Tracie should have cried because of the last caller actually. The "evolution made me believe even more in god" thing? That's just him saying "Oh, evolution doesn't explain where the diversity of life comes from (stupid in itself), so since I don't know the cause it must be god". BIG argument from ignorance!
how is that even possible?you might think there are totally titless people out there ,therefore not everyone can possess bigger tits than ripley.ignorance fallacy?
On the nipples point, the caller pointed out nipples are formed before the gender is decided. Maybe this true, who knows? But in creation, men were definitely created before women. So why did men get nipples too?
xamarmm Just a correction: we're not born female, we become female before that. But yes, female is the default form. That's no excuse for New Feminists to try and create a patriarch enemy where there is none and replace it with their own matriarchy.
xamarmm Yes, I know, but considering we were talking about reproduction, it's not fitting to misappropriate a term used in that field. That said, if gender did develop post-birth, that would be interesting.
"Males are actually modified females" If one does not develop as male that does not necessarily make them a female. By definition, a male or female can reproduce, and the female is the one producing eggs. The fact is that both male and female have female DNA, but females lack male DNA, and males lack the DNA to become fully female. What they are talking about when saying the female is the base form is that male growth hormones block some female traits from ever developing, like breast tissue, and stimulate development of male traits like the adams apple. A person cannot develop into a thing that they don't have the necessary DNA for. Breasts however, is something we all have the DNA for, so anyone can develop them.
It's really very simple. Women have XX-chromosomes and men have XY-chromosomes. The egg always carry an X-chromosome and the sperm carry either the X- or the Y-chromosome from the offset. So the idea that gender arises during pregnancy is ridiculous. From the second the sperm touches the egg, your gender is decided.
The argument from ignorance breaks my heart. I wish that all the time in the world was available to teach every single person who needs to spend the time and education while searching out their answers... to understand this moniker. The world would be such a productive and more peaceful place. but some people need more time than my life has left in it. Gr8! Peace ☮💜
@@larjkok1184 Basically, how can so many (not counted) experience the same thing through the same practices (yoga? meditation?), and be wrong. He wasn't ready to define the words he was using, which happens to me all the time, but I have Google to help if I'm caught off guard, though he was using ill-defined words that rely on unevidenced concepts. I hope he figures that out.
MMDE Oh, I meant Steven. Did you mean that SJG's site is down? I know there is an official and an unofficial archive site, and the official one seems to be working. I wouldn't expect SJG to have changed his mind and he certainly wouldn't now.
Some of us have an extra tendon in our wrist, you can check it by pressing your thumb to your pinky. You can see the lack of this tendon sometimes on one hand of the same person, I forget the name of it but it was once used for climbing, but now it does nothing.
+Kyran Zipped My favorite vestigials in humans is the Nictitating Eye Membrane (movable clear eye cover) and tails in humans. If you go to TalkOrigins.org, you will find under Vestigials, an X-Ray of a little girl who was born with a working tail with tendons and vertebra! There's no explanation in Creationism for Vestigials in animals and humans.
Actually creationists like the criminal Kent Hovind do present "explanations" for vestigials. Sure it is pure bullocks for an explanation but his indoctrinated brainwashed sheep probably swallow it right up hook line and sinker. I guess if they are okay with penguins traveling from the middle east to Antarctica by volcano explosion after the mythical flood and that the earth had a physically impossible ice firmament around it are okay with any other nonsense "explanations" he can pull from directly out of his ass.
This is one of the best episodes. It covers so much, is entertaining and very informative. I love the info on patterns in humans and why they are hard to break. Thank you for this show!
Am I being too coarse? I listened to Josh try to define "mystical" and "spiritual", but with every sentence, the only thing I could think was "Hindu horseshit"... Added later: I like to think that Josh was just joshing! Added still later - a year after last edit - Josh is so committed to his indoctrinated nonsense that he is desperate to spread his own gullibility to others.
If you are saying many animals are harmed in the harvesting of vegetables/crops please remember that most crops we grow go to feeding animals so that just makes that even worse. You consume the least plants by eating plants. Also all vegans are 'ethical vegans'. Peas.
The argument against being a vegetarian at ~30 minute mark was pretty bad. "just follow a columbine and see all the destruction" Short of just shows Matt does not know how the meat gets to his table. The vast majority of the plants we harvest got toward feeding our livestock for producing meat. Seems eating meat is one of the beliefs Matt holds without good reason.
Lol if you're going to criticize someone's statement, you should at least have basic knowledge of the topic. Since you don't even know what a "combine" is, I feel it's a safe assumption.
Bible Belt Atheist You assumption that because I misspelled combine is that I dont know what it is in an incorrect assumption. I know exactly what it is. Did you even bother to read the rest of my post? If you had then you would realize that majority of that destruction from a combine as matt points to is not to feed people vegetables but to feed animals to produce milk eggs or meat. Seriously read, and try to understand the argument Then actually address the argument instead of cherry picking what you like and refute straw men, if you can...
