Fact-Checking James Tour’s Embarrassing Debate Performance
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 06. 2023
- Any rational person who watched my debate with James Tour was immediately struck by Tour's totally insane behavior, focused on chalkboard pageantry and shouting like a deranged lunatic for two full hours. But there is a lot more to discuss regarding the very numerous and very specific lies he told during the exchange regarding the scientific literature we were discussing. Not to mention the biased moderator and other key details, which deserve to be addressed. So let's dive into a little fact-checking endeavor, which comes with commentary from four experts in the OoL field: Dave Deamer, Loren Dean Williams, James Attwater, and Kepa Ruiz-Mirazo. Let's humiliate James even more AND learn about cool science in the process!
Watch the full debate: • Dave Farina vs. James ...
Lee Cronin with Lex Fridman: • Origin of life researc...
Ashkenazy Peptides: www.nature.com/articles/s4146...
Powner Side Chains: pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/...
Szostak RNA Linkage Heterogeneity: molbio.mgh.harvard.edu/szosta...
Deamer Prebiotic Analogue Conditions: www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/11/2/134
Loren Dean Williams Research Page: cool.gatech.edu/people/willia...
Functional Information: www.pnas.org/doi/epdf/10.1073...
More Information Stuff: arxiv.org/pdf/1409.0590.pdf
James Attwater Research Page: www.ucl.ac.uk/chemistry/peopl...
Kepa Ruiz-Mirazo Research Page: www.ias-research.net/people/k...
Kepa Prebiotic Systems Chemistry Review: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24171...
James thinks no one has demonstrated RNA formation on montmorillonite clay. He's a lying idiot:
www.nature.com/articles/381059a0
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12458...
www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/4/3/318
www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/22/8/3857
www.sciencedirect.com/science...
James thinks no one has ever produced a fully self-replicating ribozyme. He's a lying idiot:
www.pnas.org/doi/epdf/10.1073...
www.cell.com/action/showPdf?p...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.pnas.org/doi/epdf/10.1073...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.nature.com/articles/s4146...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
Watch all of my content humiliating James: bit.ly/ProfDaveTour
Watch my other debunks/debates/discussions: 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
"It's hard to publish my critiques because of peer review"
-An actual thing that James Tour said without irony
Edit:
The actual quote, which is functionally identical to what I wrote initially:
"First of all, it's very hard for me to publish a critique that is negative, because it has to get through peer review..."
James just proved my scientific theory that a fully grown man can act like a toddler. And please, do a peer review on that.
@@nirui.o I saw plenty of grown men acting like toddlers over the Bud lite bullshit that happened a few weeks ago, I think that theory will pass
@Sekretarz Jezusa The toddlers who are obsessed with "woke" because some buffoon alpha males use it for political profit, meanwhile they don't even know what it means.
As perilous as peer review can be given the circumstances, ultimately from how it's been explained to me is that it's primary goal is to kind of proof read something before it goes to market. If one is making making claims in their research like showing the statistical improbability of autocatalytic organic chemicals arising on their own, they better not make any mistakes like showing how it works like in a court room. I wouldn't accuse James of doing that because he has published research. So it's odd to me that someone like Jim might claim a certain position has standing, but the rules won't allow for such, when he knows exactly how to work within the rules.
So it seems like he only agrees with the process when it agrees with him.
@Sekretarz Jezusa I wasn't aware that gunning down helpless cans of beer for being promoted by a trans person was considered "woke" behavior.
"I am going after the people that do not read the scientific literature"
- Dr. James Tour
Fun fact, if yoy put this in Google translate it says "I didn't read the literature, therefore I target other people who didn't read the literature so I can sell them my bullshit"
"i am going after" = following in the footsteps of....
@@MostAttractiveDudeInTown Oh damn, it does do that. That’s a pretty fun fact.
Reading and understanding, are not mutually _inclusive_ .
I'm going after scientific illiterate people. Spoken like a true Christian apologist fraud.
By the end, I was half-expecting him to start shouting, "If we 'evolved' from a cell, then why are there still cells around today?"
Cells caused the big bang.
Source : Almando Calvo.
@@user-ii6xm2we7l because they have evidence for it...just watch the damn video before you comment.
if evolution is "faith" then what is religion? there is a lot of evidence for evolution and ZERO evidence for religion
@sahandshafa3181 did you even read the comment you replied to? She/he was clearly mocking the creationists 😅😂
@@ReasonBeing25 thanks for pointing that out. I thought it would be obvious to anyone who has ever discussed this topic with a religious person and got the old, "if we evolved from monkeys, then why are there still monkeys around today?" question thrown at them. Being that I've heard some variation of that question dozens of times, I thought it was a safe joke to make without needing to explain myself. However, I guess that I was wrong.
@@ReasonBeing25 Oh I'm sorry English is not my first language I can't tell mocking and sarcasm easily I didn't realize lol
MR. FARIIIINNNA
Gets me everytime man he lost it
💀💀💀
What's funny is Tour, to this day, uploads the clips where Dave is snarky or sarcastic. He does this to try to make the narrative how Dave is a bully who doesn't even give Christians a chance to talk.
If you comment even a portion of one of Tour's outburst, it gets banned because of how damning his performance is. I commented "Here, GO! GO! GO! GO! YOU DON'T HAVE IT!" And it's been removed. Its actually kind of funny😂.
@@stephenheffren4324 Jimbo's house has no mirrors. They seem to make him *very* angry, for some reason.
Repeatability?
@@greenfloatingtoadwhat about it? Please ask if you have a question! This is probably a great place to ask
@@ThommyofThenn i was trying to coyly suggest other people do this
“You just talk, talk, talk!”
Yes, James. Here in the DEBATE Dave would like to TALK. It’s a calmer version of screaming; you may want to try it sometime
Fuckin right
Yeah i dont recall Dave signing up for a game of #$#% dictionary. James Tour needs to GTFO.
Fucking nailed it
Fucking true
If it wasn't the yelling it was the posturing.
He was a manipulative little fuck, I thought. I found him infuriating.
I don't see how Rice University isn't completely embarrassed by one of their own professors acting like a reality show contestant.
Seems some of the students like the religious bias against science with their cheering for their screaming priest.
@@edisoncarter3841 No, they are just being your average liar for the baby jesus.
Baby? I think Revelations paints him more as a fire sword Demon/Diva.
You’re asking an institution based on lies to be emberassed? Don’t hold your breath.
@@edisoncarter3841 those are not students. One of Tours requests for the debate was a certain number of seats be saved for members of his church.
"I cant publish my critiques because they are full of lies, so I will lie to the public instead." - That was the absolute best part of this whole thing.
I feel like most right-wing and/or religious grifting starts this way
@@royalrelishes2473 @1:41:00
a close second is "if write not clueless does that mean i win?" (sorry if its not exact but its at least very close, was a little hard to understand exact words at some points)
@@MinTea14 Really close, it was "If I write 'not clueless' does that mean I win?"
