmond and Moore, Darwin, pp. 141. While Darwin was a guest of the General, who had loaned Darwin some of his horses to go exploring on during his sojourn in Argentina, he received a correspondence from Fitzroy back on the ship, who desired to know how Darwin's "campaign with General Rosas" was going. Desmond and Moore report: "Well armed, with fresh horses and ruthless companions, he had little to fear from the hostiles. Indeed he was beginning to appreciate the 'great benefits' of General Rosas' 'war of extermination ." (Ibid, pp. 141) In Darwin's mind it was all fairly simple: "Less Indians => more cattle => healthier Spaniards: Survival of the fittest!" (Although the term "survival of the fittest" was not coined until the 1850's by another rogue, Herbert Spencer, founder of the modern pseudo-science of sociology and from whose work the communists and national socialists in the twentieth century built their dark machinations with, Darwin clearly had the concept buttoned down in his notes years before) Apparently the slaughter of the Indians didn't weigh too heavily on his conscience, for Darwin boasted when describing his living conditions while riding with Rosas' men: "I . . .drink my Mattee; smoke my cigar, then lie down & sleep as comfortably with the Heavens for a canopy as in a feather bed." Charles Darwin, The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, Vols.. 1-9, (1821-1861), Cambridge University Press, See also Browne, pp. 256-257 and Desmond and Moore, pp.141.
This is a great discussion, even though it takes a lot of background knowledge to understand the topics being discussed. Time will reveal the importance of this series of discussions.
A living cell occurring on Earth would be like a three story house occurring in the desert. But not just a three story house, but also finding the blue prints for how the house was built and maintained. And the house would have had to have builders that could read the blueprints and have arms and legs and a bunch of tools. And of course, these builders would need very specific materials at certain times and in a particular order. And also there is a danger of rain, fire, drought and other conditions while the building was going on. There is just no way possible something like a cell or a house just came about on it's own and for no reason to come about.
The best presentation I have seen that argue Coherently, Cogently that we need to Reclaim and Refocus and shift from Reductionist approach that says we must leave out --God or Life requires an Intelligent Being to start this process.
Actually, Professor Dave has already made a huge effort debunking James Tour: ruclips.net/p/PLybg94GvOJ9HzCxBR9f4oi7MvfVcKAS6O The one who tends to shout is in actually James Tour, as in his debate with Dave Farina: ruclips.net/video/KvGdllx9pJU/видео.html
In the origin of life there must be specific purposeful information which gives rise to that life. Where did the information, the epigenetic coding in the cell, originate?
Once again a great conversation from the Hoover Institution basically showing how science disproves a self organizational process and how clueless we are when it comes to origin of life questions.
but I don't think it is clueless. You can't know that someting exists without any further info. I know you had a father but his existence IS absolutely all I know.
A creator is not the answer. It just poses more questions in infinitum. Who or what created the creator? I believe this is unknowable. Just like the creation of the universe. Unknowable.
@@DouglasLippi Nothing created the Creator. The Creator is the Prime Reality, the First Mover, the Uncaused Cause. If you're asking that question, you really need to read some more philosophy.
@@chrispark2698 You need to study philosophy. A creator does not explain anything more than "we have no idea". Then let us stay with " we have no idea" and the Occam razor.
I really treasure what Tour and Meyers are providing apologetics. Peter reminds me of Socrates as presented by Plato. Socrates claims to know nothing but knows his limitations of knowledge. These are three men who are not only intelligent but also wise. I could only wish that everyone would realize that all the pillars of neo Darwinian evolution have crumbled: abiogenesis, mutations plus natural selection, and the fossil record. Nevertheless, it is all the atheist has to cling to. The late Stephen J Gould knew that much of textbook orthodoxy was not supported by the data.
The problem is those who claim to know how life begin not only stall but also discourage and deter those who try to know. Contrary to many false accusations, those who believe God is the final cause, they are the ones who try to know how God did it. They do not settle with, God did it, therefore no need to know how. God ordered them to seek to know. To know how is the step to know why. The why is the hole that every sages from the past to the present driven to fill. On the other side, to those who believe it is random, the question of why is already answered which is no reason Thus why really bother to spend the time and effort to know the how. Just get those money, grants to sustain their meaningless existance (by their own admission just ask them yourself, what is the meaning of life) The random dudes get in the way of the design dudes.