Tracie, "It's like getting to 1 from 0. It just can't be done.." Not that I disagree with what she was saying, just saying... 0^0=1 So she just didn't know how to get there.. :)
xamarmm no multiplication (or powers which is multiplication in series) is not like divide. Oh and every calculator on the planet - 0^0=1...so there is that.
xamarmm No dude.. 5^5=5*5*5*5*5=(5+5+5+5+5)+(5+5+5+5+5)[.......] There is no DIVISION in MULTIPLICATION. Just wrong. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. You can get as complicated as you want with the math but you are wrong.
Tracy is great! Matt is great! Love the discussion of "Argument from Ignorance." I run into it in all sorts of discussions, not just religious discussions.
My points: 1) Some people are more connected to technology. 2) People are not equally connected. 3) I predict that this connection will in large part determine who survives to breed again and who will not.
It takes 16kg~ of vegetable matter to produce 1kg~ of beef, thus the human consumption of meat results in the indirect consumption of far more vegetation compared to eating vegetation directly. The principle also applies to water and land. On a separate note, eating something purely because you enjoy the taste with no regard to the morality of doing so is at least a little bit like believing something purely because it makes you happy regardless of whether or not it's true.
the definiiton of a test is: The purpose of an experiment is to determine whether observations of the real world agree with or conflict with the predictions derived from an hypothesis. E theory is testable, and has shown to be in agreement with real world observations
And the fact that there was a women who died in the hospital described what doctors said in the other end of the hospital, when she came back after flat lined she told the docs what they were talking about and the docs were amazed when she said she came out her body and heard them
The initial remarkings made me recall a ghost story I read about. There was this lab that was famously haunted. People there saw things like wandering spirits and heard things as well; sometimes some people even witnessed physical phenomena, like glasses espontaneously falling from tables, etc. And these phenomena were very common and relatively easy to experience and show other people. Well, it was a lab, with scientists who worked there, so they did what scientists do when they witness something strange: they looked into it. Turns out, it was a malfunctionins air conditioning system, that was emitting infrasound vibrations throughout the building. The vibrations messed with people's eye fluid, so it pressed against the retina and made you see shadows and stuff - the retina respond to mechanical stimulae, that's why you "see stars" if you're punched in the eye. It also accounted for weird noises and the falling glasses, by the virtue of ressonance. As Tim Minchin said: "Throughout History, every mystery ever solved has turned out to be not magic".
I think with Steven's argument in this video, it was more or less about the order of either searching for reason to believe, and coming to accept your belief. For example, one person might search for evidence and come to a conclusion, whereas others may begin with the conclusion they want to reach and then try to find evidence for that (this would be the people he thinks are "faking").
"does one species EVER turn into another species? show me an example in the last 2000 years." "show me an example of speciation. show me the experiment the date the author" These are actual quotes from you, and I had given you what you asked for. The strongest evidence for speciation that we have is actually strong inference(with a scientific and rigourous) approach from what has happend in the past, which is why fossil records and genetic mapping is frequently mentioned as evidence.
"The thing that’s so interesting about Psilocybin and DMT is that they’re so closely related to ordinary brain chemistry. The brain chemistry of all higher animals runs largely on serotonin. Serotonin is 5-hydroxytryptamine. DMT is N,N-dimethyltryptamine. Psilocybin is 4-phosphoryloxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine, but the phosphoryloxy group goes off as it crosses the blood-brain barrier, so it’s 4-hydroxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine. So, it’s very interesting that, these powerful, naturally occurring hallucinogens are in many cases only one molecule away from endogenous neurotransmitters. So, in answer to your question, it's possible to suggest that we’re as close as one mutation away from significant shifts in the chemical mix of the human brain. And, for instance, in the pineal gland, there’s an enzyme called adrenoglomerulotropin, which is chemically, 6-methoxy-tetrohydroharmaline. It’s very closely related to the harmine alkaloids in ayahuasca. Well, the persistent myth about ayahuasca is that it creates states of group-mindedness and telepathy. The original alkaloid was actually named telepathine until it was discovered that it was structurally similar to harmine, which had been previously described by, Hochstein & Paradies. Well. I'm not wedded to any of this. I just simply state the facts, and the facts are that, not DMT so much, which is pretty common in many plants and animals, but Psilocybin. Psilocybin is 4-phosphoryloxy-NN-dimethyltryptamine. Well now. This is slightly technical, but it is the only 4-phosphorylated indole on this planet. That's strange because the way biology works, is if you have a molecule useful in a biological system, then in other biological systems you will get that same molecule or tiny variants; methylated or o-methylated. So here is Psilocybin with the only hydrolation in the 4 position on the planet. Well now, they search for extraterrestrial life with radio telescopes waiting for a signal. Fine. Another way would be to search the biological inventory of this planet for something that looks like it did not evolve from the main, broad flow of animal and plant evolution. And if you do that, this 4-phosphorylated indole is sticking up there like a sore thumb. I'd like to see a paper about how many of these kinds of chemical anomalies are known to exist on this earth in life. And what's the explanation for this. I've never seen anybody discuss this kind of thing. And yet, to my mind the Psilocybin molecule is as artificial as a Coke bottle. As it appears in nature. So.. If you'll just inventory nature. You would pick this molecule up and say, well now. What is, this molecule" (Terence Mckenna)
At about 36:00, Tracie was talking about a Pigeon experiment. To my understanding, how the experiment worked was there were two sets of pigeons, one getting a treat when it presses a button and one at random intervals, and eventually, the latter pigeon would think that whatever it was doing at the time was what caused the treat (in the experiment it was looking over it's shoulder, eventually it did so expecting a treat). Basically this shows that superstition is a natural occurrence.