@@loganleatherman7647 ALL grifting. Convenient BS isn't exclusive to a particular political ideology.
Just watch main stream news media or jump on social media for endless examples.
So let me get this straight:
- The person timing the debate was a graduate affiliated with james
- The moderator only seemed to comment on points you made and questioning it
- and changed his arguments, from what they have been over the passed few years, in the debate without you knowing any of it
Doesn't exactly seem like the most neutral debate
That's why Tour insisted so much on using his own dojo for the debate. A neutral platform surely scares him.
@@zeendaniels5809Yep, he's hit Darth Dawkins levels of insecurity there
@ErrantMasa "Darth Dawkins" hahahahahaha
I wanna see him in a dark cloak and explaining the definition of the word meme to Anakin Skywalker
@@SuperGoodMushmnn nnn nnn n nnn nnn nnn nnn n nn nn nn nn nnn nn nnn n nnn n nnn nnnn nnn nn nn nnn nn nnn n nn n nnn n ℕ n n nnn nn nn nnn nnn nnn nnn nnn nn n g
@@HowdyOaks no idea what this means but you're absolutely right
James: Show us the data
Dave: Shows the data
James: “no. That’s not how you’re supposed to play the game”
PUT IT ON THE BOARD! 😆
Dave: Shows the data
James: NANI?!
More accurately Dave shows exactly what Tour wants. Tour then shifts to now wanting a ver specific side chain created for a very specific amino acid. Tour asks because he knows it is not in that paper. And will now harp on that even though he had to move the goalposts.
You are suppose to show the data in the chalckboard, everybody knows that is how science works!!! /s
I’m quite worried about his lack of understanding regarding the difference between appropriate, accurate notes, and a ‘script’. Does this mean James doesn’t even have accurate lecture notes prepared for his students? Oh wait, even if he did they would not be accurate.
He made Kent Hovind look cool and composed in debates.
Damn, that's the meanest thing I've ever heard anyone say. That was *awesome*.
Dave even makes a jab at Kent in the debate: "He is a gish galloper, like Kent Hovind!"
Smooth conman vs raving lunatic. Neither do very well in debates but man are they fun to make fun of. Tour's performance was bloody embarrassing if he plans to make people like me believe him. Hovind is just so smug in his ignorance you want to light him on fire.
Kend Hovind actually is kind of cool and composed in debates. He's got that scammer cool.
Kent does strawman a lot, but hes a nicer and more disciplined YEC who doesn’t shout.
Perhaps Mr Tour could explain, via the blackboard, how Jesus turned water into wine.
That would be an easy one for him... Something like "The bible says so" and just ignore any objection because come on, it's the bible.
@@zeendaniels5809
Yep,agreed. Also how would Mr Tour explain, with no doubt the help of the his blackboard, how Duck billed platypus made the 14.000 mile journey to Noahs Ark, ......they die in salt water.
@@iainrae6159 How did koalas made the journey back to Australia... They are pretty slow and their diet is primarily eucalyptus so... Yeah.
@@zeendaniels5809
No doubt James Tour would say they grew wings because God can do anything
@iainrae6159 Or have him address the fact the story of Noah's ark is suspiciously similar to the story of the flood from the Epic of Gilgamesh, from several centuries earlier and a different religion. Almost like a writer needed a quick story to make this Yaweh or Jehova seem interesting.
"It is very hard for me to publish a critique, because of peer-review." WELL NO FUCKING SHIT JAMES! I WONDER WHY YOU CAN'T GET ANYTHING PUBLISHED!
The fact checking video being almost as long as the debate is almost poetic
I also appreciate that Dave has approached this video in a way that is inclusive of a layperson like myself.
Sadly, a debate like this, with soooo many minute factuals, its literally an impossible debate, at least over the course of an hour or so. Only like a dozen people on earth understand that (see what I did there, dozen? lol) That is why Monday morning gameplay video like this is needed, to point out the detail of what was right or wrong.
It's always easier to spit out nonsense. That's why charlatans are so prolific. By the time anyone proves them wrong, they already moved on to something else and scammed another thousands of people and you're back to square one.
Well every lie or piece of misinformation takes 10% of the time to spout out that it does to show research and deconstruct it.
That's why gish gallop is often so cringely effective.
Screaming CLUELESS seems like a good debating tactic....
Yeah, and dumbasses are saying Dave was unprofessional 😆 ridiculous
But he wrote it on the chalkboard, too. 😂😂😂
CLUELESS!!!!!!!! Lol
To be fair, by the end, the blackboard behind Dave says 'Not Clueless', whereas, behind Tour, it says 'Clueless Clueless Clueless Clueless Clueless'.
I think that's accurate.
@@archivist17 😆
not gonna lie "Mr. Farina" sounds dope as fuck. if you ever go in your villain arc, this should be your nickname
Farina sounds like a cool ass last name you can't lie
As an Italian... Unfortunately the "Mr Farina" spell loses meaning, as farina means flour in Italian... So I'm there imagining Dave as a sack of flour getting screamed at
@@mareephemeral1689 damn can't unread that
@@mareephemeral1689 yeah but you can use flour to bake bread so to that I say, let him cook
"If I write 'not clueless' does that win?" Brilliant!
Honestly I should thank James Tour. If it weren’t for his complete idiocy, I would’ve never learned this much about systems chemistry and origin of life research.
Me too!
@@ProfessorDaveExplains I should probably be thanking you even more though for the amazingly well researched and presented content! Please keep being you:)
@@ProfessorDaveExplains it helped me in my 2nd first year chem course, all of his ranting about EE and handedness meant I could not forget any of that on the exams
If it hadn't been for all of those DI idiots I wouldn't have learned so much about evolution
Same here. The whole drama with James Tour got me updated with the latest research on origin of life
James' lack of composure and emotional stability was legitimately disturbing at times. You did an amazing job keeping your cool. Well done Dave!
Yep that's exactly what you do when someone is acting like a complete jackass, be the calm one and everyone will see who is the jackass.
Snapping at the audience was cringeworthy, but you can’t not start getting pissed off when morons are yelling against you
Was starting to think he was drinking before the debate.
MISTER FARIIIIINAAAAAA
I am physically embarrassed watching this for James Tour. I just don't understand how an adult looks back at a performance like his and is not ashamed.
In high school I was for a time on the debate team. If any of us used that same tactics of Mr. Tour, the moderator(s) would stop us and warn us to refrain from this type of behavior. If we kept up the poor behavior at the debate, we risked the moderator stopping the debate and declaring the other team the winner. This is not proper way to conduct a debate.
This "moderater" was definitely not brought there with the intent of mediating any heated discussion
@@andyarellanoChannel Did you not watch the video? Tour employed several deflections and deceptions, and his overall conduct (shouting, the chalk thing, and so on) was incredibly unbecoming of a proper debate. This is not how debates are supposed to be done. This is not the purpose of a debate.