True scientists ❤. Dr. Tour is the best! Thank you for having these two future Nobel Peace Laureates on your show. The world needs more men like these. Thank you, gentlemen
Fall to our knees everyday !!! Powerful stuff guys....the modern athiest is on shaky ground...this is almost like Jonah telling Nineva to repent and they beleiving him and doing it.
Absolutely fascinating these gentlemen have a wonderful way of explaining something that is mind boggling, thank you for sharing your knowledge and passion with us all
"The notion that not only the biopolymer but the operating program of a living cell could be arrived at by chance in a primordial organic soup here on the Earth is evidently nonsense of a high order." -- Fred Hoyle -- he likened the theory to "a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein"
@@Lancet75 ruclips.net/video/xIHMnD2FDeY/видео.html Dawkins sits mute/deaf/sub-moronic as actual achieved biologists, 2 Nobel laureates and Craig Venter ALL say: "it is IMPOSSIBLE that humans will EVER know life's origin". NOTHING about "abiogenesis" has advanced in the most utterly de minimis since Hoyle's metaphor. Chpt. 4 of The God Delusion, Dawkins invokes it only to elide out of ignorance or duplicity to existing life...CONVENIENTLY skipping addressing Hoyle's immutable truth. Other perhaps than Lee Cronin's famous; "origin of life science is a SCAM"
Actually just the opposite. A thousand tornados would break down a junk-yard into almost atomic elements. Life and evolution began from basic materials that existed at the time. Why is this so hard to contemplate?
Inspiring discussion! Key Principle: "Everything I think I 'know' (or 'believe') is (at the very least) incomplete (and quite possibly just 'wrong')!" I have to remind myself of this concept every day. Some helpful 'teachers' of mine have included Alfred Korzybski, S.I. Hayakawa, Thomas Sowell, and others.
Can get enough of this topic. Its tte least talked about most important topic. We ve been dumbed down to barely think about by the Marxist educational system
Are you high? This is the opposite of thinking. These dopes are just saying "we haven't been able to figure it out so it must have been inexplicable divine forces or aliens"
Peter Robinson is the greatest interviewer I have ever seen. An intense listener, and a mind so agile that he can receive almost ANY new contention and turn it into a point of clarity.
Another fantastic show--thanks for having them on! Meyer (PhD Cambridge) and Tour (Rice chemistry prof, >650 research papers, >200 patents, H-index > 170) are highly intellectually credible. They deserve to be heard! So let's ignore the pro-cancellation comments from folks who want to suppress academically credible people like Meyer and Tour simply because they disagree with the majority. Let's stop the viewpoint suppression of dissenting scientific voices!
They are being refuted. Because their research papers and ideas have no substance and are constantly found to be lacking. They are led by faith and not evidence.
If they had credibility, then they would be listened to by the general scientific community.
They are as credible as Terrance Howard.
No way to stop it I think but you can still ignore it
I love the dynamic of having Dr Meyer and Dr Tour on the same panel. They're both quite brilliant but really have a unique approach to debating the questions of origin of life. Dr Meyer is more measured while Dr Tour is more polemic. I had to pause at Dr Tour "a stinking pond" and laugh a little while I get ready for the rest of this.
When Steven Meyer and James Tour arrive in heaven, God is going to say to each, "Well done, thou good and faithful servant." These two men have taken such abuse for stating the obvious. Such courage is inspiring, amazing and worthy of honor and respect.
Peter please keep these coming! This content is contributing to a paradigm shift.
Thank you, Peter, for bringing this VERY IMPORTANT discussion to the public. HIGHLY IMPORTANT.
I have tons of respect for both of these men. And no one can match Peter as a host. Dr. Tour said what he hoped is that a younger generation will lay aside the prejudices of rank materialism and move in a more scientific direction. But I ask how can this happen so long as they are all immersed exclusively in the classroom with a single materialist cause for the origin of life.