Brilliant work guys, keep it up! My brain broke when i was thinking about Tracies' opening comments; what evidence would we accept as existence of a God? Like at what point, what demonstration, upon experience of what incomprehendable phenomenon would we feel certain that a divine celestial being exists? It's almost certain that it wouldn't be any god depicted by modern or past faiths, a god can ONLY be unknowable to a point where 'praying' to one would be folly because you are certainly wrong
The caller who's a Hindu had some interesting ideas. As an atheist/buddhist myself, I find meditation to be helpful as a psychological "medicine". I don't believe in any supernatural aspect of it, but the subconscious mind is brought to consciousness which can be a "mystical" experience. It's a state of mind that's achieved in silencing our thoughts & being mindful in the present moment. Psychadelics also open the mind to liberating expansiveness. And science has studied the brainwaves of monks.
Yeah, it unfortunately took me too long to realise this. At the start of our conversation I actually put in the effort to provide evidence and address his questions, but more recently I have stopped because of how futile it is. It is probably best we do not spend too much time with it, it is like talking to a brick wall.
Let me clarify something. Vegetarianism is not usually connected with religious or spiritual beliefs in western countries. Atheism may not have anything to do with being vegetarian but having a rational logical and consistent form of ethics and morals DOES have to do with it
Considering how much of evolution is based on environment, and how much of most of our human environments are based on our technology, this just makes sense.
It's an argument from ignorance to say someone's committing an argument from ignorance just because you can't see how it couldn't be an argument from ignorance doesn't mean it is. The previous sentence is an argument from ignorance too.
Hmm, that sucks. For me, being deaf and mute would be torture(though not as much as blindness would be) and all the more reason to master writing and sign. Communicating is so much a part of what it means to be human that the thought of being incapable of doing so horrifies me.
"I mean.. Think about it.. And I don’t think you could discover consciousness if you didn't perturb it, because as Marshall McLuhan said, “whoever discovered water, it certainly wasn't a fish”. Well, we are fish swimming in consciousness; and yet we know it’s there. Well, the reason we know it’s there is because if you perturb it, then you see it; and you perturb it by perturbing the engine which generates it, which is the mind/brain system resting behind your eyebrows. If you swap out the ordinary chemicals that are running that system in an invisible fashion, then you see: it’s like dropping ink into a bowl of clear water - suddenly the convection currents operating in the clear water become visible, because you see the particles of ink tracing out the previously invisible dynamics of the standing water. The mind is precisely like that, and the psychedelic is like a dye-marker being dropped into this aqueous system. And then you say, “ Oh, I see - it works like this… and like this!' So, its hard for me to imagine that it could be in the Psilocybin, because Psilocybin is a very simple molecule. It seems to me that what must be happening is that we are in-bedded in an ocean of information, and Psilocybin somehow changes our channel slightly. You know, ordinary consciousness is created by a neurotransmitter called serotonin; 5-hydroxytryptamine .. Suggestively, a very close relative to Psilocin; 4-hydroxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine .. and DMT; N,N-dimethyltryptamine .. So, it seems to me that we have evolved a neurotransmitter which has had the effect of narrowing the focus of consciousness to what is operationally defined by the body as the here and now. Well now, the fact that we contain and metabolise DMT in the course of ordinary metabolism, what does it mean that the most powerful of all psychedelic tryptamine hallucinogens is a part of ordinary human metabolism. Now, the pineal gland .. Who's function is very mysterious, is doing a lot of chemistry that looks like psychedelic chemistry. So it's possible, that literally, when we take these tryptamine hallucinogens, we are as it where, dressing up in the mental furniture of the distant future. That we are experiencing a state of consciousness toward which we are naturally evolving. And that over time and through natural selection, the serotonin neurotransmitters are making way for these more powerful psychedelic compounds, and shift our mental life. Literally, into another dimension" (Terence Mckenna)
in other words: i agree, anything we do will affect nature. that obviously doesn't mean that the possible options and their eventual outcomes are equal, yet this seems to be what you imply.
Josh doesn't seem to understand that brainstorming (fantasizing) has some value, but you have to eventually come back to earth and pick up the debris if you want to get anything done. New age is BSing with big words.
1) That you have experienced a particular type of hallucination that you could easily tell was such does not rule out that there may be types that you cannot. 2) You have not ruled out confabulation. Did this vision appear as a real girl or was it phantasmal in nature? Was there sound? Was the house locked? Did she disappear at the top of the stairs? What did you do?
I studied Christmas by reading Levitation chapter 13 and it seems to be about skin conditions. There's this dude named LORD talking to a couple of guys named Moses and Aaron. LORD explains how to deal with scabs, bright spots, white hair etc with the help of a priest. Personnally I think it's best to see a doctor. There was no mention of Christmas, by the way.
