Response to James Tour: 700 Papers and Still Clueless (Part 1 of 2)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 май 2021
- Last year I made a video about James Tour, a chemist and creationist who speaks out against origin of life research. He didn't like it much, so he decided to make a 14-part series about how dumb I am. He really pulled out all the stops, parading all of his classic fallacious talking points, with plenty of bald-faced lies and deliberate misrepresentations of scientific research peppered in for good measure. Honestly, I was rather shocked at how stupid it was. With so much material to work with, I ended up with quite a lot to say in response, and had to split it into two parts.
In this Part 1, we discuss how James pretends to be an expert on origin of life research but objectively isn't, and how he deliberately ignores mountains of research regarding the emergence of homochirality.
Part 2 of this response: • Response to James Tour...
My original video on James: • Elucidating the Agenda...
Research cited in this video:
Organic molecules in planetary nebulae: adsabs.harvard.edu/pdf/2009IJA...
Organic synthesis in the solar nebula: geosci.uchicago.edu/~fciesla/C...
Life as a manifestation of the second law of thermodynamics: www.sciencedirect.com/science...
2021 autocatalysis review: chemistry-europe.onlinelibrar...
Autocatalytic confusion clarified: www.sciencedirect.com/science...
Spontaneous network formation among cooperative RNA replicators: www.nature.com/articles/natur...
Cronin and autocatalysis: www.pnas.org/content/117/20/1...
Self-sustained replication of an RNA enzyme: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19131...
Niche partitioning in the coevolution of 2 distinct RNA enzymes: www.pnas.org/content/early/20...
Origin and evolution of the genetic code: iubmb.onlinelibrary.wiley.com...
Microscopic dissipative structuring and proliferation at the origin of life: www.cell.com/heliyon/pdf/S240...
Viedma on enantiomeric recrystallization: link.springer.com/article/10....
Deracemization of amino acids via sublimation: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23690...
Spoilt for choice on the evolution of homochirality: pubs.rsc.org/en/content/artic...
Selective adsorption of amino acids on calcite: www.pnas.org/content/pnas/98/...
A route to enantiopure RNA precursors from nearly racemic starting materials: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21860...
Origin of biological homochirality: journals.plos.org/ploscompbio...
Watch my other debunks: bit.ly/ProfDaveDebunk
EMAIL► ProfessorDaveExplains@gmail.com
PATREON► / professordaveexplains
Check out "Is This Wi-Fi Organic?", my book on disarming pseudoscience!
Amazon: amzn.to/2HtNpVH
Bookshop: bit.ly/39cKADM
Barnes and Noble: bit.ly/3pUjmrn
Book Depository: bit.ly/3aOVDlT
"Chemistry can only happen in a lab"
The copper statues standing around, literally rusting because of chemistry: Are we a joke to you?
"Yes, but it's *simple* chemistry!"
Concrete curing: Am I a joke to you?
All of biology is chemistry, investigating its effect on lifeforms.
All of chemistry is physics on a macro level beyond the atomic scale.
There is no limiting factor that would prevent any of these three to happen EVERYWHERE.
@@Ugly_German_Truths true
his stomach digesting his lunch: am i a joke to you?
@@jamesgaming-kn1zz nice one
Normal people insulting each other: ''stupid'' "jerk", etc
Scientists insulting each other: the Dunning-Kruger effect graph
Neh neh (I’m laughing under my breath)
in Tour's case regarding OOL, its a true statement, not just insult
Get dunning-kruger’d
Dave isn't a scientist soo....
@@zzzzz77771 Yes, he is. He is a graduate in Chemistry. And even if he were not, it is obvious he knows more than anybody related to religion
"Chemistry needs to happen in a lab" is the James Tour version of "spectroscopy needs to happen in a container".
Yeah, that is literally it hahahah, how can he not understand this??
😂🤣
I think James Tour's conception happened in a container, in a lab...
Bruh lol
I don't even know a lot about chemistry but he STILL sounds dumb
James: “there was nobody to buy all of these chemicals!”
Wow James, it’s almost like they were all already there
They were there in complexes. For instance iron and sulfur are always at least oxidized or reduced. Plus exist impure as ore or dirt.
@@hondoh5720duh... it was a joke
Can you please make this into a 28 part series so then James can make a 56 part series on your 28 things get exponential from there?
Series all the way down instead of turtles.
No, because unlike quacks like James and Hovind, this guy knows how editing works and can say things concisely without droning on for double-digit hours.
@@SoI_Badguy should probably do something about that glare from his window though. Makes him look like those pictures of Jesus.
@@VodShod Nope, keep it that way. this is science jesus.
Such a good idea!
I HAVE a Ph.D., in Oceanography, a very interdisciplinary field. I learn a lot from you, and feel your content is in no way diminished because you don’t have a Ph.D.
What does your degree entail?
If I could make the move from hydrogeology/hydrology to Oceanography, I'd be so damn happy.
@@simonbirchhansen3573 well, my qualifying exam had questions in: applied math, chemistry, biology, physics, fluid dynamics, geophysical fluid dynamics, meteorology, and I likely forgot one or more due to trauma.
@@cguy96 I like to view your response answer as “There are two types of people in this world. Those who can interpolate from missing data.”
I have made my contribution to your research with the quantity of "fluids" I have provided in my younger beach-going days.
My (YEC) bio teacher played a clip from one of James Tour’s videos responding to you in class today, and every time there was a clip from your video it was very clearly cut off right before you/your guest speakers could actually get to your actual points. And honestly I’m a little salty that my teacher is trying to shove that kind of dishonest pseudoscience down my throat, so now I’ve decided that I’m gonna watch all your videos about this guy out of spite, lol (and cause your videos seem cool).
But seriously, thank you so much for making this kind of content. It’s really interesting, even if a lot of it goes over my head, and it’s nice to hear the actual theories and information on this topic.
You should force him to watch my content exposing him. Seriously, this moron is a teacher? Where? You should report the bastard. Or just learn from my content how he's wrong and inform your teacher as he's playing the videos.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Yup, I’m stuck at a private Christian school unfortunately tho, so I don’t think reporting it would do much, especially cause they do technically meet the government set curriculum guidelines for the course (it’s just prefaced by a whole lesson and assignment poisoning the well against anything that disagrees with them first).
Definitely hoping to pick some stuff up from your content to counter the strawman version of biology and evolution I’ll undoubtedly be taught this semester.