@@lorscarbonferrite6964I'm not even sure what this guy is saying, I think he's smoking something
i think the moderator wasn't there to moderate in the slightest but instead to support james's "arguments"
At the beginning, Tour said he's never debated before. I assumed he was using it as a blanket excuse for all of his atrocious behavior.
As Mark Twain said “never argue with a fool, the bystanders can’t tell the difference”. James Tour tries to bring everyone down to a low level. Classic bully.
It is possible to learn recognizing the difference between a lying fool and a honest man, no matter their behaviour.
At least he openly admits that he's writing for scientifically illiterate religionists rather than scientists.
My therapist said the same thing: “If you argue with an idiot then you’ve just got two idiots arguing”
yes he was truly a bully, hurling insults and derogatory words towards Dave was absolutely unacceptable and hurtful, Dave is very intelligent and knows what he's talking about far more than Tour
Dave explains NOTHING. But Dave isn't a serious scientist he's a Social Media Faux Scientist. Nothing much going on in his noggin he's just regurgitating the same old dogma .
The dumber a person is the more they rely on repeating what other mainstream experts say. Like the simple minded people who were scared into taking the poison Covid Jab. They bought into the Covid lies and wore the mask and did the social distancing and took the poison Jab.. Why? Because they were obedient robots with NO critical thinking skills.
I bet Dave took all the Covid jabs and all the boosters. He's not a smart guy.
I personally know two people who died from myocarditis from the poison Covid Jab.
Moderator should be prohibited from ever moderating again.
Never advised the audience to not interfere.
Allowed shouting by Tour.
Stepped in to help Tour make an argument.
Yes, he should have asked Dave not to attack the audience (Dave wouldn't have had to of moderator did his job)
Give him some credit for the great hair piece :)
The moderation was as authentic as the hair on the moderator's head.
Naw. Let him attack them. He's totally right.
Alternatively if this "moderator" is going to "moderate" another creationist versus science guy debate the first thing the science guy should do is ask the "moderator" if he is going to again completely side with the creationists, or if he perhaps would like to be impartial this time and actually do his job...
@@juhanipolvi4729 do not trust people to suddenly be able to actually be competent just because you tell them to
I look forward to Tour's 370-part response to the debate.
Everyone knows that the longer and louder the response, the more correct it is!
What's that? Gish Gallop? Never heard of him. /s
Only 370?
@@totalstrangerthing7419 aleph 370
Corresponds with the scrapped Metro Cammell EMU AC train 370..
But he's not a youtuber
So Tour says that he treats his students the way he treated professor Dave? Does it extend to his moronic "HE CAME PREPARED SO THAT MEANS HE CHEATED" excuses? Is citing papers forbidden in "doctor" Tour's little academic fiefdom? Does he fail his students if they don't remember everything by heart?
According to some testimonies from his students the answer is "something similar".
@@marknieuweboer8099 Not surprised that this guy is a terrible teacher and an asshole to his students, considering the mentality he approaches science with. He's an authoritarian as soon as he's got the tiniest bit of power, then pretends to be a poor oppressed underdog the moment he has to deal with his peers.
So he's a clichéd 1980s movie condescending teacher or lecturer.
@@berniethekiwidragon4382 He's the teacher from God's Not Dead but religious, and actually existing in real life. Wonderful.
So, James lied?
I never would have guessed
*GASP* James lied?!?!?!?! Oh no! Who could have saw that coming?!
In other news...
Water = wet
Yeah creationists are another group of lying idiots, albeit not as stupid as the flerfs you debate on your channel.
@@drsatan9617 and fire hot
And earth is a globe
It is eggregiously inappropriate for a debate moderator to conduct themselves as a "fact checker." It is NOT a moderator's job to contribute to content but to insure the exchange is not the shit show this "debate" became. That's two catastrophic failures on the host's part; a far greater abomination than any stupid arguments James T presented.
Absolutely shameful.
He was also dead wrong every time, which makes it much wrose.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Edit: typo message container [Little spelling mistake “wrose” but, i think its fine.]
Well im embarrassed, and i will admit it. Still though, i was sleeping while everyone was replying. Thanks for that though.
@@FlatEarthKiller Thanks, you saved everyone with that comment. Clearly your wisdom has come through in the clutch to shine the light of reason among us lowly simpletons. Typos are so cringe amiright
@@FlatEarthKiller what's wrong with "wrose?" It's my favorite flower.
@@FlatEarthKiller typo police are here...everybody wtach out!!!!
Hey Dave, in our interview with you and Aron Ra, we pressed you on your use of rhetoric. After realizing what kind of person you're dealing with, I realize now that your use of words were necessary. I hope more people look past James Tours stunt and sincerely look to the peer reviewed primary literature to understand what is actually going on with Origin of Life research.
Your friend Derek
The strength of the scientists are the facts.
The strength of the opposition is the ability to make it impossible to show said facts in a reasonable amount of time.
💯💯💯
0:00 Intro
1:38 James reframing debate with his five prompts
2:22 Sidenote about ad hominem
4:04 James's opening statement
9:02 Chalk writing antics
11:02 (1st prompt) Polypeptide synthesis
16:00 Sidenote about reading paper titles
17:08 1st comment by moderator: NMR spectrum of ribose-borate vs ribose
18:29 Dave's response
23:29 (2nd prompt) Polynucleotide (esp. RNA) synthesis
28:58 David Deamer's comments on nucleotide synthesis
30:32 2nd comment by moderator: early vs modern RNA
31:25 More about peptide synthesis
32:56 Loren Williams's comments on prebiotically plausible synthesis of polypeptides and polynucleotides
36:59 (3rd prompt) Polysaccharide synthesis (esp. via enzymes)
39:38 Sidenote about when talking points were said in the past
40:59 Early vs modern enzymes
42:27 Chemical purity vs natural synthesis
43:29 Homochirality
43:39 Note about scripting prompts
46:20 3rd comment from moderator: mixing up terminology
48:26 (4th prompt) specified information/complexity
53:13 Systems chemistry (+ evolution arising from chemistry)
53:43 Sidenote about reading from a script
54:38 James's rant about bringing dead cells back to life
56:27 James's denial that ribozymes can self-replicate
59:24 Peak of chalk antics
1:01:06 James Attwater's comments on ribozyme autocatalysis
1:16:03 Kepa Ruiz-Mirazo's comments on prebiotic systems chemistry
1:27:57 Loren William's comments on systems chemistry
1:31:00 Q&A
1:31:17 Amino acids: activators; abiogenesis with a subset of amino acids
1:33:53 Self-replicating ribozymes
1:35:14 James's treatment of his graduate students
1:36:14 What Dave and James admire about each other's scientific careers
1:39:40 Why James doesn't submit work to peer review
1:42:01 Sidenote about critiques of OoL research
1:43:54 Conclusion on James's behavior
1:44:20 Reactions (Discovery Institute, commenters, Rice University)
1:46:57 Final remarks
Thanks a bunch
Thanks for the time stamps!
And there are still people who defend him
The dude literally behaved like a child during the debate
In experience with my own an other kids clearly shows me that they often adapt very fast to new circumstances and learn at a sometimes mindboggeling rate. James did none of that.