In the mid 40s, I remember the proverbial "primordial soup" model of life origin when I was still in grade school. No one questioned it. Same in high school science and biology classes of the late 40s and early 50s. In college, however, I just went on and studied mathematics, chemistry, physics, and electrical engineering. I like Dr. Meyers' statement about "undirected processes" which abound in the natural world versus the processes which occur in laboratories and manufacturing facilities. I think that point is central to all the origin of life questions. As an 89 year old retired engineer and mechanical guy who spent a lot of his lifetime fixin', repairin', buildin' old autos, auto engines, electric motors, washing machines, desktop computers, and my house. I have one pretty consistent observation from my years of getting stuff from auto junkyards. The stuff that's been in the junkyard the longest has rusted or deteriorated the most. Always reminded me of a fundamental "law" - No matter what you start with, if it is left without something continuously or repeatedly added in some organized ("directed") manner, it will decay, run down, stop working and absolutely end up becoming less than what you started with. Have never observed any exception to this.
I love these two guys. You should invite them on your podcast at least once per month.
Peter is one of the all time best interviewers. Loved hearing Dr Tour and Dr Meyer
Mate he’s brilliant I found him so unintentionally funny aswell, the interviews with Thomas sowell are incredible!!
Yessss!!! I will fall asleep listening to this. And will listen to it again tomorrow when I am awake. I cannot get enough of this topic.
A discussion like this requires a room like that!
Or a couple of REAL experts on the topic.
@@galileog8945like the ones in the video?? 😂
@@ayekaye8055evolutionary biologists
A discussion challenging the concensus, popular culture and the scientific dogma. Thank you hoover institute
How does this discussion challenge scientific convention. No one is claiming to be able to explain how the cell evolved. What scientific convention are they challenging? This is just arguing against nothing and proposing nothing. Can he ask them both what their alternative is ? No because it would immediately shut down this discussion.
I want to thank the three of you for an extremely lucid discussion about the most amazing subject in the universe: Life.
Long will it remain a mystery, and the subject of study.
One of the best, if not the best, UK episode I have yet watched. Peter Robinson is an excellent interviewer. Meyer and Tour are 2 fantastic minds and make for an excellent episode.
It's a very mid level pedaling of the same old creationists "arguments".
I never tire of listening to these two men.
Best part is at 44:30 where Tour explains that we still don't know what makes a call function. The top scientists can't explain what is "lost" from a cell seconds after the cell "dies" because it still has all the chemical components, yet something is lost. That something is not found in DNA or anywhere else. Its like "the force" in star wars because we don't know what it is, we just know it makes things tick.
Ah yes, another example of we don't know yet, therefore, God did it.
@@bionanoscience - Ah yes, another example of "We don't have a scientific explanation, but it can't be God."
@@bionanoscience no mention of God, you’re just projecting.
@@bionanoscience - Kind of reminds me of "Oh, we don't know, therefore evolution ...". Give me a break. Is that the best you can do?
@@bionanoscienceThis is a pure strawman. Tour says we need a better theory of the origin of life. We’ll never get it if we just keep saying this and stay at the same place.
This chemical engineer hit the nail on the head, the scientist in the field of origin of life keep it going for the funding. To believe in intelligent design takes out the science. But it doesn’t, it still gives man a goal to unravel how it works. We may not figure out who designed life until we die, but faith helps get past that.
Easily the most profound and important issues facing today’s study of origins. Yet the willingly ignorant majority of the science community will proceed straining at gnats while swallowing camels because that’s where the research funding is focused. Bravo to all three of you for shining the light into the darkness and demonstrating the emperor of this world truly is naked. You all rock!
James Tour is so Great by the highest standards and yet he is still trying to tell everybody about Jesus Christ.. that’s incredible and it totally Strengthens my faith
Love them together. The philosophy of science and science. Biology and Chemistry. Beautiful.
Dr. Meyer and Dr. Tour are awesome!
One hundred and sixty five years later since "Origin of Species", and we're right back to where we started from, God said.
No, we are definitely not.
The real myth busters, thank you, gentlemen.
Oh boy the comment section is upset. Take it easy. People can have different ideas and share them. If you don’t think they have any validity so be it.