@@kaielival you could make a creationist bingo. Some terms to include that will highly likely pop up:
- we came from a rock
- the first cell is unbelievable complex
- since humans design things, everything is designed
- "we are clueless"
@@kaielival oof. Good luck. At least high school isn't forever
@@kaielival "Christian school", welp, that explains a lot.
I got an advanced degree in Maths. Yet there are branches and applications of maths of which I am almost clueless and which I would have to spend a good amount of time studying to bring myself up to speed. Just because we may have expertise in a given subject doesn;t automatically mean we are expert in every facet of the subject. That's why you have people with Masters and Doctorate degrees that still take courses and spend many hours studying.
I'm a professional musician. I studied music theory and can play 12 instruments ranging from the didgeridoo to the guitar.
No one is shocked when they find out that while I am an expert guitarist, I can't play a violin or a mandolin barely at all. I can't even play Bass Guitar very well, and that's literally just a deeper tuned guitar.
I dont understand why people think scientists or mathematicians could, let alone do, know about every scientific or mathematical discipline.
Science, much like music, requires highly specialised knowledge and training. An astrophysicist might know the basics of particle physics, but why should they have expert knowledge?
The same with music, yes, music theory gives me a base to play any instrument, but why should playing the guitar make me an expert in the violin?
I am simply appalled when he described that chemistry could not have happened because there could not have been a lab setup. WTF.
It’s pretty much all over at that point. I mean, Tour is literally claiming that if you don’t accept his gods as the creator of all life, you have to posit an actual Archean laboratory manned by Protozoa, I guess, building bacteria?
'Agreed' - my year 9 chemistry class
@@marcosolo6491 it amazes me how fanatical creationists can be. And they know they are only denying the science because it flies in the face of their holy books creation myth
I do chemistry literally all the time, it's called breathing. Turning o2 into energy
Because, you know, chemistry requires a lab. I guess alcohol forming inside fruit as yeast consumes the sugar isn't chemistry. You know, like wine...
I fell asleep watching Potholer54, and woke up to James Tour speaking, not knowing where Autoplay had dumped me. My only thought was, "oh no, he's spreading." So glad to find I was safely on Professor Dave Explains. Whew. . .
Falling asleep while watching a vid with autoplay on sounds fun, might try it soon.
@@stycks3008
I'd recommend making a playlist, or using "play all" within one of your favorite channels. If left to chance you may end up with a ridiculously loud video hours in. I can't sleep without ambient noise, otherwise silence gives way to screaming and crazy sleep paralysis nightmare stuff super easily.
@@stycks3008 I dunno man, I've actually woken up to warbly synth music and some goofball mumbling about cosmic vibrations, it's just surreal
Its funny how the you tube algorithm always leads to bullshit pseudoscience and conspiracy theories eventually. It's like "this one's had enough reality, let's see if he likes lies!"
@@Chronix-
I have woke up to some right wing Christian propaganda stuff after falling asleep to science content.
Damn Tour really just said "no chemist mean no chemistry therefore how chemistry" when life does chemistry everyday with or without humans around lmao
It’s like he took the idea that “if a tree falls and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?” and applied it to science.
@@quantumegghead5439 except he concluded it makes no noise, like the poor ignorant brainlet he is...
@@neetard7360 Yep
@@quantumegghead5439
That’s what I immediately thought of: the tree falling in the forest. As though the insects, mice, raccoons, and everything else in the forest aren’t there to experience the tree falling.
Nah, chemistry doesn't exist without humans around. 0 chemistry at the bottom of the ocean, duh
Everytime you show the dunning-kruger graph, i think of one of our professors who actually has it hung up on his door and it's the first thing you see before you can see him, it has always been funny to me.
The sign is in scientish roughly translating to saying 'F you'
It's obvious you put a lot of time and effort into this, Dave. I sincerely hope you never feel like any of this work you did was pointless or wasted. It most certainly was not. Just the fact that this work of yours will live on indefinitely on the internet is incredibly valuable to those of us who are susceptible to conmen, like James Tour. This type of content is the antidote to PT Barnum's "sucker born every minute".
I mean it's almost literally falling on deaf ears.
@@ElonTrump19 They don't use Carbon-14 to determine the age of the Earth. There are numerous other longer lasting isotopes to choose from.
Daddo, did you know that there are many different nuclides that are used to do radiometric dating? Maybe you should learn literally anything about radiometric dating. Also, "con man" is not precisely the right word to describe James. He's a fraud. Charlatan is also acceptable.
@@ElonTrump19 the asteroid (Not a meteor) was dated using zircon as the dating method, the assumption is that due to earth and the asteroids forming from the same planetary eccretion cloud, they would have coalesced around the same time, it is quite possible the earth is much older than an asteroid however, as asteroids would be leftovers from planetary eccretion
@@ProfessorDaveExplains What a video! It is the single best "response video" I have seen so far. It is information-rich and backed by strong, scientific evidence with plenty of references. Hats down Dave! It is like the entire NATO alliance invaded a single beach on a deserted island in the middle of the ocean and bombed it into oblivion ;) I am really impressed with the amount of science behind it. Live long and prosper Dave! ;)
I may never fully understand all of the language, but you make the concepts so easy to understand. Thank you.
PS- I just started reading your book "Is That Wi-Fi Organic", and it's amazing!👍
You need to watch part two, where the scientists Tour cited calls TOUR the fool!😊
@@juniorsir9521 this guy Junior has no clue what he is saying.
@@juniorsir9521 can you show actual evidence instead of just saying that he's wrong and moving on? It's really annoying when people do stuff like this.
I finished the book. Excellent read.
Damn, Junior, what did you bail out for? You bailed out because you're a coward, Junior. Your fragile religious mindset has weakened you.
Tour published another video about "false science behind abinogenesis" about 3 days ago. I am 6 minutes in and all I heard is: "they are mean because I believe in God", "Dave has more views than me", "prebiotic soup definition straight out of the kindergarden level textbook", "molecules don't care about life" and "whining about research + media coverage". Why do I have a feeling that he haven't learnt a thing?
Yeah it’s really pathetic.
That's exactly the expected from an indoctrinated religious zealot. You can't get rid of the dogma when it's burned this deep in your brain... It's sad.
@@zeendaniels5809 Religious zealot is one option, conartist another.
I am a Ph.D. Molecular biologist, and I would be the first to say I continue to learn everyday. Your video series are one of my go-tos!
The sign of a good scientist in any field is one who proudly says they are still learning
I am interested in looking into your dissertation Geoffrey Waldo.
I have a Ph. D. in Zoology and I think having a science Ph. D. shows how much there is to know and how fascinating it is to learn and investigate. Don't make much money but I am so glad to understand how research works (which is one of the purposes of a university education, IMHO).