I've seen people's confirmation bias push them to defend worse, like FOX "News"
If Tour had brought one piece of literature that supported his unresolved chemistry written on the blackboard, it would given him *some* help (not much), but he literally brought childish antics and clueless fanboys to make his points. Just looking at the debate from the outset, Dave bringing a shit ton of verified articles, and Tour bringing... a crowd of booers, tells u all u need to know.
Reading through Tour's comment sections is downright depressing.
@@angusyang5917 now I'm depressed
I was disappointed to see the debate devolve into James screaming over 75% of sentences Dave said. Moderator should have taken action honestly. It kept trading of ideas from happening. It made it embaressingly clear that James had no plans to engage in debate, he just wanted to yell at Dave in person.
Maybe if they did what most proper debates do and have a neutral third party moderator instead of one of their buddies...
The moderator seems to be James' colleague in that university so it's been a lopsided debate from the start.
The moderator did take action though. It just happens that the action he took was to cover for Tour at every turn, and moving the conversation on when Dave managed to get more than half a sentence out.
It was obvious the mod was on James’ side unfortunately.
This wasn’t a debate even in the slightest. It was just a childish display first by Tour with all his screaming then Dave for insulting the audience.
No, I don’t think that audience understood 75% of what was said. It was just childish to insult them when you are supposed to have a debate.
The best part about his character arc is when the students end up roasting him harder than you did.
For anyone struggling to know why dave is so harsh please recognize agreeing with tour is essentially accusing a large amount of scientists as frauds
Gotta love how these people say Dave saying the naughty word is worse than a screaming, lying, science-denying lunatic.
Grow the fuck up, please.
And accusing several whole fields of research as incorrect
For context this is an offshoot of James Tour telling everyone "We have been lied about OOL"
Yes, James Tour outright accused scientists as liars.
czcams.com/video/LAwwsewPxUs/video.html
I attended this debate with my husband and I just want to point out that the (non student) Tour people were there for Evangelism and not necessarily science.
We were there early and a large group of Tour people sat next to us. It was mostly Boomers with one man who looked mid-30s who joined them about 20 minutes before the debate started. He asked why they'd chosen to sit where they did (slides with Farina and Tour's names were on either side of the front wall of the auditorium) and they said they'd chosen Farina's side in the hope of reaching some of his followers.
I'd been chatting with a lady in the group who had been told that Farina was a gossip columnist and we'd tried to explain a bit more about CZcams to her. The group was loud, especially when Dave called out that a lot of what he was saying went over the audience's head, but my favorite comment from them was "God understands the science".
We were clearly skeptical of Tour during the debate and as a former EvangelicaI, I was dreading trying to politely tell them that I wasn't interested in a dialogue because I was more than familiar with their tactics and uninterested in a sermon.
Ya'll, they could not have left more quickly when the debate was over. Stopping the Evangelical mission field machine means Professor Dave won in my book.
I’m glad to hear their sad little “mission” failed. Seems really common whenever they face difficulties, they just gave up… anyone honest would conclude their god must be an angry coward, just like them.
@@jrojala I mean, most of us conclude He doesn't exist. Hard to be angry or a coward if you're not real.
"God understands the science"
lol, they obviously haven't read the bible.
I get this. Having your faith in doubt is such a frustrating thing if you are extremely religious.
I was there too, and they made most of Dave's supporters go to overflow seating and watch the Livestream. So we couldn't even be in the main seating.
Tour: *did not even read the papers, just screamed, lied, moved goalposts, and Gish galloped
Prof. Dave: *had to compile and study a lot of papers and reach out to OOL researchers
Brandolini's Law: The amount of energy needed to refute b**lsh*t is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it.
"Brandolini's Law" - After having watched so much debunk on YT it is an under-estimate of a factor 3.
@@freddan6fly Thanks for informing me that this phenomenon has a name and a wiki page! Definitely pointing to this in the future for efficiency.
I actually find this quite hard to watch and have turned off after 22 mins. It isn't just one idiot in his bedroom denying the scientific consensus, it's one idiot trying to brainwash others with his dishonest take on science, using lies and misinformation. What does he get out of this? It is dangerous and unfortunately he will manage to convince those people who are susceptible to this kind of thing (flat earthers, creationists etc). I'm sorry that in 2023 we have to debate this kind of thing. Hats off to you for remaining so calm.
_"What does he get out of this?"_ He's trying to get religion taught in schools. Check out the Wedge document for their plan.
Whats so dangerous about it
Why do you think that is so dangerous? How can 'Whats' be dangerous, anyway?@@billballinger5622
I know you wont respond to this Dave, and I dont intend for you to do so. However, I do see you responding to negative comments frequently, so I assume you read every comment. I just want to tell you what a huge inspiration you are for me and how much I enjoy your content. Thanks for all the high quality, educational videos. Continue your amazing work.
When the debate is lost, shouting is that last resort of the loser. Tour is an embarrassment to scientific debate. I commend you for keeping your cool as much as you did! Nice job Dave.
Oh shit glad to see you here, godspeed.
Thanks for commenting here. I love watching your videos
@@caseycox1002 for real. Tripped me out.
Hey Arvin ! I love your work and I’m glad to see you showing a bit of support for another great science communicator
“When the facts are on your side, pound the facts. When the law is on your side, pound the law. When neither is on you side, pound the table.”
I believe Tour on one point; I believe that he does treat his students like that.
I believe him on the second truth during the debate from James : "I talk about OOL science for the lay man" - he actually meant to say "my unhinged uneducated stupid congregation"
To think that Mr. Tour would've stayed a respected member of the scientific community, if he just knew how to keep his trap shut and not act like a toddler when legitemately criticized, crazy world we live in huh?
It's really interesting to see how James Tour just... collapsed. I'm pretty sure Dave didn't target him because he thought he was a weak link or anything. If anything, he was the most credible and useful part of the Discovery Institute. But oh my god this guy has just fallen into a pile of rubble.
Look at him SHAKE here. He's fuming! He can't handle this sort of thing, he can't handle a challenge to his authority but doesn't actually know how to re-assert himself in an authoritative way. Instead he's reduced to red-faced, limb-shaking shouting and theatrics. Insinuating that because Dave "prepared" for a "discussion" means he's fucking cheating or something, when he's an academic, a CHEMIST, and has to know that you can't possibly expect someone to be able to write down a whole biological pathway on the board in, like, 15 seconds, or a full chemical reaction. That's the kind of cheap shit that only works on people who've never seen any actual scientific primary literature. I don't mean 'laypeople' or anything like that either, I mean that they've never looked at a paper before and went "oh, shit, this is pretty serious huh?" You know, the kind of arrogantly ignorant people that are Flat Earthers, Electric Universers, or Creationists.