Very much agree.
There is a difference between conflictingn viewpoints and being plain wrong. I can say gravity doesn't exist, is that a different idea?
Thank you for bringing together Meyer with Tour. That was a fantastic discussion
Loved this very interesting conversation between such learned men. Thank you!
I was so hooked. This is so enlightening😊
Not only is Peter the best interviewer but he is prepared to cover these, er, rather important things, otherwise all but ignored.
Such an incredible discussion!! I learn somethingvevery time I listen to Dr. Meyer and Dr. Tour!!
Loved it. Peter, Stephen and James give us a pretty good place to start, honesty and humility sparking fresh amazement.
The fact is that the universe screams out that there's a designer, this is something that was 100% obvious in the far past until recently some scientists began to convince us that a garden had no gardner, a code had no coder and a car had no machanical engineer.
And maggots spontaneously arose from rotting meat.
But apparently stupidy can arise from a complex brain.
There is no god,, grow up.
Who designed your alleged creator then? Lol
What other universes can you compare it to, to say it is designed rather than anything else?
I’m not hearing that from the universe. You can believe that if you want but I don’t see it.
Thank you so much for this amazing discussion. Thank you for your courage and honesty. All three of you are using the talents given to you by your Designer to the utmost.
Peter, well done !! What a program you have made with Estelar guests and how much you know about the subject at hand.
No layman there !!
Mazal Tov !!!!!
These two men are BASED. Thank you for this great video!
Every theory must be reexamined as new science and studies develop. If something is true it should stand scrutiny. This is the true essence of debate and therefore the cornerstone of a civilized enlightened society.
but nothing has been proven true about the origin of life, that's why research and experiments continue, these 2 are just saying "it's too hard for US to understand, so God or aliens must have created life on earth". Intelligent design is not science, it offers no testable hypothesis.
Are we a “civilized and enlightened society”?
But if that scrutiny is squeed with mega $$$ being thrown into the questioning process in order to direct the outcome to a predetermined result how can true answers come to light. Scientist know in their heads & hearts the fakery of evolution BUT they must play "the game" so they can get paid on Friday. There's no courage in science. And who suffers ... the next generation being feed the lies and worked into the system.
I love this kind of discussion!
"James Tour is performing chemical accounting on the OOL researchers." Well said, and it explains their disdain for him revealing that they are cooking the books.
Towards the end, when Stephen mentioned the students saying "no waaayyy" while learning what's happening inside the cell I wanted to laugh out loud, because that was ME in the early 90's, so over 30 years ago, in high school, learning biology. I remember clearly when I learned mitosis and the duplicated DNA chromosomes being pulled apart and then the cell dividing itself in two. That totally blew my mind. And it is just one of the millions of possible examples. As Dr James pointed, it's not just the DNA information storage. The whole thing SCREAMS design, wherever you look. If so many scientists weren't pushing their atheist religious dogmas so blindly, we could be making more progress. But then, would they be willing to confess they just don't know and they are even more clueless about it, the better microscopes get?
Wow, what a fantastic, well done, educational and informative video. Thank you for all the work (Peter Robinson & Guests) and for then sharing.
"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."--Romans 1:20
Tour and Meyer are brilliant gentlemen, and i like millions of others became a believer (Christian) from a scientific perspective, not indoctrinated as a child (grew up in an agnostic family). The complexity and the evidence of design cannot be denied anymore, something created our species and all life on earth.
We do not seem to hear much mention of the work of Sir Fred Hoyle these days who published his book the "Intelligent Universe" in 1983. .To quote Hoyle: Did life start as a random process? No. "Imagine a blindfolded person trying to solve the Rubik cube. The chance against achieving perfect colour matching is about 50,000,000,000,000,000,000, to 1. These odds are about the same as those against just one of our body's 200,000 proteins having evolved randomly by chance" . Great interview.
Scientist here, I've been saying for years that the evolutionists have put the cart before the horse with their theory. They have built extremely elaborate fantasy castles in the air.
true that!
Yes, for sure they are the one who believes in fairy tales I actually believe in the one true living God who created all things
Not really. Biological evolution - Darwinism - is a phenomenon in and of itself, and can be studied and understood without consideration for the origin of life; in the same way that physicists are allowed to study, model and attempt to understand the universe in the absence of an explanation for its origin.