Unlike james who thinks he know everything
What kind of research are you doing? I think molecular biology could be lots of things, I;m not one myself, but I am curious, it sounds interesting
Having the experts rebuffing the misquotes and mischaracterisations makes this way better than a standard "debunk", cheers Dave
This is a slam debunk.
Yes - very impressive!
@@kindle139 😂
I saw this comment before watching the video, and I misread “misquotes” as “mosquitoes” . I was equally confused and intrigued
@@user-qk1xt1xw9t 😂 I read it after watching and was equally confused by the mosquitoes. Then realized my brain went 🥴
"You couldn't buy chemicals from a store" is one of his arguments against abiogenesis? Literally speechless
I think it shows his limited thinking. It is probably also related to his dislike for speculation. He’d rather have certainty even if it’s wrong.
You do realize that in this context the companies get their products by extracting them from living systems right? It's like me buying tires from a store and using them to try and find a natural route to building cars.
@@GodzillaFreak can you elaborate? I'm not really sure what your point is. I'm not sure what companies you mean since there would be no companies 3-4 billion years ago when abiogenesis would be happening.
@@alexmcd378 My point is that the companies are not synthesizing their products, rather they are extracting from living systems.
@@GodzillaFreak no the point is that figuring out pathways requires testing one variable at a time-namely, the one you are specifically interested in-so buying chemicals eliminates irrelevant and unnecessary variability. Likewise when we are interested in testing the effect of temperature on boiling water we don't use different volumes in each experiment.
It is also much cheaper.
You guys also are propagating a fallacy that pretends that one must recreate the entirety of natural history in a test tube, in one fell swoop if one is to effectively study anything in nature.
That's not how reductionism works.
Chemistry is impossible outside a lab, so I guess nuclear fusion is impossible outside High Energy reactors. Nevermind the stars
😂Lol I can’t , I can’t breathe 😂🤣
@@beeble2003 yeah, I was aware of that one. Beautiful
@@fostena duh, that's not nuklear fusssion, that's CONVECTION coz it's balls of gaseous plasma burnin' in the vacuum of spaec without oxeegin 'n' without gravutashinal klaps... somehow.... but also electric anodes and magnetism and earthquakes and reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!
......seriously, that's how idiotic some of these two-bit hacks sound......... the Sky Scholar and Thunderbolts debunks were beautiful examples of how dumb these morons really are...
They are trying to make it sound more unlikely. Since they see the existence of unlikely events as proof of God's existence they are done. This of course is nonsense because given large enough sample sizes unlikely events should be expected.
Yep, and no nuclear fusion in the sun, totally! Tour is kinda slow
I love hearing the actual professors and researchers talking so excitedly about their areas of expertise. :)
"At the peak of mount stupid."
This will stick with me for a long time. I love how Dave doesn't try to sugar coat a turd.
(4:33) "This is you." 🤣😂
It’s so much more viscerally satisfying to see him take the hollow insults and return them in kind when Dave acknowledges just how rude and foolhardy this guy was being
What's actually also funny is that that graph does not actually represent the dunning-kruger effect, even though it is often used that way. It seems kind of ironic using that graph to represent the dunning-kruger effect confidently even though it is unrelated
Great comment. Perfectly put. Lol.
The best part about it is pretty much everybody who uses that Dunning-Krueger diagram doesn't understand what the actual Dunning-Krueger Effect is.
The irony is that James bringing up the "magical car assembly" only serves to show that its possible for complex systems to emerge over millions of years. Consider early man and ask, is it possible for this organism to ever make a car? They have no tools and all of the car components are essentially "just rocks". Yet hundreds of thousands of years later, boom, we have a car. 🤔
@@studygodsword5937 oh... Looks like you didn't watch the video. Try again, it's still there.
@@studygodsword5937 You're not very good at this.
Not just a car, but even a self-driving car
Fred Flintstone had a car, and it was made of rocks.
Checkmate.
@@blanktrigger8863 share that evidence, don't just say "there is, but he didn't show it", do what you claim they don't.
This man really had the audacity to say “just because a person speaks with confidence doesn’t mean they know what they’re talking about” to his audience because he knew they wouldn’t take the time to actually apply that same logic to him. This guy is something else
He knows his particular audience do not apply logic at all ... Just quote from an old broken book ... it's truly worrying that so many do it .. and have the vote ..
You sound like a man who knows without a doubt in his soul..........that what you say is complete and total.........bullshit. Here's an idea, how about you take his challenge and explain to all of us, buffoons, just how organic life began champ? I'll wait. All talk and no walk, putz.
@@DanielSoto-vv3or “all walk and no talk, putz” lmao fucking what kind of weird ass talks like that
@@xenon3759 who talks like that? The guy that called you a putz, for one. A fa'real weirdo..........🤒
@@DanielSoto-vv3or RUclips commenters will never cease to amaze me
These videos are so smooth and calming to listen to. You can turn them up on and do anything else, read a book, play a game or exercise. These videos are great for listening for the facts and listening to then for fun.
As a non-PhD scientist myself I always bristle up when people try and use that as an attack. Oh yes, I don't have this one shiny piece of paper that magically makes me into a "real" scientist. I have two lesser pieces of paper that are apparently meaningless, because you absolutely cannot be a "real" scientist without the fanciest one.
In debate it is a "call to authority". Ie you dony have facts or a logical argument so you rely on a title to declare something unquestionably factual. It is the opposite of science
This
I just watched a friend successfully defend her PhD theses and all the hard work shows, but also you could clearly see the other PhD’s tendencies to uptalk themselves at length before the questions, they are clearly proud of all the work and the achievement , so it’s not surprising to see them put a sine qua none value on the title…
I get it.. you can cook the best meals but you won't be "chef" until you get that little piece of paper.
It’s official recognition you have specialist knowledge in your field that wasn’t generated in isolation and the holder is more reliable.
That dunning Kruger picture with the music is right there with Scimandan's yodeling bits.
And crickets elsewhere.
,
I just watched his talk at Texas A&M University and everything you say rings true Prof. Dave. The big-upping himself, appealing to emotions with confidence, fallacies, ignorance and delusion. He is obviously a smart man but he is also obviously bias in his agenda and that agenda is superstitious woo woo that has no foundation in science or reality. His emotional beliefs and faith have clouded his rationality.
Dave, I didn't realize how much biochemistry theory on life origins has advanced since I last looked into it well over a decade ago. Thanks so much for all your work in finding and presenting/explaining all of that research in an understandable format. Great. It's actually proven that life can emerge through natural processes. Fascinating.