Dave having the arduous task of explaining a complicated field to an audience primed to ignore him while a bad faith demagogue undermines him should have made this way rougher than it was. Instead, he made the poster boy of a multi-million dollar propaganda outlet look like a rank amateur. Tour is obviously unfit for the task, but Dave really deserves some credit for making Tour lose his cool when his entire plan was to frustrate Dave via annoying internet debate-bro tactics.
When you're entire audience are die-hard Christians that think religion is science and it's the only thing that keeps his career afloat, he's going to do everything in his power to keep that. James should have known on a surface level that he was going to look like a clown, even in his own university. It's insane to me how Rice still keeps him employed after this shitshow. This was a long time coming for Tour, he's gotten more public embarrassment from the debate alone than from the years of tension that built up since Dave's first debunk. The day the D.I concede to their pseudo-science, we can all say good bloody riddance, but I know much like the 2nd coming of Jesus, that day will not come.
The funniest thing is though Dave was as polite as you could be when talking about a creationist in his first video on Tour. Even gives him the benefit of the doubt on several occasions. But that's how fragile tours ego is. He couldn't even take that mild criticism of his lies. He brought all this on himself.
Yeah, by "collapsed" you meant "won".
@@ilmannimea8897 No. He didn't. It looks this way to you because you have a bias towards him and the types of thought-terminating arguments he's using.
Tour lost his facade of the critical scientist and instead became a full-on ranting crank, which while appealing to people with an anti-science bias, isn't appealing to people who know how things, like, work. Yelling MR FARINA, GO GO GO is silly. What Dave was explaining was a massive chain that he'd probably have to take like 15 minutes to write all on the board. It's theatrics, not actual discussion or debate.
Tour is useful to people like the Discovery Institute because they allow intellectual cover for their theocratic desire to suppress research they don't like because they lack the capacity to fit it into their theology. There's a million people who can rant and rave about how scientists don't know anything, but few who could tow the line as a disciplined scientist who simply didn't agree with conclusions drawn from experiments.
Tour couldn't maintain that balance because actually knowing anything about Origin of Life research makes you realize that its claims are totally understandable and reasonable, just like pretty much any other area of scientific inquiry. Charlatans love to imply that scientists are taking wild swings, but if you've ever read a paper you'll realize just how small and specific scientific claims are. It's just that they add up to significant and serious claims about how things work.
Tour is useless now. He's replaceable, especially since his stage presence is poor. He was at an advantage and blew it, since he was too busy trying to re-establish authority through shouting and browbeating rather than understand that the way he needed to argue was from a place of weakness and oppression. Tour's not a good enough con-man to actually run one, so he's not very helpful to the con-artists of DI who are trying to pass off theocracy as scientific rigor.
Won? Tour in no way win. 🤣 Dave proved everything. It’s not his fault that yourself, tour, and all of his other idiotic followers don’t understand how it works.
Weird how the moderator had no idea what he was doing despite being a senior lecturer. It really makes me question the quality of that university
He was on James' side the whole time.
I’m honestly impressed/surprised nobody’s mentioned the atrocity the moderator is wearing on his head.
‘ma said not to trust anyone who wears their bad wig like that, and I’m thinking she was right.
So much THIS.
Worst. Moderator. Ever.
Removed all doubts for me. 😢
The moderator should have had to state his religious affiliation and relationship with Tour or the DI.
I've heard James' exact tone before, it's the voice of a man who got caught cheating by his wife, and he's trying to shout out a way to make it her fault.
It literally sounds like he's in a domestic dispute.
That sounds horrible 😢
I dread to think what his family life is like if he behaves this way in public.
Seeing Casey Luskin of all people accuse Dave of "playground tactics" and "citation bluffing" made me chuckle
If James Tour behaved like that in a classroom that I was in, I would make him go and sit in the corner. This is extremely shameful behaviour for a educated man, much less a religious person. Totally unprofessional behaviour Dr Tour 👎👎👎
Religious people know no shame.
@@brandonman1315
True, sadly very true.
Who should I believe more? The calm, reasonable-sounding man on the left...or the obnoxiously-loud, chalk-loving raving lunatic on the right, who refuses to actually listen to the guy on the left?
Neither. None of what you said has any bearing on whether either of them is correct or not. But at least I know how to scam you the easiest.
@@stylis666 Touché.
@Setekh, adept Lisaist well, to add a psychological perspective, if you don't look at the behavior but rather the why behind the behavior, you get a different picture.
@@stylis666 ok. I understand what your saying. In the end if someone starts acting like a child I won’t even listen to them. So you won’t have a chance to convince me of you being correct. Trying to show people facts while acting like a child will only work on children. I am a skeptical person so I will look into the facts to see where they pan out. But I won’t even give YEC an ear at all because all of the proponents of it act like children. I don’t even take most of their critics seriously because they act like children as well. Dave is an exception but not completely.
I like loud noises and have a small attention span; so I think the guy on the right won (Average American).
Tour fanboys when he writes clueless: 👏🤣👏
Tour fanboys during Q and A: 🤐
Interesting.
The beautiful irony in Tour unwittingly framing himself with scientific terms used wrong, visual models drawn wrong, and the word clueless repeated over and over.
"All you can do is write one word"
... That was two words...
The real villain is whoever sold the helpful moderator his toupee
Oh God....😂 Stop it 😂
Maybe God really does punish liars
If I had been in the audience, my question to James would have been: "Did you give Dave that nice present at the start of the night in a cynical attempt to preload the audience with the concept that you're the 'good guy' in this scenario?"
Because I'd love to see how he would attempt to explain that very obvious rhetorical trick away.
He'd probably just say "I was trying to be nice and friendly" and present himself as the victim and underdog.
Too right he did.
I also think he knew Dave would start with questioning his truthfulness, and so this would add to make Dave seem like a villain
Same goes for that handshake at the end. Look at me stepping over myself and approaching Dave to show my respect even after all the disagreement.
No, that was just a pre-emptive non-verbal apology for what was to follow.
@@temari2860 Like... who would be stupid enough to buy it after he literally screamed at him like a lunatic in front of everyone?
The synchopants supporting and clapping James were simply embarrassing.
As an ex Christian creationist, I just wanted to say thanks to you and others like you who make this content. I'm sure it seems like it falls on deaf ears but every now and then, a creationist decides to actually try to understand what the other side has to say and your work is invaluable to them
"As an ex Christian creationist"
Sure you are.
@@ilmannimea8897 Lol you don't even know my hair colour but you think you know more than I do about my own past beliefs?
Damn, it's not often I get to hear "ex Christian creationist". Congrats!
@@mihael64 because there is no such a thing.
@@ilmannimea8897 you think the indoctrination is unbreakable?
For someone who hates the idea of humans coming from inhuman primates, he sure posed and screamed and pointed and stared like a chimp having a dominance battle.....
It is surprising he didn’t reach into his adult diaper to fling actual crap.
What a fantastic observation. It's surprising he didn't fling feces.
@@chriswinchell1570 LMAO!
@@weevolvetogether LMAO!
@@chriswinchell1570 he did... metaphorically speaking.