How you explain or what is your best guess of the diversity among extant and extinct organisms for the last 3.8 billion years on planet earth?
What is an evolutionist😮
This is the first time I’ve heard someone other than myself make the time objection - the idea that the first structure would be able to survive this supposed primordial soup and form the ability to replicate enough that they all survive and kick off the arc of life seemed ridiculous to me - and stumped every professor of biology and chemistry I had.
i think you're underestimating how easily bacteria replicates itself
Another awesome discussion. Please host more!!!
I have yet to hear of anyone attributing the inscriptions on the Rosetta stone (discovered by Bouchard) to random processes. To attribute those inscriptions to intelligent agency is not only a scientific observation, but any attribution of these inscriptions to random processes instead would be regarded as laughable.
The DNA code in the cell (discovered by Watson & Crick) is far more complex, and FAR more unlikely than the inscriptions on the Rosetta stone. To prefer random processes to explain the DNA code, over the other explanation, that the ONLY known source of code is intelligent agency, is not only laughable, but clearly motivated by deeper imperatives; probably dominance contestation.
Then what is the other, or any, other explanation? You dismiss this theory without giving an alternative.
This is strong. Thank you
As a former materialistic evolutionist and atheist, it was evidence for catastrophic fluvial geomorphology that opened the door for me to explore Genesis from the view that its primarily an historical text.
Genetics and microbiology, ancient accounts, the fossil record and so much more points to Genesis as being plain history.
Do you hold to theistic evolution?
// As a former materialistic evolutionist and atheist //
Was that lobotomy painful?
No. It's a waste of time both in terms of science, history and theology. @@collin501
We get an unnerving insight into Darwin's character from an entry he made in his personal ledger during his voyage on the Beagle. While he was journeying through the Argentine pampas in South America there was a bloody slaughter of the indigenous natives taking place, conducted by the rogue General Juan Manuel de Roses, a self proclaimed despot, in 1833. Indian women and children were thrust through with saber and shot down like hunted animals.
Darwin traveled through the territory as a guest of the General, and he wrote of the war in his diary:
" . . . women who appear over twenty years of age are massacred in cold blood while the children are sold into slavery" however he was also able to write on a lighter note: "This war of extirmination (sic), although carried on with the most shocking barbarity, will certainly produce great benefits, it will at once throw open four or five hundred miles in length of fine country for the produce of cattle." Beagle Diary, by Charles Darwin, edited by R.D. Keynes, 1988, pp.180-181, pp177; and The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, Vol. 1, pp.326, 1821-1861, F.H. Burkhardt and S. Smith ed., Cambridge University Press, University Library, Cambridge, 1983-1984
Practical man that he was, Darwin could definitely see the positive side of this genocide. Perhaps if there had been electric lighting back then Darwin might have also come up with some novel ideas for interior design with the by-products of this slaughter, as some of his followers in the twentieth century did during the holocaust.
Desmond and Moore wrote that "Darwin shook a hand soaked in blood" when he struck up his acquaintance with General Rosas, whom he decribed as "a perfect gaucho." Desmond and Moore, Darwin, pp. 141.
While Darwin was a guest of the General, who had loaned Darwin some of his horses to go exploring on during his sojourn in Argentina, he received a correspondence from Fitzroy back on the ship, who desired to know how Darwin's "campaign with General Rosas" was going.
Desmond and Moore report: "Well armed, with fresh horses and ruthless companions, he had little to fear from the hostiles. Indeed he was beginning to appreciate the 'great benefits' of General Rosas' 'war of extermination ." (Ibid, pp. 141)
In Darwin's mind it was all fairly simple: "Less Indians => more cattle => healthier Spaniards: Survival of the fittest!" (Although the term "survival of the fittest" was not coined until the 1850's by another rogue, Herbert Spencer, founder of the modern pseudo-science of sociology and from whose work the communists and national socialists in the twentieth century built their dark machinations with, Darwin clearly had the concept buttoned down in his notes years before)
Apparently the slaughter of the Indians didn't weigh too heavily on his conscience, for Darwin boasted when describing his living conditions while riding with Rosas' men: "I . . .drink my Mattee; smoke my cigar, then lie down & sleep as comfortably with the Heavens for a canopy as in a feather bed." Charles Darwin, The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, Vols.. 1-9, (1821-1861), Cambridge University Press, See also Browne, pp. 256-257 and Desmond and Moore, pp.141.