I peeked my head into that room and probably have never felt so small
It's absolutely mind-blowing just how much they've managed to discover, observe, and reproduce with so little precursory information. Unfortunately, due to the emergent nature of this field, many cry that it lacks any emperical aspect, which is patently false to anyone viewing without a strong bias
It's one of the most rapidly advancing disciplines in science right now, going way beyond what evil powers I wield my own science for. Hell, I've considered jumping ship just so I can make synthetic reptiles for fun in the near future, as it won't be long before synthetic life in and of itself is a widespread thing.
All juvenile jokes aside... yeah, it's completely fascinating how much has been answered at this point. Hell, Moderna exists solely _because_ abiogenesis is largely understood at this point, and I'd *love* to see some apologist hack argue against that. Their name literally means "modern RNA" (quite clever and subtle, imo) and they're primarily based on producing synthetic RNA for medical purposes. It's why they were first to market with a COVID-19 vaccine. Without origin of life research, Moderna wouldn't exist... and they're not exactly a startup either, as they've been around for quite awhile now. They're far from the only one, they're just the most popular one I know of, so they're who I chose to cite here. But yeah... it's way beyond simple lab work at this point... this discipline has real-world effect far beyond what the common populace is even aware of, and has for years... and the insulting irony is that the very people it helps try to say that it doesn't exist. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you... sometimes literally.
Hasn’t proven shit. It’s called evidence. Much different than proof
I'm a retired lawyer, not a scientist. Even without knowing this science, I recognize an epic takedown when I see/ hear one. Well done, Professor Dave.
I don’t know if there’s any graphics going along with what he says but even I can keep up and I didn’t even go to 6 form… he’s brilliant
@@blindbrad4719
Normal people: "grade 12 and 13"
Bri'in: "6th Form" 🤪🤪
Great series! The video reminds me case kitzmiller vs dover.
@@blindbrad4719 What's a 6 form
@@achyuththouta6957 British system, refers to the last two years of secondary education after you’ve done your GCSEs. A-levels are done in these years.
I have discovered that Dave's takedowns lose nothing upon repeated viewings. His brutal logic and rapid fire delivery construct a timeless classic.
Yeah but he's misrepresented Tour and not explaining his side. If "Professor Dave" is correct researchers would ready documented life coming from nothing at some point. Miller Uray (how ever your spell it) expirement and other like it only claim to create the building blocks to life, but not non life to life. Just give a good definition of life and try observe it coming from not life. Changing genes around is not what I'm talking about because you already have life to star with.
Agree. I appreciate the concise and rapid-fire delivery. It doesn't waste the viewer's time with inessentials.
@@email2hector Give us some time. It apparently took about half a billion years for life to emerge on earth and we've only been studying abiogenesis for a hundred years, if that long. Scientists are not omniscient and work slowly and methodically.
Aggred
@@email2hector maybe watch the first video, the one that pissed off Tour so badly he had to make fourteen videos (milking it much?) to argue against it. It goes through the basics of what is known since Miller-Urey, which is quite a lot! They are being very careful, though, because they don't want to create a life form that could endanger the existence of our own ecosystems. So, they are going step-by-step, so they know they understand each part of what they're doing.
Besides, it's a fairly complex process, after you get to a certain point, to safely make something totally new. You don't want them to just start making life that could be dangerous, do you? Just look at what a single virus has done to our whole planet the last nearly 2 years. And think about what a completely new type of organism than had ever been on the planet before could do.
I don't know about you, but I'm _glad_ they're taking their time!
Man, when you described the darwinistic tendencies of autocatalytic RNA enzymes I spontaneously got a huge smile on my face. Not because of how much it dunked on Tours, but just the very concept of molecular autocatalytic selection. It's absolutely mesmerising, it just made me so happy that this can happen.
@@keithlucas6260 I...I don't understand how that relates to what I said? I used the term 'darwinistic' to describe the natural selection-like mechanism. I never said anything about Darwin himself?
Also, yes, I'll take your word that it happens in the Coronavirus, but why say the 'big whoopee' like it's not a big deal? This video was how I found it happened, and I just wanted to say that learning about this genuinely made me happy. Unless I misunderstood what you meant by that.
Life is chemistry. When you understand on the basic level, there are few surprises, just more evidence of what actually is. If Dr. Tour really understood chemistry, he would not make such foolish mistakes.
Yes, I am also smart and understood that part and think it is awesome. 😅
I have to facepalm when some say that there is no evolution before "life". For instance: "Without Miracles", by Gary Cziko demonstrates that evolution is the flow of energy adapting to real conditions. Even science itself adapts to new understanding of reality.
Here I am 36 mins into this video because the flow of information is densely packed and compelling enough to maintain attention. School would have been fun if every teacher was this good.
That "huh?" clip was a weapon he should not have given to you.
Like an intercontinental ballistic missile turned against Tour.
@@totmgsrockxd9900 or an intercontinental facepalm missile...
@@totmgsrockxd9900 or a fucking tsar bomba with energy from the suns core
Imagine making a 14 part series because one guy made a single video calling you out, seems pretty desperate to me.
It feels like the digital and far less efficient version of the gish gallop.
Yeah lol he really thinks one isn't enough it's like he's afraid of dave and trying to shut him down as soon as possible.
Sounds like throwing spaghetti at a wall and hope that some of it sticks! ;-)
Literally straight out of Kent Hovind's book. I remember he had a video response debate with Aron Ra and after Aron made like three points in half an hour, Kent responded with a 5 part video series that droned on for OVER SEVEN HOURS.
The reason it takes 14 parts is because people like him have no real content. They have to keep rambling the same nonsense in 18 different ways and make their following fall for it.
I mean, if I had a couple million years of free time I'd probably be able to make a car without knowing anything about it, just by randomly putting shit together xD
You really made me laugh!
With enough time you could probably derive everything you need from first principles
well yes, i dont think you'd even need a couple million, trial and error on the parts of a car, assuming you had the parts already, without the parts perhaps longer sure. but its a bit of a bad argument since you're a rational thinking human being putting it together.
@@brianbarber5401 i think people are missing the point to be honest, for example Dr james tour and his debate with Lee Cronin. it ultimately came down to understanding how it happened, he wasn't denying it happening, he also said that he didn't say it couldn't have been by natural processes, he wants to know the process or mechanisms by how it happened, which was in relation to Lee's primordial soup statement. in which Lee said they dont know as of yet, but he knows its there, it happened. which neither are denying.