James' tactic is basically just to scream as loud as possible to prevent Prof. Dave from saying anything
Indeed. It is embarassing to say the least. I havent watched the full debate... but just seeing the way he debates in the clips you can tell he is intellectually dishonest. He tries too hard to play for the audience instead of actually having a conversation.
He reminds much of a flat earther on FTFE:s or McToons debates.
@@shroom2001 i watched it, and it's hard to listen to with james constantly screaming and interrupting dave
@@aetheriox463 haha never watch a flat earth debate then lmaoo
@@shroom2001 ive tried, it is unbearable
Tour has the anger of a man who is wrong, knows deep down that he is wrong and is desperately clutching at straws to avoid backing down. Or he's actually mental.
Both.
James Tour had a home game, stacked the deck against prof Dave and he lost his cool and had to resort to screaming like a banshee? What a charlatan
Professor Dave, I hope your debate with James Tour inspires other scientists to grow some balls and join you in calling out these grifters and educating the public. I'm sick of fundamentalists controlling scientific narratives and progress because of "divine providence". I'm sick of going to my local Barnes and Noble and seeing Richard Feynman and Carl Sagan grouped together with goobers like Deepak Chopra. Keep up the good work, sir.
Well a few made statements for this video, so I think it's working!
Scientists typically don't engage with pseudoscientists because it is impossible to talk sense to them. Also, unlike Tour, we don't try to reach outside our area of expertise since we are smart enough to know we don't know all the literature in that field. But debunking these things is an important job that needs to be done. I commend Dave for his dedication to reading all these papers and not just pulling a Tour and pretending he did and proceed to lie about the results. Misconceptions and misinformation can spread like a virus if nobody is fighting it. I once spent days and 200+ comments seeing if I could get a couple of Tours followers on one of his videos to concede they were wrong about anything. I read and cited dozens of papers disproving their points and they absolutely refused to read the papers themselves. Rather than cite any papers themselves, they shifted goalposts again and again and made stupid comments like, "the ocean dilutes everything" as if they had never seen a puddle, tidepool, or lake in their lives. Most of the time they would just timestamp Tour's own lies on the subject, even though the paper I just cited refuted his claims. I am happy to report I did get one of them to read the first few paragraphs of a paper, even if it was just to quote mine it in the stupidest way possible. The troll proceeded to call me a liar, saying there was no way I was a real scientist. "Real scientists quote other papers rather than just leave a citation," he said, demonstrating he'd never read a paper before. Needless to say, I did not send him a link to my academic profile for fear the extremist would track me down in real life. Religious zealots are scary. On the bright side, the experience taught me a lot about OoL research and the thickness of skulls.
@@PheedPhil
Edit: thank you for clarifying your point in the post below, my bad on the misunderstanding. Original comment below.
I have to respectfully disagree. I cannot recommend Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World" enough then. In the open chapter, Dr. Sagan admonishes those in the scientific community about the necessity of the scientific community to fight against conservatism and religious fundamentalism, lest those communities win over public opinion on science *by default*. This was written back in 1996, and arguable holds even more true in 2023.
While I understand that most religious zealots have closed their minds to any viewpoint that doesn't agree with theirs, when they encroach on the scientific community and attempt to control a narrative and establish rules on the community based on conservatism or religious fundamentalism instead of the desire to learn and improve on our collective scientific knowledge, then you get wack jobs like James Tour who are held in high regard by the public and shunned (albeit silently) by the actual scientific community. Even if you don't change the minds of the people you are addressing, you are certainly changing some of the minds in the audience, but this comes with a consistent fight for scientific truth.
I'd also like to point out that the amazing James Randi (a magician turned pseudoscience debunker and someone Dr. Sagan holds in high regards in his book) was shamed on national TV while said program was defending noted pseudoscience peddler Uri Geller, and yet this did not deter Mr Randi from his fight against pseudoscience. I certainly hope more scientists and those in the scientific community adopt a stronger stance like Mr. Randi against pseudoscience BS, because it may be them siphoning research grants for their garbage if the scientific community continues to stand by idly en masse.
And I'm saying this as someone who had to reteach myself basic science to get accepted into a university, because my middle and high school science courses were dictated by the church running my private school.
@@adamestrada7610 not sure why you're respectfully disagreeing. I hundred percent agree with you. Fighting this scientific disinformation is very important. I too am trying to do my part and have a website to fighting scientific disinformation in the science fiction field, as many lay people just accept science they see in movies and books as real. I'm just saying many scientists choose not to do it because they feel it is not worth their time and because they are trained not to speak with authority in a field they don't study themselves. I'm not saying they are right. They definitely should be standing up against pseudoscience to prevent it from becoming opinion. Sorry for not making this clear.
@@PheedPhil Ha! I read "the scientific community..." and "...we don't...", so my mind misread this as "the scientific community, including myself, doesn't engage with pseudoscientists".
Thank you for clarifying.
James totally won. Didn't you hear how loud he was? Loudest = victory in a debate, I'm pretty sure.
Don’t forget the wild gestures and unhinged rambling!!
@@jrojala yeah, Dave didn't get a single wild gesture point. Step up your debate game, Dave.
I almost feel bad for Prof Dave after Dr James wrote on a board calling him clueless when I heard the sound of the audiences, that feeling but.... Make a good content for youtube to be watched by everyone!🤣
To be fair, he wrote "Clueless" on the black board like 5 times more than Dave wrote "Not clueless". According to DI debate rules, that means he definitely won.
@@jrojala All that was missing was JT clubbing PD over the head with a femur and pounding his chest while screeching.
At the end when he was responding to the "what do you admire" question he was shouting "I admire him" in such a hateful tone it perfectly encapsulated his character and how the entire debate went. He couldn't even answer that question without spitting poison and lying. Then he dodged the question like every job interview candidate when asked the "what is your greatest weakness" question.
He is an angry and dishonest man but he doesn't seem to realize that he's such a bad liar that his emotions might as well be written on a giant billboard over his head.
The difference between scientists and people like James Tour is that James Tour claims to have the answers when he doesn't, and scientists don't necessarily claim to have the answers, but they know how to go about finding them when they don't.
And scientists are capable of changing their opinion.
This debate is a clear example of moving the goalpost. In 20~30 years they will be saying: "if you can't show me a full self-replicating modern bacteria you have NOTHING!! Clueless!!"
If you can't explain quantum gravity in a black hole we are clueless on space. Let's take down all research facilities and space telescopes until we know everything
CLUELESS.
BINGO!!! you can actually see the post has been moved since pasteur debunked spontaneus generation.
The simple fact (and I wish this could have been pointed out during the debate itself) is that if we are to the point where even a CRITIC of OOL research is able to identify 4 different key problems in chemistry in resolving the OOL, It's pretty evident that we are not clueless at all, and are so close that this is all that functionally remains.
If you can't show me a single example of a horse appearing out of nowhere, then we're clueless about OOL research!
/s btw
My favorite part of the event was when you told him that his own students use your content to help them pass his classes.