''Yes a law by definition is an explanation to a phenomenon that once we hear about it we test its function so we can understand its viability and so we can understand how it works and its implications.'' actually thats not a law its a hypothesis.
"Theory: A plausible or scientifically acceptable, well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena and predict the characteristics of as yet unobserved phenomena" There, are we done now?
Experiments have been done with fruit flies with artificial selection pressures where changes have been seen through generations to the extent that they cannot reproduce with other members from the original lineage. Experiments have been done with bacteria showing genetic changes in response to antibiotics (selection in preference for resistant bacteria).
i did not use it as a compound word, rather a description that it has mathematical components, not that it falls into a category of theories called mathematical theories
What is it that is felt when all thoughts have ceased? There is, in my experience, i kind of yearning. A machine that is running and waiting for the next thought to enter and be processed. What i would define as mysticism would be the belief that this underlying machine that thought are built upon, is intelligent.
It's very frustrating to realize that no matter what evidence you bring to someones attention and no matter what method of explanation you may use to illustrate something, you will never be able to bring a person to even consider your position because they made the decisions meany years ago to turn there brains off and force stupidity on them selves
I dont think they are any less abundant then one would expect with the theory as it is, and there are many more examples which I can provide, and with better explanation of the definitions, however as you understand it takes time to do this
and to respond to matt's statement, plants aren't sentient, meaning they don't feel pain like animals, which includes fish and insects. I'd also eat any meat, ANY, if I needed to survive.
I agree, and there is a subset of individuals in the second group who want to dispute the aspects of science that conflict with religion but do not want to have the burden of proof for any religious beliefs, so they use the strategy of pretending they are not religious or even claiming to be atheists so they can appear to attack the views that contradict their religious views on a 'scientific basis'. I think Matt on the show even mentioned this as something some apologists suggest believers do.
"I know it was not a hallucination..." How do you know it wasn't an hallucination? How would you know the difference between seeing a 'real' ghost and having an hallucination of a ghost? That's the definition of hallucination; to see or hear something that isn't really there, as though it really was.
Tracie is bomb. Her reasoning skills are what we all should aspire to have. She has a way with words and explanations. Love her.
My WCW
Yeah too bad shes going to hell. Just kidding
Hey, Steve? Reading a two paragraph summary of evolution off some creationist website does not count as 'research' or 'study', hth.
LOL I think of the Simpson's. "If it isn't my old friend Mr. McGreg. With a leg for an arm and an arm for a leg.
I always love how Tracie relentlessly asks people "define what you mean by...".
I love it because it's so right to do.
Tracie should have cried because of the last caller actually. The "evolution made me believe even more in god" thing? That's just him saying "Oh, evolution doesn't explain where the diversity of life comes from (stupid in itself), so since I don't know the cause it must be god". BIG argument from ignorance!
Tracie is the Ellen Ripley of atheism.
"What makes you think they're gonna care about a bunch of lifers who found God at the ass-end of space ?"
how is that even possible?you might think there are totally titless people out there ,therefore not everyone can possess bigger tits than ripley.ignorance fallacy?
Thomas Lara this is why they disable comments...
Bergzore she's hideous
Oggy Oggy you’re a shit for brains loser with no reason to live. Do us all a favor and.....
Tracie and Matt together makes for awesome episodes every time
sigourney weaver is so smart!
Dude lol I always thought she looked just her!!
lol
Sigourney Weaver doesn't have a goatee, you big silly!
I am sick of creationists who don't understand evolution insisting that evolution is false.
On the nipples point, the caller pointed out nipples are formed before the gender is decided. Maybe this true, who knows? But in creation, men were definitely created before women. So why did men get nipples too?
xamarmm Just a correction: we're not born female, we become female before that.
But yes, female is the default form. That's no excuse for New Feminists to try and create a patriarch enemy where there is none and replace it with their own matriarchy.
xamarmm Yes, I know, but considering we were talking about reproduction, it's not fitting to misappropriate a term used in that field.
That said, if gender did develop post-birth, that would be interesting.
xamarmm I know of fish that can do that, but I've never heard of that occurring in humans.
"Males are actually modified females"
If one does not develop as male that does not necessarily make them a female. By definition, a male or female can reproduce, and the female is the one producing eggs.
The fact is that both male and female have female DNA, but females lack male DNA, and males lack the DNA to become fully female.
What they are talking about when saying the female is the base form is that male growth hormones block some female traits from ever developing, like breast tissue, and stimulate development of male traits like the adams apple. A person cannot develop into a thing that they don't have the necessary DNA for. Breasts however, is something we all have the DNA for, so anyone can develop them.
It's really very simple. Women have XX-chromosomes and men have XY-chromosomes. The egg always carry an X-chromosome and the sperm carry either the X- or the Y-chromosome from the offset. So the idea that gender arises during pregnancy is ridiculous. From the second the sperm touches the egg, your gender is decided.
The argument from ignorance breaks my heart. I wish that all the time in the world was available to teach every single person who needs to spend the time and education while searching out their answers... to understand this moniker. The world would be such a productive and more peaceful place.
but some people need more time than my life has left in it. Gr8! Peace ☮💜
Cozy episode. No name-calling and almost no yelling. Also, I like it when every caller is taken serious regardless of Tahrir
12:00 Josh - CA Spirituality.