If you are that sure about your statement you can run a simulation of randomly making a simple object not a car and see the results by your self.
This is super super in depth and I actually learned a whole bunch about abiogenesis, which is something I've been wondering about for a while. Thanks Dave.
God, the stuff that this dude was supposed to learn in college flew so over his head that it is now threatening to contaminate pluto
An hour. Part 1/2. Oh boy. 🤩👌🏼
Absolutely.
Yeah all these videos are really long on either side. It must take a lot of training to keep a mind immerged in either.
Came for the debunk drama, learned fascinating science 😅
Made it all the way through! Great stuff, even though the near entirety of my knowledge of chemistry involves cooking food, I now know enough about the various types of chemistry involved in the origins of life to confidently say that all of this is waaaaaay over my head. I've got some free time tomorrow, so I'll be back for part 2
Imagine being able to make autocatalytic reactions with cooking ingredients, sounds like an interesting chemistry experiment actually, and if failure or contamination occurs, you now have a little accidental terrarium for microbes to look at 🎃
Edit: jacolantern was the only emoji showing on my recents that wasn’t eyes closed or tear smiling
I studied Psychology in college / grad school. I had a professor who was so old that he could have grandfathered into being licensed to be a counselor. He was always focused on research, stayed on top of his field of interest, but not much more. He told us that and he said that he did not get licensed because there was so much NEW research and theories and treatment modalities in between when he went to school and that time, that he said he would not know enough to be efficient. That is literally in the same field. Now, I don't mean that one automatically forgets everything else, but you have to - HAVE TO - keep up with the field and I have the impression that this chemist went to school, got his PhD, got a job and learned all about this job, published in that narrow scope, but never kept up with the rest of the field and surrounding research. Now, he just speaks for the general knowledge of the 80ies and assumes that is the be-all-end-all.
My personal example: I got a counselling degree. I took the class for diagnosing clients when the Diagnostical (and Statistical) Manual was the second revision of the 4th edition, basing all of it on a decades old model. Then, towards the end the DSM-V came out. I audited the new class and boy, there were a lot of changes! Anxiety disorders were spectrumized, so were Autism disorders. Axis - functional groups in all previous versions of the manual were abandoned completely, just to name a few changes. Would I have been able to counsel without it? Sure! But would I know the latest theoretical basis? Not so much! Would I have made a fool out of myself when discussing underlying theory with a younger generation colleague? For sure!
Yeah, this is why I side eye old people who use the piece of paper that says they finished a degree in Psychology _(before age 30)_ to defend their views, prove they're smart, etc.
Despite being completely out of the field for many decades.
I studied psychology, I don’t have a degree in the field. But I focused on old school theories, and studied Freudian theory in Berlin as well as various derivations.
What I see happening in psychotherapy often is a reinvention of the wheel. Everyone says Freud or Jung or Adler or Kohut etc are outdated, and then they rehash the basic ideas slapping a new label on old wine and not referencing back.
Contemporary psychology is fairly strange in this regard.
I would argue that many old school psychologists would be perfectly qualified today with the exception of certain political correct social protocols.
@@matthewkopp2391 I would disagree with that anyone is rehashing psychoanalysis nowadays. Since the mid-70s, counseling moved towards data driven models and new therapies need to prove to be at least as effective as proven ones. Sure, there will always be cheaters and liars that p-hack or straight up make up data, but overall, that’s where the field moved toward. Some key aspects came out of that which proved to be universally useful: unconditional positive regard toward a patient, active listening, empathy. If you use these 3 principles, you can mostly do good as counselor. To pretend that one theory explains why something in someone’s memory is what it is is just pretentious. And for therapy’s sake, it doesn’t even matter. What matters is how you help the patient to live with it.
Oh, and yes, I call them patients. Not clients, customers or any of that bs. If you are sick, you go to the doctor and you are a patient. If your brain is sick and we want to get past the stigma of mental health, let’s stop pretending this is anything different- they are sick or they do preventative care - no matter, they are patients. So, if you deal with something that right now just bothers you, you are the same way a patient as someone getting their blood tested for pre-diabetes.
Why does Dave's smile at 1:56 look so wholesome and cute, but also terrifying and deadly. It only goes to show how badass Dave really is, and I LOVE him for it. Keep the good work up Dave.
Dave is a savage
Plot twist: David is a former flat earther seeking revenge by promoting actual science.
Such a cutie 😚
🤣 Dave is the GOAT, savage confidence but it’s actually backed up by knowledge
Dave’s a fucking beast and I’m glad he exists and makes these awesome videos.
James is living proof that you can do anything if you put your mind to it.
Whenever I'm feeling really nihilistic and I've started thinking about how incompetent I am, I always remember this: If James Tour was able to become a scientist, then I can become whatever I want.
Imao😅
"how could you build a car with no instructions all jumbled up?"
James clearly has never played My Summer Car
Or Kerbal Space Program
Mon Bazou
Or created a nuclear reactor from parts found in your parents garage 😬
Or created a nuclear reactor from parts found in your parents garage
Those that make their money off of lies will do whatever it takes to protect those lies. THAT is a universal truth folks.
Like evolutionists, liberals and globe earthers!
@@braija . I like how you threw liberals in there... for some bizarre reason. You should have said “politicians”, unless of course you are certain that there is one specific way of thinking that is the “right way”. I fail to see how “liberals” or “conservatives” for that matter fit in with you list.
@@robertt9342 I am glad we at least agree on evolutionists and globe earthers.
@@braija So normal people with a brain capable of a logical thought proces
@@braija
Why didn't you watch the video before posting a comment here?
Are you afraid?
”I can’t build a car. Therefore God. Amen.”
I can put that car back together, doesn't make me a god, maybe I can sell my services to Tour 🤣🤣
And we're not talking about cars : most of the people I know could build a human being with very basics instructions and a little teamwork.
@@Bzuhl you mean a robot?
@@Bzuhl Ah yes. When humans _get together._
@@igamse No, it's a simpler process that takes about 9 month after an initial setup of 2min (if you're me) to 9 hours (if you're Sting)
The way you teach and make us laugh at the same time makes you a rare commodity and an informative genius.
more accurate car analogy: a giant mixer filled with millions of magnetised car parts and the goal is for 2 wheels to stick together in a way they form a vehicle capable of rolling down a cliff without falling apart
And then you throw the wheel back into the pot and it makes imperfect copies of itself, and assemblies that are better at rolling down the hill get to the blender first and in better shape and make more imperfect copies of themselves than ones that arrive later.