It was exquisite. Seems like the kind of thing that would really get under James' skin and live rent free in his brain the rest of his life
I liked that part too. I especially liked the part when everyone clapped, but like actually.
Imagine having to suffer James' classes, where he is probably just wasting so much time writing schemes with chalk on a blackboard.
For me, it was worth it to watch the entire debate for that one moment. It felt like the debate equivalent of a Mortal Kombat fatality.
@@parcormasteryesiknowispell4337 That part shouldn’t be the highlight in terms of persuasiveness. It sounds like you’re taking this as some sort of a reality show where two characters fight and you pick your favorite based on demeanor and charisma. That’s why Trump was elected in 2016.
No, that comment from Dave was just a jab and did nothing to prove a point. Just useless slander.
The arguments are the only thing that matters
Tour's behaviour makes a lot more sense when you realize he isn't arguing out of legitimate disagreement with the science - he's arguing out of faith. To concede *any* of these points would betray the religious beliefs he's dedicated his life to. It's the classic sunk-cost fallacy; if he admits he was wrong, he's admitting his entire life was misguided: he doesn't want to accept that.
He actually announced it in his opening statement.
"Prof Dave is wrong, I am a véry religious man."
"It's all about interpreting the data."
I'd say he's not arguing out of faith, he's arguing out of known deception. The DI really don't care about the truth, they just want to gain power and force faith into education. That goal is all that matters and for some reason they have zero sense of morality when it comes to reaching that goal.
I know very little about chemistry, and even to me it was really obvious James was being dishonest simply because he didn't engage with what you presented and asked for you to waste time writing out hyper specific things (not to mention the incredibly rude behaviour). I don't understand how the audience of people who presumably understand the topic more than me was unable to see that and blindly agreed with him. Even if he were correct and you incorrect he lost the debate. This debate has driven me to learn more about chemistry and its connections to biology and its very interesting, im gladI found your channel.
Your presumption is wrong. The part of the audience that blindly agreed with JimmyT were fanboys and -girls from his congregation. They understand even less of chemistry and science in general than you and I. In Dutch we call them "klapvee" - applause cattle.
@@marknieuweboer8099Thanks for teaching me some Dutch!
@@mihael64This is a good representation of Dave's community: always trying to spread information because its interesting 👍
“Why can’t you publish your critiques in the scientific community?”
James: “Do you know how hard it is?😢”
Once again, Dr. Tour is a complete joke as is clearly evident by even RU staff at this point. He does not and refuses to understand or acknowledge the scientific literature that counteracts his beliefs. These are beliefs that stem from his religious views and are not backed up by anybody but other religious figures and groups. It cannot be construed in any other way, Dr. James Tour is wrong about the entire field of abiogenesis and our understanding of it
His answer was even worse.
“Why can’t you publish your critiques in the scientific community?”
James: “Social media allows me to reach the masses who never read the primary research.”
Or in other words: "I want to target those who do not know anything about the topic"
@@bass-dc9175agreed
You didn't get it did you ! The reason is that the whole damn community, the media, the academies, the supposed science depository's , literally everyone, WILL NOT LISTEN to anything that is not Darwin. He is their God.
THAT'S WHAT HE MEANT. duhhhhhhhhhhhh
Not going to lie, this looks a lot like when Bill Nye tried to debate Ken Ham. The problem is when you are debating someone who is deeply entrenched in protecting a religious viewpoint (either one covered in science, or one completely out in the open), they know their best tactic is to fall back to talking over, lying, and shouting. As though they've never understood what the term "debate" means.
"Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired" - Jonathan Swift (oddly enough this quote was used to promote religion against "free thinking")
It looks a lot like Bill Nye debating with a ham. And an angry one at that.
At least in nye vs ham we got the gem when ken ham admitted that nothing would change his mind concerning his views on creationism.
I wonder if we can get a similar gem from this one.
@@Julian0101 I think instead he would take the intellectually dishonest position of saying a thing that would change his mind, and then just moving the goal post if you actually showed him that thing.
I wouldn’t mind so much if any of them had experimental evidence for any kind of creation or god. It’s simply “Naha” & I win by default.
At least Ken Ham didn't start screaming at Bill Nye.
Ben Shapiro talks fast to sound correct
James Tour talks loud to sound correct
The despair in Tour’s speech reminds me a quote _"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."_ (Saul Bellow)
Thanks for the quote and reference , it's a great quote, I shall enjoy exploring his work now :)
To recycle an old quote: Arguing with James seems to be like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are or how well you play, the pigeon will just knock over peices, crap on the board and strut around like it won the game.
While squawking at you angrily. ;-)
@@page8301Ah, yes. For James that is quite an essential part!
It must be incredibly frustrating to try and have a debate with someone like James that is simply unwilling to present or address the topics and simply resorts to shouting and attempts at distraction and misdirection. Your presentation seemed pretty solid overall.
Weeks ago, when I first saw the ..."debate" James had already made several videos knocking you. That's the bullshit advantage. You can tell a hundred lies before anyone can fact check a thing. But at the heart of it all is this. The one saying it's impossible is making a positive statement, and the burden of proof is on him. The debate was on "Do we know anything?" All you had to do is show some plausable research. You did that. You win.
When my sister wanted to tell our mother something embarrassing about me I would try to shout over her nonsense as much as I could so she wouldn't understand what she said
The resemblance is uncanny
The end of the debate was hilarious.
James: *writes clueless on the board*
Crowd: Woooooooooo!!!!
Dave: *writes not clueless on the board* “If I write NOT clueless on the board do I win the debate now?
Crowd: *laughter*
There were a lot more cheers for Dave when he wrote not clueless than when Tour wrote clueless repeatedly.
How STUPID does Tour have to be to set his bar of winning at us having NO CLUE AT ALL about origins of life??
Well Tour himself is _clueless_ , so he projects this lack of knowledge to everyone else.
@@freddan6fly he really is. He does a good job pretending like he knows what he talks about, really. Unless you know chemistry pretty well, he can fool you. But he just has nothing.
Once you get past his jargon it's just:
"You don't know how to do this!" *Yeah, we do.* "OH yeah, sure but only with purified chemicals!" *Which can be purified abiotically.* "The chances of any SPECIFIC sequence is astronomically low!" *Yup and that doesn't matter when multiple sequences can do the same thing.* "You're reading a script!" *Are you referring to the notes that were made because all your points are predictable?* "CLUELESS!"
@@SnakeWasRightYou need to remember that he's part of the DI and they are only interested in brainwashing the masses to make America a theocracy. It makes sense after you realize that.
It really was a weak position to take. Any progress in any one of those four points was an “L” for him, while he had to deny decades of advancement and thousands of projects and tens of thousands of published articles.
@@irenafarm he's just dug in and has to double down because he's clearly an ideologically driven narcissist. Bad choice of ideology for a narcissist, as intelligent design is one of the most mocked and least respectable "intellectual" positions to hold.
James treated this like a sermon and not like a debate.