"The Spirit moved over the waters". Life came from the Spirit of God the Father and the Son.
This is a great discussion, even though it takes a lot of background knowledge to understand the topics being discussed.
Time will reveal the importance of this series of discussions.
I'm not a big evolution guy but I enjoy watching these debates.
Fascinating conversation. Thank you for sharing
A living cell occurring on Earth would be like a three story house occurring in the desert. But not just a three story house, but also finding the blue prints for how the house was built and maintained. And the house would have had to have builders that could read the blueprints and have arms and legs and a bunch of tools. And of course, these builders would need very specific materials at certain times and in a particular order. And also there is a danger of rain, fire, drought and other conditions while the building was going on.
There is just no way possible something like a cell or a house just came about on it's own and for no reason to come about.
this is a dramatic misrepresentation of abiogenesis theory
The best presentation I have seen that argue Coherently, Cogently that we need to Reclaim and Refocus and shift from Reductionist approach that says we must leave out --God or Life requires an Intelligent Being to start this process.
Very thought provoking. Thanks.
Wow! Nice comment from Dr. Keating. It must have been good. "Professor " Dave must be next!
@@jamesmiller7457 professor dave is too busy shouting at his webcam
@@notloki3377 good point
Actually, Professor Dave has already made a huge effort debunking James Tour: ruclips.net/p/PLybg94GvOJ9HzCxBR9f4oi7MvfVcKAS6O
The one who tends to shout is in actually James Tour, as in his debate with Dave Farina: ruclips.net/video/KvGdllx9pJU/видео.html
This will open the question about the divine origin of life.
We can barely comprehend lifeless nanotechnology, let alone the advanced biotechnology that we are!
exquisite!
Thank you so very much.
Zee zee
Delightful, honest, thrilling discussion.
Beautiful conversation!
great session
I really enjoy these talks main stream science is finally coming around to intelligent design
Thank you for posting this interview
In the origin of life there must be specific purposeful information which gives rise to that life. Where did the information, the epigenetic coding in the cell, originate?
Once again a great conversation from the Hoover Institution basically showing how science disproves a self organizational process and how clueless we are when it comes to origin of life questions.
but I don't think it is clueless. You can't know that someting exists without any further info. I know you had a father but his existence IS absolutely all I know.
We can't find answers if we refuse to accept evidence because we don't like it.
I’ve been waiting for Dr. Tour on one of these Uncommon Knowledge sessions.
The problem is,life is not physical it is spirit. So any scientific theory that confines itself to only the physical will fail.
Thank you for this very thoughtful conversation!
People who cannot contemplate the scientific facts discussed here are AFRAID of scientific truth. They are suffering from Creator-phobia.
A creator is not the answer. It just poses more questions in infinitum. Who or what created the creator? I believe this is unknowable. Just like the creation of the universe. Unknowable.
@@DouglasLippi Nothing created the Creator. The Creator is the Prime Reality, the First Mover, the Uncaused Cause.
If you're asking that question, you really need to read some more philosophy.
@@chrispark2698 You need to study philosophy. A creator does not explain anything more than "we have no idea". Then let us stay with " we have no idea" and the Occam razor.
@DouglasLippi God created time, space and matter. He exists outside of these. 27:27 This is impossible for us to comprehend.
Exactly, the idea of a Creator scares them. Because a Creator implies a LOT of things that they just can't accept.
Oh this is going to be good! My favorite scientists and philosopher!
I really treasure what Tour and Meyers are providing apologetics. Peter reminds me of Socrates as presented by Plato. Socrates claims to know nothing but knows his limitations of knowledge. These are three men who are not only intelligent but also wise. I could only wish that everyone would realize that all the pillars of neo Darwinian evolution have crumbled: abiogenesis, mutations plus natural selection, and the fossil record. Nevertheless, it is all the atheist has to cling to. The late Stephen J Gould knew that much of textbook orthodoxy was not supported by the data.