It could happen.
I see a professor dave video with the words ‘response with’ in the title and i click fast
The way this guy speaks about this stuff shows a lot. He doesn't talk like a scientist, but like a preacher that needs your money. His brain is actively fighting to keep his current ideas.
@@user-cg2hb3ye9v oh, no, sorry if I wasn't clear enough, English is not my native language. My comment was about James Tour
@@eduardor9390 Yeah because he kinda is. He works at/for the Discovery Institute; a Christian 'Scientific' Intelligent Design Think Tank.
Nobody who works for such as the Discovery Institute, AiG, etc, can call themselves a scientist because they will reject any evidence which conflicts with their religion.
@@eduardor9390 your English is very good and imo it was very obvious that you were talking about James, not Dave. Not sure why you were misunderstood. If you hadn't said that English isn't your native language, I would have never guessed (it isn't for me either)
@@edbrackeen5979 .
What are you talking about, there is no religion in evolution.
I’m just glad there is someone out there willing to call stupid people stupid. There’s no point in sugar coating it anymore.
Good lord. I just finished part one and my brain hurts. That was brutal. And there is more to go!!
Based on the replies it seems like the only responses from Tour followers are
1) Attack Dave's credentials (despite him interviewing numerous experts and citing several dozen peer reviewed articles in this video)
2) Re-stating points that were addressed in the video, because they didn't watch the video.
Sad.
They also seem to throw in intelligent design and then complain about ad hominem while ignoring the garbage for Tour.
I mean ... what else can they do? Refute the sources by disproving the results? That seems beyond most people ...
Didn't professor David do that first?
So just like everyone else who has tried to debunk you (Eric Dubay, Globebusters, Ben Davidson and Pierre Robitalle) he just repeats the things you debunk and pretend that's an argument.
Eric Dubious is a pathetic con man so definitely belongs on that list.
@@dogwalker666 As are the Globebusters
@@BroncoJosh last time a checked them out I was convinced it was satire, no one can actually be that Dumb.
@@dogwalker666 Yep. And remember Dave utterly ruined their channel and they had to start from scrap.
@@BroncoJosh oh damn Dave forced a channel to restart?? I gotta go watch his debunk video for that
I sit here at 40 years old, and watching your video's, I can't help but wonder, what I could of done in school, if we had teachers like you, that explain things like this and in so much detail, as opposed to the ''god squad'' idiots that done the bare minimum and down played everything, and couldn't explain the bare min function of anything I asked(or refused too). And I wonder why I lost interest, but yet, yourself, sciman dan, and a few other channels, rekindle a huge love and passion for all sciences. Love the content - I just ignore the idiot religion bit and love you explanations and knowledge. great work.
the thing about the car analogy is that even though I start without a blueprint, natural selection will reward me every time I put one of the pieces in its proper place, thus making it MUCH easier to eventually arrive at the end design
I just *love* the "look at this complex task, do you think it can be completed with [all limiting factors that a human can come up with]" question.
The fact that the idiots still using this question didn't even consider that the answer might simply be "yes, it'll just take a while" speaks volumes.
Entertaining video.
It is amazing that 14 episodes of incomprehensible "scientific" nonsense with such precision can be destroyed in a short hour. I enjoy the way you break down the arguments of James Tour with real science without having to resort to distasteful ridicule of him. It's OK to point out his complete lack of knowledge while explaining things in a relatively understandable way. Love it!
I love how extremely obvious it is that you so completely got under his skin. Good work.
So glad I found your channel today. Thank you.
"You can't explain why this happens, so it doesn't" is one of the dumbest fallacies I've heard
How about the one where an inability to explain how something happens conclusively proves that their god did it. 🙄
The arguement from incredulity rises like a Phoenix. If you don't believe that mythical fire birds can self reincarnate, that's a you issue.
@@junodonatus4906 God has ultimate knowledge and power so this is illogical
@@Ab-in6fk
There are many gods, all were created by human beings. Funny how gods, in holy books, never seem to know more than the ancient people who wrote those books and also share the hideous morality of those people.
@@junodonatus4906 Strawman fallacy? No one said there's many Gods, all religions have monotheistic roots (and we can see part of them today) until some got corrupted later on.
All religions lead to one God.
Let's Assume just for the sake of it that here and there some lied about God, how this in any way does prove that God does not exist?
Hi, chemistry student here! Loved your video, man, learned tons of interesting stuff! Keep it up! =)
It's so wonderful to have people like you making education accessable to everyone, you really are doing great things
Wow, and I thought the bigger issue was when I messed up a question on abiogenesis on an exam XD. Great work as always, as a biochemistry student it really provided an interesting perspective!
Tour needed this debunk.
@Pisstake Still; this one will convince the less dronistic ones.
@@NapaCat are there any of those though?
@@Forest_Fifer Yes; very few become diehard overnight.
@@studygodsword5937 Those what... few dozen hours of ranting Tourbabble were the biggest wastes of time ever spent by me.
@@sgloobal3091 Can you introduce me to Jesus?
Hey Dave! I stumbled across your videos through this debunk series against Tour, and it has really helped me understand what my in-laws are thinking and what to say to them when they start to spout pseudoscience with the utterly misplaced confidence these types usually have.
So thanks! I owe you one!
If Tour were an honest broker, he would have invited chemists specialising in the physics and chemistry necessary for origins of living systems, rather than fellow creationists, to discuss the sort of chemistry that might have preceded life. His problem is, he's terrified he might be forced to change his mind. But like all creationists, he's so afraid f being wrong, he cannot risk it. He's a small man.
Much more than having to change his mind, he'd be sacrificing a pretty big paycheck.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Bit of a Tour de Farce, all told.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki Nice
@@QuestForTheS I think of him as Wee Jimmy Tour. ;)
The word “if” is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence.
I just wanted to thank you for making these videos, I know you read these comments, only someone whos so good at explaining science can battle these charlatans, they use every trick in the book to try and discredit actual scientists.
ahh the blind mechanic parable that is completely different then blind watchmaker parable. because he is a "scientist"
I love the banana metaphor.
A banana was designed by god for humans because it perfectly fits in our hands.
Said unironically by Living Waters (iirc)
@@XraynPR lol i think fractal wrongness fits perfectly here.
@@w__a__l__e I like watching Sir Sic for the humor of that LW series, but it's extremely cringe as well ...