26:45 Wyatt - OR Vegetarianism.
31:05 Victor - UK Irrationality in the world
Josh made absolutely no sense.
He’s a blabbering idiot.
I wonder if he thought he had a point to make before he called.
@@larjkok1184
Basically, how can so many (not counted) experience the same thing through the same practices (yoga? meditation?), and be wrong.
He wasn't ready to define the words he was using, which happens to me all the time, but I have Google to help if I'm caught off guard, though he was using ill-defined words that rely on unevidenced concepts.
I hope he figures that out.
Steven: Go to a zoo with sea-lions. Take a look at the flippers. Tell me they don't look like deformed dog paws.
I have a Staffordshire Bull Terrier. They are also known as land seals 😎👍
Take a look at the flipper bones of whales. They look exactly like hands.
The thing Steven talks about, the transitional form being an issue in evolution, was well addressed by Stephen Jay Gould in "Not Necessarily a Wing".
MMDE Kind of funny that Steven is defeated by Stephen.
0okamino lol, it would seem his web page is down now.
MMDE Can't say I'm very surprised by that. I just wonder if he changed his mind about the whole issue.
0okamino Stephen or Steven? I don't think Stephen ever changed his mind on things like NOMA or episodic evolution.
MMDE Oh, I meant Steven. Did you mean that SJG's site is down? I know there is an official and an unofficial archive site, and the official one seems to be working. I wouldn't expect SJG to have changed his mind and he certainly wouldn't now.
16:10 Anyone notice how he said chemistry transcends chrmicals???? LMFAO hilarious
49:00 ..... er, what about your tailbone? Ya know, the leftover part of our tails? What about goosbumps being a vestigial reflex?
Some of us have an extra tendon in our wrist, you can check it by pressing your thumb to your pinky. You can see the lack of this tendon sometimes on one hand of the same person, I forget the name of it but it was once used for climbing, but now it does nothing.
+Kyran Zipped
My favorite vestigials in humans is the Nictitating Eye Membrane (movable clear eye cover) and tails in humans. If you go to TalkOrigins.org, you will find under Vestigials, an X-Ray of a little girl who was born with a working tail with tendons and vertebra!
There's no explanation in Creationism for Vestigials in animals and humans.
Actually creationists like the criminal Kent Hovind do present "explanations" for vestigials. Sure it is pure bullocks for an explanation but his indoctrinated brainwashed sheep probably swallow it right up hook line and sinker. I guess if they are okay with penguins traveling from the middle east to Antarctica by volcano explosion after the mythical flood and that the earth had a physically impossible ice firmament around it are okay with any other nonsense "explanations" he can pull from directly out of his ass.
What about the fact that our spines arent well "designed" for bipedal animals.
@@whichgodofthousandsmeansno5306 these are just some of the many things that are repeatedly pulled from the ass. Kent seems quite busy back there.
This is one of the best episodes. It covers so much, is entertaining and very informative. I love the info on patterns in humans and why they are hard to break.
Thank you for this show!
Am I being too coarse? I listened to Josh try to define "mystical" and "spiritual", but with every sentence, the only thing I could think was "Hindu horseshit"... Added later: I like to think that Josh was just joshing! Added still later - a year after last edit - Josh is so committed to his indoctrinated nonsense that he is desperate to spread his own gullibility to others.
If you are saying many animals are harmed in the harvesting of vegetables/crops please remember that most crops we grow go to feeding animals so that just makes that even worse. You consume the least plants by eating plants. Also all vegans are 'ethical vegans'. Peas.
The argument against being a vegetarian at ~30 minute mark was pretty bad. "just follow a columbine and see all the destruction"
Short of just shows Matt does not know how the meat gets to his table. The vast majority of the plants we harvest got toward feeding our livestock for producing meat.
Seems eating meat is one of the beliefs Matt holds without good reason.
Lol if you're going to criticize someone's statement, you should at least have basic knowledge of the topic. Since you don't even know what a "combine" is, I feel it's a safe assumption.
Bible Belt Atheist You assumption that because I misspelled combine is that I dont know what it is in an incorrect assumption.
I know exactly what it is. Did you even bother to read the rest of my post?
If you had then you would realize that majority of that destruction from a combine as matt points to is not to feed people vegetables but to feed animals to produce milk eggs or meat.
Seriously read, and try to understand the argument Then actually address the argument instead of cherry picking what you like and refute straw men, if you can...
Bible Belt Atheist buzz off troll.
Mark T
Butthurt? Butthurt.
Mark T troll=someone who's called you out on straw manning
Tracie, your patience knows no bounds.
Tracie, "It's like getting to 1 from 0. It just can't be done.."
Not that I disagree with what she was saying, just saying...
0^0=1
So she just didn't know how to get there.. :)
xamarmm no multiplication (or powers which is multiplication in series) is not like divide. Oh and every calculator on the planet - 0^0=1...so there is that.
xamarmm No dude.. 5^5=5*5*5*5*5=(5+5+5+5+5)+(5+5+5+5+5)[.......]
There is no DIVISION in MULTIPLICATION.