A great discussion. Very, very elegant.
What a fun discussion. Love these guys.
The problem is those who claim to know how life begin not only stall but also discourage and deter those who try to know.
Contrary to many false accusations, those who believe God is the final cause, they are the ones who try to know how God did it. They do not settle with, God did it, therefore no need to know how. God ordered them to seek to know. To know how is the step to know why.
The why is the hole that every sages from the past to the present driven to fill.
On the other side, to those who believe it is random, the question of why is already answered which is no reason
Thus why really bother to spend the time and effort to know the how. Just get those money, grants to sustain their meaningless existance (by their own admission just ask them yourself, what is the meaning of life)
The random dudes get in the way of the design dudes.
😂😂😂, a brutal honest opinion. They dont have right to do something but do that because the money is good.
True scientists ❤. Dr. Tour is the best! Thank you for having these two future Nobel Peace Laureates on your show. The world needs more men like these. Thank you, gentlemen
Thank you for this amazing interview 🙏🙏❤
Thank you.
Absolutely wonderful discussion ❤
Amazing! Thank you for incredible content!
Amazing topic and very interesting and illuminating ideas. Thank you👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
Great interview!
Wonderful and fascinating conversation.
Fall to our knees everyday !!! Powerful stuff guys....the modern athiest is on shaky ground...this is almost like Jonah telling Nineva to repent and they beleiving him and doing it.
Three men with whom I would be delighted to have a conversation... or two. *_Wonderful._*
😎♥✝🇺🇸💯
Great conversation.
Bless all three of you!
Outstanding interview and information. !!!!!
Absolutely fascinating these gentlemen have a wonderful way of explaining something that is mind boggling, thank you for sharing your knowledge and passion with us all
"The notion that not only the biopolymer but the operating program of a living cell could be arrived at by chance in a primordial organic soup here on the Earth is evidently nonsense of a high order." -- Fred Hoyle -- he likened the theory to "a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein"
Hoyle's remark is obsolete: Boeing 747 is a bad simile.
@@Lancet75 ruclips.net/video/xIHMnD2FDeY/видео.html
Dawkins sits mute/deaf/sub-moronic as actual achieved biologists, 2 Nobel laureates
and Craig Venter ALL say: "it is IMPOSSIBLE that humans will EVER know life's origin".
NOTHING about "abiogenesis" has advanced in the most utterly de minimis since Hoyle's
metaphor. Chpt. 4 of The God Delusion, Dawkins invokes it only to elide out of ignorance
or duplicity to existing life...CONVENIENTLY skipping addressing Hoyle's immutable truth.
Other perhaps than Lee Cronin's famous; "origin of life science is a SCAM"
Actually just the opposite. A thousand tornados would break down a junk-yard into almost atomic elements. Life and evolution began from basic materials that existed at the time. Why is this so hard to contemplate?
i gave a thumbs up. i just loved this discushion and love the show. bible beleving creationest here but i appreciated both sides argument
Brilliant discussion. Very well done
Inspiring discussion! Key Principle: "Everything I think I 'know' (or 'believe') is (at the very least) incomplete (and quite possibly just 'wrong')!" I have to remind myself of this concept every day. Some helpful 'teachers' of mine have included Alfred Korzybski, S.I. Hayakawa, Thomas Sowell, and others.
Excellent, excellent
Thank you so very much Peter.
Magnificent! Life and your minds and hearts, true gifts.
Can get enough of this topic. Its tte least talked about most important topic. We ve been dumbed down to barely think about by the Marxist educational system
Are you high? This is the opposite of thinking. These dopes are just saying "we haven't been able to figure it out so it must have been inexplicable divine forces or aliens"
Way down!! A lot of Mr. Smith's in the comment section.
How is our system Marxist?
It is not taught in schools as science, for the same reason that flat earth is not taught.
It has no relevance.
@@klouis1886 Wow! There are literally books 📚 written on the topic. It is SO easy to research.
Great discussion.