This is an absolutely mind expanding video. Being exposed to these experts is incredibly useful and educational. Thank you so much Dave for your dedication to education of we knowledge less neophytes. Please know that youe dedication to rebuttal of so called experts is so greatly appreciated. We owe you much gratitude. Please keep up the fight and know that your efforts to enlighten are advancing knowledge and are furthering education and the desire in others to learn and seek greater education.
Hi Dave, slightly unrelated but what do you use to educate yourself on the details of scientific topics you want to learn an teach? I’m impressed by your knowledge on many scientific fields.
In some areas I refer to textbooks and some primary literature, and in others I just hire writers who are experts in those fields.
As opposed to James, who hires a composer for his dramatic soundtrack 😂
Copy pasta - ah so that's what spaghetti monster was. Exposing the plagiarists
@@ummerfarooq5383 You don't know what plagiarism is, do you?
@@alexmcd378
Of course he does.
It's when spaghetti self-replicates.
Thank you Dave. This was very informative and eye-opening. I really appreciate your effort. I am a Muslim science graduate. I believe in my religion based on a thorough epistemological process. Even though I am not an expert in either science or religion, I try to learn more. What I don't appreciate is people bullshitting their way to establish their religious beliefs. I respect people of knowledge. Especially those who work sincerely, systematically and meticulously to find answers to problems. I really learnt a lot from this expose of yours. For a while, I was taking Dr. Tour a bit seriously, even though his proselytization really put me off. But his credential peddling, kind of made me take him a bit seriously. I can't stress how much I learned from your videos. I like the fact that you displayed some thorough analyses and also provided ample reference and also introduced some prominent researchers in the field of abiogenesis research. All of this is very beneficial to those who are not within this field but might want to gain more appreciation for it. Honesty and thorough use of our rational faculties are indispensable to our survival. Thank you for your efforts. You are helping a lot of people to learn science. May your efforts be blessed with more productivity and intellectual openings. May you find ease in learning more about the world we live in. May you continue to illuminate people with knowledge. I might have a different opinion than you on many things, but I believe in trying to find the truth. And the truth is not found by obfuscating clear rational processes. The systematic pursuit of knowledge and truth is one of the greatest gifts mankind has come upon. This is a good exchange. If Dr. Tour has any shred of real commitment to truth and any shred of humility, he should accept that he chose to talk about a matter that he doesn't understand or know. If he knew about all the research that you showed, he should take the responsibility for not revealing that knowledge to his listeners. Thank you again. Please keep up the good work.
When it starts out about car abiogenesis. Only if we are talking about how life emerged on Cybertron should James bring that up. :D
Autobots, roll out!
The quintesssons created the planet and the Transformers, have you not been reading the comics?
Do you know Cybertronian? Man, that’s old school! You need an aging SR71 with a cough and a cane to understand that!
He probably thinks the first self-replicating system was as complex as a car 🤦 considering that it could have been a single RNA molecule or a system of 2 molecules, I doubt that
Imagine James Tour as a homicide detective.
He’d spend his entire career pontificating how the murderer was never found and how clueless we are on who actually committed the murder.
Meanwhile insisting it was a scary spooky ghost 👻 who actually did it.
:D
The J Warner Wallace approach, then.
While the ACTUAL detectives have already identified and apprehended the real culprit, submitted the evidence to court which then subsequently charged and convicted that person with murder.
@@davidsommen1324 Sadly it seems Tour kept the culprit from being convicted, as that damned ghost is still out there!
A scary ghost sounds cool though.
I hate that most if not almost ALL people that watch videos like this one are NOT the people that NEED to watch this video.
If only some do it's still a _good thing._
And some *_do._*
@@philaypeephilippotter6532 For our sake I hope you're right.
@@ohisheh
Look how few are _trolling for jesus_ now compared to when these videos were posted. Some of those didn't know what was in the videos, just what they were told. They got challenged by questions that meant that to answer them they had to watch.
Some of them actually watched. They realized that *Tour* is a liar who has misrepresented a lot of people - deliberately.
That's actually more important than getting them to understand abiogenesis or even evolution.
@@ohisheh It's depressing to know that they're so intellectually dishonest they won't even listen. But knowing that you at least get a feeling for it's not something that some will never look into the truth.
If Tour did eat the entire research field, how would he explain the extreme indigestion?
Pretty obvious. Flat Earth. Duh.
Instead Professor Dave is making him eat his own words.
I thought he was kidding, but this man seriously has 700+ papers with 100k+ citations.
This is probably the worst case of cognitive dissonance I've ever come across
And this, we might assume, us because those were genuine contributions to the field.
Linus Pauling was a biochemist who made significant contributions to the field, with over 1200 papers to his name. And he also made extravagant claims concerning the health benefits of Vitamin C, none of which have stood the test of time.
I'll stick my neck out and proclaim that every scientist knows this story. You can't get a science education without learning this - or to put it another way, it wasn't a science education if it skipped the part about how methodology trumps authority. That part isn't optional.
By all means, make all the contributions you can, based on sound methodology. It will NEVER entitle you to declare something is true "because I say so, and I'm a famous scientist." That is an attempt to UNDERMINE science, and it's strictly a disqualification.
When is James family going to ask him to take their picture off of his desk in the background because they're so embarrassed ?
I kind of feel bad for them.
I admire your tenacity, Professor Dave. Keep fighting the good fight, it'd be a shame if future generations referred to the enlightenment as a brief period of derangement.
So, this all boils down to a chemist pretending chemistry doesn't happen outside of a lab.
That, my friends, is a manipulation technique we call lying
And a complete lack of understanding of the world. It’s astounding to think someone could think in such a limited way.
@@keirfarnum6811 we will
Yep I magically turn water into urine, no chemistry involved.
Can you at least admit how staggeringly impressive it would be for all the components you need to even build the most basic life form to all be in the right place at the right time?
@@NoContextRDH it's not that impressive when you actually know what cells are made from.
Biogenic elements are fairly common, especially around places with volcanic activity, biogenic compounds like lipids and nucleic acids can form spontaneously, and once they do, and phospholipids do their thing and form biphosphate layer (which is a thing they do spontaneously all the time because physics), voila, we have a protocell. RNA inside will produce proteins out of amino acids that are around anyway.
Given what we know about biochemistry we can assume hot springs and such produced RNA strands all the time and all it takes is one of those strands to actually code useful proteins and it will outcompete other protocells.
At first protocells use phospholipids and amino acids that are being produced in the thermal vent anyway, but if a series of mutations causes them to be able to produce those compounds on their own, they start outcompeting those that can't.
That, by the way, is the reason why it's likely that new protocells form all the time, they are just outcompeted or outright eaten by modern cells that figured it all out already.