Just wrong. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. You can get as complicated as you want with the math but you are wrong.
xamarmm yay math arguments!
I like quadratic equations, and differential calculus, but I can't do mental arithmetic to save myself
bfk1970 i'm ok at simple mental arithmetic, but I can't calculus for diddly squat.
After having watched about a dozen if these I find that I prefer the ones that are more topical to the ones that solely deal with call-ins.
I admire the hosts and crew, for making this show, and dealing with these people, in TEXAS of all places.
Beautiful.
Those were some great calls.
Tracy is great! Matt is great! Love the discussion of "Argument from Ignorance." I run into it in all sorts of discussions, not just religious discussions.
To use a turn of phrase you enjoyed, rather than patronize,try making sense.
Your service.
My points:
1) Some people are more connected to technology.
2) People are not equally connected.
3) I predict that this connection will in large part determine who survives to breed again and who will not.
My apologies. You are correct, These were targeted to Realitystratt, Now I have to repost. Sorry.
mow, i have to admit you are doing a good job backing up your assertions here.
It takes 16kg~ of vegetable matter to produce 1kg~ of beef, thus the human consumption of meat results in the indirect consumption of far more vegetation compared to eating vegetation directly. The principle also applies to water and land.
On a separate note, eating something purely because you enjoy the taste with no regard to the morality of doing so is at least a little bit like believing something purely because it makes you happy regardless of whether or not it's true.
Matt Dillahunty and Tracie Harris are fast becoming intellectual heroes of mine..!
This is the best episode, as its on my birthday, there's no other explanation
the definiiton of a test is: The purpose of an experiment is to determine whether observations of the real world agree with or conflict with the predictions derived from an hypothesis. E theory is testable, and has shown to be in agreement with real world observations
when i said 10 million years its just an example - im not saying that in that time period we are guaranteed to see it - dont take it literally
And the fact that there was a women who died in the hospital described what doctors said in the other end of the hospital, when she came back after flat lined she told the docs what they were talking about and the docs were amazed when she said she came out her body and heard them
Josh sounds like Xavier Renegade Angel
The initial remarkings made me recall a ghost story I read about.
There was this lab that was famously haunted. People there saw things like wandering spirits and heard things as well; sometimes some people even witnessed physical phenomena, like glasses espontaneously falling from tables, etc. And these phenomena were very common and relatively easy to experience and show other people.
Well, it was a lab, with scientists who worked there, so they did what scientists do when they witness something strange: they looked into it.
Turns out, it was a malfunctionins air conditioning system, that was emitting infrasound vibrations throughout the building. The vibrations messed with people's eye fluid, so it pressed against the retina and made you see shadows and stuff - the retina respond to mechanical stimulae, that's why you "see stars" if you're punched in the eye. It also accounted for weird noises and the falling glasses, by the virtue of ressonance.
As Tim Minchin said: "Throughout History, every mystery ever solved has turned out to be not magic".
Fair play to Steven in Montreal. He was willing to listen and also to find out more.
I think with Steven's argument in this video, it was more or less about the order of either searching for reason to believe, and coming to accept your belief. For example, one person might search for evidence and come to a conclusion, whereas others may begin with the conclusion they want to reach and then try to find evidence for that (this would be the people he thinks are "faking").
Poor Steven isn't aware of vestigial organs. Bless his heart.
"does one species EVER turn into another species? show me an example in the last 2000 years."
"show me an example of speciation. show me the experiment the date the author"
These are actual quotes from you, and I had given you what you asked for. The strongest evidence for speciation that we have is actually strong inference(with a scientific and rigourous) approach from what has happend in the past, which is why fossil records and genetic mapping is frequently mentioned as evidence.
"The thing that’s so interesting about Psilocybin and DMT is that they’re so closely related to ordinary brain chemistry. The brain chemistry of all higher animals runs largely on serotonin. Serotonin is 5-hydroxytryptamine. DMT is N,N-dimethyltryptamine. Psilocybin is 4-phosphoryloxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine, but the phosphoryloxy group goes off as it crosses the blood-brain barrier, so it’s 4-hydroxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine. So, it’s very interesting that, these powerful, naturally occurring hallucinogens are in many cases only one molecule away from endogenous neurotransmitters. So, in answer to your question, it's possible to suggest that we’re as close as one mutation away from significant shifts in the chemical mix of the human brain. And, for instance, in the pineal gland, there’s an enzyme called adrenoglomerulotropin, which is chemically, 6-methoxy-tetrohydroharmaline. It’s very closely related to the harmine alkaloids in ayahuasca. Well, the persistent myth about ayahuasca is that it creates states of group-mindedness and telepathy. The original alkaloid was actually named telepathine until it was discovered that it was structurally similar to harmine, which had been previously described by, Hochstein & Paradies. Well. I'm not wedded to any of this. I just simply state the facts, and the facts are that, not DMT so much, which is pretty common in many plants and animals, but Psilocybin. Psilocybin is 4-phosphoryloxy-NN-dimethyltryptamine. Well now. This is slightly technical, but it is the only 4-phosphorylated indole on this planet. That's strange because the way biology works, is if you have a molecule useful in a biological system, then in other biological systems you will get that same molecule or tiny variants; methylated or o-methylated. So here is Psilocybin with the only hydrolation in the 4 position on the planet. Well now, they search for extraterrestrial life with radio telescopes waiting for a signal. Fine. Another way would be to search the biological inventory of this planet for something that looks like it did not evolve from the main, broad flow of animal and plant evolution. And if you do that, this 4-phosphorylated indole is sticking up there like a sore thumb. I'd like to see a paper about how many of these kinds of chemical anomalies are known to exist on this earth in life. And what's the explanation for this. I've never seen anybody discuss this kind of thing. And yet, to my mind the Psilocybin molecule is as artificial as a Coke bottle. As it appears in nature. So.. If you'll just inventory nature. You would pick this molecule up and say, well now. What is, this molecule" (Terence Mckenna)
At about 36:00, Tracie was talking about a Pigeon experiment. To my understanding, how the experiment worked was there were two sets of pigeons, one getting a treat when it presses a button and one at random intervals, and eventually, the latter pigeon would think that whatever it was doing at the time was what caused the treat (in the experiment it was looking over it's shoulder, eventually it did so expecting a treat). Basically this shows that superstition is a natural occurrence.