TL;DR
Basic elements are easy to come by, right circumstances were easy to come by, and they had a lot of time for random replication errors to start producing useful stuff.
I'm watching Paulogia debunking "Evolution Exposed" and I had to click on the guy with the hair. A fourteen part series? Boy, you must be important!
this is one of the most fascinating, eye-opening pieces of science education i've seen. thanks, dave.
Hey Dave, this got nothing to do with this specific video, but I love your debunks and want to know if you might want to debunk the MMS/CDS scene? My mom is deep into it, and while I tried to explain to her how it’s dangerous, she won’t believe me. You have way more experience and capability in reading science publications and breaking chemical concepts down step by step than a fresh Highschool graduate like me. Idk, I just thought it could be worth a try to suggest it.
Wow, this bozo really really doesn't understand evolution at all.
I used to work on artificial life stuff back in the late 90s and early 2000s. Basically the same sort of stuff chemists have been doing (more recently), but we used little self-replicating (or even autocatalytic sets of) computer programs with imperfect copy instructions. We didn't call them "simulations" because they actually evolved... The math is the same.
Anyways, you mentioned a lot of familiar names here. Good job hitting the main concepts. Especially liked the shout-out to Eigen's Molecular Quasi-species (1988)... It is a good read. Oh, and Eric Schneider... Should check out his left handed DNA hall of Fame (and how to use entropy and information correctly when talking about biological systems.)
*Tour's* -trolls- fans insist that he's an expert on evolution as well as abiogenesis.
They say he accepts evolution but some of his *DI* presentations refute that completely.
He is a Christian creationist who already is biased with a conclusion and is filtering out and attacking any evidence which contradicts this
"Not only will I poke the hornet's nest, but I'll poke it FOURTEEN TIMES!"
James Tour's brilliance is really on display again.
He's not the first to horribly underestimate me, and sadly he probably won't be the last.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains has anyone you’ve debunked ever just been like, “Oops I was wrong. Thanks Dave!”?
At least he has the guts to do what I could only in my worst nightmares (I'm afraid of wasps and hornets).
Haha none yet, and something tells me James won't be the first!
@@chaseray8224 the fact that no one has i think shows these conmen are in it mostly for money and fame... so sad
As a student currently studying chemistry, I really hope I don't turn this senile.
You are funny and very effective! Happy of having discovered you! Greetings from Nyon, Switzerland
Hey prof! Loving these debunking videos. Keep'em coming!
Kid at the DMV: "What do you mean with 'I have to do tests'? Just give me my license, I did show you the screenshot of how many hours I have in GTA"
I love this comment
*proceeds to mow down concertgoers with a car*
I'm so impressed with the quality of science content creators on YT! Professor Dave posts _seventeen_ papers he cites, in this. Anton Petrov cites, posts, and explains a different new paper on his show every single day, with compilations made for over the holidays and during any moves he's had to make. Every single day.
YT may be a hotbed for flerfs, yecs, and other pseudoscience wackos, but it makes up for it for content like this! Thank you, Professor Dave, for what you do!
? whats "Flerfs" and "Yecs"?
@@nacl4988 Flat Earthers and Young Earth Creationists, respectively.
While the material is way over my head, I find it extremely interesting. I enjoy your content, Dave. I'm going through your course playlists as well.
"You can make molecules that can be like proteins and be like genetic material at the same time. Mutually interacting that started off as an inorganic salt." Yup, this blew my fucking mind. That is so cool!
Origin of life research is truly fascinating. It is a shame, however, that the majority of religious zealots blindly following tour because he's a scientist will never appreciate it.
@@studygodsword5937 objectively false. The combined evidence for both of them dwarfs whatever misrepresentation of science you can pull out to support out of context or factually incorrect Bible passages.
@@studygodsword5937 that is patently incorrect. Did you crack your noggin on the crystal firmament?
@Pisstake it's possible, but there are tons of creationists like him around these parts. I certainly wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't a troll.
@@studygodsword5937 🤣🤣🤣
"buffoons like kent"
i died laughing 🤣
The more I hear James talk about cars, the more I think "My car's motor is controlled by a computer more powerful than the Apollo Landers', and it won't go anywhere without a gas pedal. Yet the Model T Ford had neither of those and it still chugged along perfectly fine."
27:37 "You can always tell when James is acutely aware that he has no clue what he's talking about because he gets louder" :-)
I love your work, Dave. It’s important. Please keep it up.
So basically instead of admitting perhaps he could be wrong! James decided to double down on the stupid! 🤦♂️
The typical, shoot-yourself-in-the-foot strategy employed by all Creationist charlatans.
@@studygodsword5937 did you know that Nostradamus & PT Barnum were more prophetic than anything in the Bible ?
@@studygodsword5937 Did you know that I've already been made aware of these so-called "prophecies" hundreds of times already? Name one prophecy that has clearly defined the future by documenting not only the time and date but specific places, number of people, and the exact event that would unfold at that exact time, date, and place as prophesized. Good luck.
These so-called "Biblical prophecies" are abundantly vague and thus highly subject to interpretation. Their relevance today is merely the result of post-shadowing due to the hindsight bias of those who foolishly and carelessly propagate them as "True." People are literally making shit up as they go along. Yeah, I said it, and no, you most certainly will not prove me wrong. Sorry, but that's just the reality of the situation. Don’t like it? Well, take it up with God. Damn it.
@@studygodsword5937 I don't doubt that you are sincere but this is likely not the best place for you to play. There's nothing you can say that will convert anyone. Likewise, I doubt that, no matter what facts are pointed out to you, you will do any open minded research and reflection on your beliefs.
@@studygodsword5937 what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points.
I like how your first guest explains autocatalysts, first by saying a catalyst is like a bridge for cars (molecules) to get across from one side to another and meet up (react) and then goes on to say an autocatalyst us like bricks on a house that is able to build itself and then go on to work together to build skyscrapers and a whole city. That's a brilliant visual aid for laymen like me who have no idea what any of this stuff is.
I feel a strange sense of gratitude towards Dr. Tour. If he hadn't pushed his misconceptions, I would have missed a very interesting overview of research into a very interesting field. Also grateful to Prof. Dave (and other participants) but that sense of gratitude there isn't half as strange.
Ouch, this has to hurt. But this clearly shows that even scientists aren’t immune to creationist silliness.
When he brought up the car parts was already the nail in the coffin.
@@sentientflower7891 It wasn't a new argument. It was the already debunked watchmaker argument but with a car instead of a watch. It has been debunked thousands of times. But you knew that already.