Brilliant work guys, keep it up!
My brain broke when i was thinking about Tracies' opening comments; what evidence would we accept as existence of a God? Like at what point, what demonstration, upon experience of what incomprehendable phenomenon would we feel certain that a divine celestial being exists?
It's almost certain that it wouldn't be any god depicted by modern or past faiths, a god can ONLY be unknowable to a point where 'praying' to one would be folly because you are certainly wrong
The caller who's a Hindu had some interesting ideas. As an atheist/buddhist myself, I find meditation to be helpful as a psychological "medicine". I don't believe in any supernatural aspect of it, but the subconscious mind is brought to consciousness which can be a "mystical" experience. It's a state of mind that's achieved in silencing our thoughts & being mindful in the present moment. Psychadelics also open the mind to liberating expansiveness. And science has studied the brainwaves of monks.
why are you asking me? i'm not hanging on to it. i just introduced it to make a point.
Yeah, it unfortunately took me too long to realise this. At the start of our conversation I actually put in the effort to provide evidence and address his questions, but more recently I have stopped because of how futile it is. It is probably best we do not spend too much time with it, it is like talking to a brick wall.
Let me clarify something. Vegetarianism is not usually connected with religious or spiritual beliefs in western countries. Atheism may not have anything to do with being vegetarian but having a rational logical and consistent form of ethics and morals DOES have to do with it
Callers. Yes, they can hear you. Answer the actual question. Thank you.
Considering how much of evolution is based on environment, and how much of most of our human environments are based on our technology, this just makes sense.
I've been searching my entire life for meaning, but now I finally understand. I'm actually a beautiful unicorn.
It's an argument from ignorance to say someone's committing an argument from ignorance just because you can't see how it couldn't be an argument from ignorance doesn't mean it is. The previous sentence is an argument from ignorance too.
49:03 Our boy is looking for a crocoduck...
Even with wheels a car won't run, however it will roll.
Claims he's not going to talk about "irreducible complexity", proceeds to do exactly that.
Indeed they are. My favourite host combination by far.
To the cheesecake thing? Yes. That is mystical. Heavenly even 😋
Steven's brain is one of his parts that he is not using!
Hmm, that sucks. For me, being deaf and mute would be torture(though not as much as blindness would be) and all the more reason to master writing and sign. Communicating is so much a part of what it means to be human that the thought of being incapable of doing so horrifies me.
"I mean.. Think about it.. And I don’t think you could discover consciousness if you didn't perturb it, because as Marshall McLuhan said, “whoever discovered water, it certainly wasn't a fish”. Well, we are fish swimming in consciousness; and yet we know it’s there. Well, the reason we know it’s there is because if you perturb it, then you see it; and you perturb it by perturbing the engine which generates it, which is the mind/brain system resting behind your eyebrows. If you swap out the ordinary chemicals that are running that system in an invisible fashion, then you see: it’s like dropping ink into a bowl of clear water - suddenly the convection currents operating in the clear water become visible, because you see the particles of ink tracing out the previously invisible dynamics of the standing water. The mind is precisely like that, and the psychedelic is like a dye-marker being dropped into this aqueous system. And then you say, “ Oh, I see - it works like this… and like this!' So, its hard for me to imagine that it could be in the Psilocybin, because Psilocybin is a very simple molecule. It seems to me that what must be happening is that we are in-bedded in an ocean of information, and Psilocybin somehow changes our channel slightly. You know, ordinary consciousness is created by a neurotransmitter called serotonin; 5-hydroxytryptamine .. Suggestively, a very close relative to Psilocin; 4-hydroxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine .. and DMT; N,N-dimethyltryptamine .. So, it seems to me that we have evolved a neurotransmitter which has had the effect of narrowing the focus of consciousness to what is operationally defined by the body as the here and now. Well now, the fact that we contain and metabolise DMT in the course of ordinary metabolism, what does it mean that the most powerful of all psychedelic tryptamine hallucinogens is a part of ordinary human metabolism. Now, the pineal gland .. Who's function is very mysterious, is doing a lot of chemistry that looks like psychedelic chemistry. So it's possible, that literally, when we take these tryptamine hallucinogens, we are as it where, dressing up in the mental furniture of the distant future. That we are experiencing a state of consciousness toward which we are naturally evolving. And that over time and through natural selection, the serotonin neurotransmitters are making way for these more powerful psychedelic compounds, and shift our mental life. Literally, into another dimension" (Terence Mckenna)
for something to be scientific, it does not need to be proven with certainty. The word proof itself implies certainty.
Some fish walk on their front fins, some fish crawl out of the water. l'm not sure where he researched evolution.
in other words: i agree, anything we do will affect nature. that obviously doesn't mean that the possible options and their eventual outcomes are equal, yet this seems to be what you imply.
Odd how they didn't identify the argument from ignorance at the end as an argument from ignorance but set out to debunk...
"I TOTALY dissagree with Tracy"
That's easy.
What is hard is to do so reasonably, rationally.
Hey, I feel a song coming on..."Some Enchanted Evening..."
Why do you instantly know how to breathe and cry and use your eyes? You don't just learn things after you're born. You're born with certain knowledge
Of course I have. But all I'm saying is that saying *You learn things AFTER being born* isn't entirely correct.
That Darwin bobblehead is fucking awesome. I so need one of those
Yes your right a hypothesis is the guess to what this might mean and a law is the description after data has been collected my bad.
Josh doesn't seem to understand that brainstorming (fantasizing) has some value, but you have to eventually come back to earth and pick up the debris if you want to get anything done. New age is BSing with big words.
1) That you have experienced a particular type of hallucination that you could easily tell was such does not rule out that there may be types that you cannot.
2) You have not ruled out confabulation.
Did this vision appear as a real girl or was it phantasmal in nature? Was there sound? Was the house locked? Did she disappear at the top of the stairs? What did you do?
No, I didnt make that assertion
I studied Christmas by reading Levitation chapter 13 and it seems to be about skin conditions.
There's this dude named LORD talking to a couple of guys named Moses and Aaron.
LORD explains how to deal with scabs, bright spots, white hair etc with the help of a priest.
Personnally I think it's best to see a doctor. There was no mention of Christmas, by the way.
we have already had this discussion and i have already done that. Don't forget about qualitative data.
Thank you.
Amazing Teacie
''Yes a law by definition is an explanation to a phenomenon that once we hear about it we test its function so we can understand its viability and so we can understand how it works and its implications.''
actually thats not a law its a hypothesis.
Ah, this woman is smart. I never considered debunking to be a justification to ignorance. Very wise indeed. I'll avoid it in further arguments.
"Theory:
A plausible or scientifically acceptable, well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena and predict the characteristics of as yet unobserved phenomena"
There, are we done now?
Experiments have been done with fruit flies with artificial selection pressures where changes have been seen through generations to the extent that they cannot reproduce with other members from the original lineage. Experiments have been done with bacteria showing genetic changes in response to antibiotics (selection in preference for resistant bacteria).
Yes it is. His Noodly Goodness regularly appears on the show :)
Lol the time stamp changes in the first call
She is absolutely gorgeous, both physically and mentally!
i did not use it as a compound word, rather a description that it has mathematical components, not that it falls into a category of theories called mathematical theories
As a British guy, this show makes me think Americans are very smart people.
The information on the test is in the video. You can know about evidence or choose to pretend it doesn't exist. Your choice.
did not say that either
I imagine there are biscuits in the box.
@@ookeekthelibrarian
My lady doesn't like shortbread or almond flavoured biscuits.
What is it that is felt when all thoughts have ceased? There is, in my experience, i kind of yearning. A machine that is running and waiting for the next thought to enter and be processed. What i would define as mysticism would be the belief that this underlying machine that thought are built upon, is intelligent.
It's very frustrating to realize that no matter what evidence you bring to someones attention and no matter what method of explanation you may use to illustrate something, you will never be able to bring a person to even consider your position because they made the decisions meany years ago to turn there brains off and force stupidity on them selves
I dont think they are any less abundant then one would expect with the theory as it is, and there are many more examples which I can provide, and with better explanation of the definitions, however as you understand it takes time to do this
Where in the world did Steven "study" evolution? He clearly knows nothing about the science.
and to respond to matt's statement, plants aren't sentient, meaning they don't feel pain like animals, which includes fish and insects. I'd also eat any meat, ANY, if I needed to survive.
I agree, and there is a subset of individuals in the second group who want to dispute the aspects of science that conflict with religion but do not want to have the burden of proof for any religious beliefs, so they use the strategy of pretending they are not religious or even claiming to be atheists so they can appear to attack the views that contradict their religious views on a 'scientific basis'. I think Matt on the show even mentioned this as something some apologists suggest believers do.
I am not saying that
"I know it was not a hallucination..."
How do you know it wasn't an hallucination? How would you know the difference between seeing a 'real' ghost and having an hallucination of a ghost? That's the definition of hallucination; to see or hear something that isn't really there, as though it really was.
If I make zero sense and cant make an argument,why are you here?