My parents pastor went on like this for hours.
“He was reading from a script!” Yeah that’s called preparation for a debate; which you opened saying you weren’t good at. Easy to be a
I love him saying this after fumbling his first slide because he couldn't see his own script.
The suspense is killing me.
He prepared for the debate, which proves that he is clueless (*writes clueless on the chalkboard and then screams incoherently for 30 minutes, and then proceeds to lie about everything*)
"Scientific article titles are just clickbait" is some next level cope
I don’t understand how “reading a script” would undermine everything you state. That’s just absurd.
"I am not a skilled debater,"
No, James. You're not a skilled communicator at all.
Tour said he treats his opponents like he treats his students... then proceeded to yell, interrupt and scream at Dave.
I'm surprised anyone would take his class voluntarily.
This
If he treats his students like this the university would be flooded with complaints.
To be honest I think he probably meant students in close association working in his lab etc, not general lecture students. But, toxic PI mentors are a problem in academia that doesn't get enough attn.
James Tour looks completely unhinged. What a horrible debate partner. It's not easy staying calm and focused when someone is screaming at you. Especially in front of a hostile audience. It's almost like the goal was to bully you into quitting or something.
Itmprobably was….
Even if it didn't begin with that intention, that is what it became. Tour is an infant 😂
Fortunately Dave is a badass.
@@Hungary_0987 He evidently just failed at it, too.
It's also incredibly rude, childish and unprofessional. I usually duck out on watching debates and panels when someone loses control like that.
I'd like to think that a lecturer and podcast host would have developed the skills to remain composed, but here we are.
You're CLUELESS Dave, CLUELESS! That's why I'm going to morph into a pigeon and flip the chessboard!
" Playing chess against a pigeon "... a cult leader
I just LOVE how you took James's threats of "debunking" as a dare and started inviting _even more_ scientists to your videos. Brilliant and savage, what a madlad 👏
I just hope the scientists were informed of James’ “threat” earlier. I doubt they’re scared of James in any way, but it’s often wise to avoid this sort of drama when you’re a postdoc looking for a faculty position, even when you’re in the right.
@@randomblueguy True. Though it seems to me that, at least for now, ignoring James works perfectly well for people. But time will tell.
Anyone thinking Tour won this debate is absolutely lost...
One could say they are "clueless"
CLUELESS!!!
@@earth1710 😮
@@earth1710 🤭
@@earth1710guys we found the apologist
Professor Dave: makes a point
Tour: counterpoint, disproving himself while shouting
Dave: well, yes, exactly... but in a normal voice
Thanks, Professor Dave. Any rational unbiased person would have declared you the victor in this circus.
I learned a lot about science from your videos and I only wish I had you as a science educator in school.
Btw, phenomenal book “Is This Wi-Fi Organic?”
Tour's whole show of "fearing" you wouldn't let him speak was such blatant pageantry to poison the well it's absurd.
If you had shouted over him at any point he'd have been like "see? I knew it!", while conversely his entire two hour tantrum of shouting over you every single time you tried to speak was "justified" and simply "assertive" to counter your "bad faith"
What an unbearable clown.
@Nicegram_Professor_Dave_Explains Reported for impersonation
I was glad to see that a decent portion of at least the people who asked questions at the end were on Dave’s side. I expected the whole crowd and the moderators to be heavily biased on Tour’s side, since he’s literally the Chemistry teacher of that University.
His idiot followers are too stupid to formulate a coherent question.
AFAIK, tour stacked the auditorium with his followers, that is why there was so many interruptions from the spectators.
Shame on the moderator for not controlling the audience.
@@Julian0101 the moderator was pointless, he didnt do anything besides attempting to correct dave and failing
@@aetheriox463 the moderator was one of yours buddies so was covering for tour where he could.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains This is a fair point.
Also, thank you for making this. Makes it so much easier to follow than the actual debate.
I love that, by the end, the crowd was cheering at points for MR FARIIINAAA
Every nature documentary: "Water is essential to life."
James Turd: "Origin of life in water?! Preposterous!"
James turd: "Dave can't write out the solution to this very specific reaction that I came up with off the top of his head, therefore the entire scientific community is clueless."
Not really sure why Tour says hydrolysis can't happen in water. The concentration of water in the medium does not affect evert single chemical reaction, and is certainly not the sole factor in cases where it does.
He is complaining about the kinetics of the reaction. Reactions progress until the equilibrium concentrations of the different species are reached. In a condensation reaction, water is produced. James is complaining that it makes the forward reaction unfavorable. This is a stupid argument- if delta G is negative, the reaction is spontaneous regardless of kinetics. AP chemistry students know this.
Regardless even of that, if these reactions are performed on a catalytic surface the reaction can be made favorable and the products can be protected from degradation. James is CLUELESS, UTTERLY CLUELESS.
You eliminate water from the k eq equation anyway.
32:50 is the most obvious example of James’ dishonesty. You start to show the research he’s asking for and he literally screamed your name over you and started yelling go go go! and pointing to the chalk board to shut you down and distract the audience. How anyone could see that and not be immediately disgusted with him is amazing.
I think he was saying, "no", not "go".
@@ratamacue0320 he was yelling at him to write the reactions down. Go makes more sense but who knows? He’s unhinged.
@@thepapschmearmd I just rewatched at your timestamp. I think I was mistaken, but I'm not entirely sure.
YES!!!! EXACTLY RIGHT!!!!
The fact that Dave was literally asking him what he wanted him to do but James just kept screaming like a chimpanzee
Great tactic, when you know you’re wrong and totally outclassed, start screaming.
Hey I just wanted to say I haven’t watched many of your videos, but my dad was the guy who asked the question about Tour not submitting for peer review. I’m so happy I got to see him here and that you liked his question! Thank you for continuing to educate
It's a shame we live in a world where anyone denies reality as hard as James. Even more shameful that people blindly side with someone like that. A yet further shame that enough people take it seriously that even dignifying that crap with a debate is necessary.
This is increasingly a problem in America, where people will blindly follow a leader with a god complex.
@@angusyang5917 yes, the number of delusional extremists is increasing, but thankfully the number of people who know about those extremists is increasing faster. at least in some places
The loudest monkey "wins", just like in prehistoric times.
I will say this, and it goes for every side in every debate ever: I hate it when the audience claps and cheers. It rewards this idea that debates should be about 'gotchas' and the like. Sit there, be quiet, and listen.
exactly, as this was a entertainment show
@@erneststyczen7071 Because it is, you can lose a debate, it won't make you wrong. This is about presenting your ideas and arguments. Science is not that far from politics. You win in the booth, not directly in debates. Here you win in publications, not on stages.
Debates are important, helps you think things through, but that's it.
@@AquaCoalaNest yes i know it is but it shouldnt be. facts about reality shouldnt be determined by someone's performance, because they arent. its the same as creationists' rejection of evolution. no matter how brilliant they appear to be when speaking (like kent hovind even) it does not mean that evolution is not currently happening just as they speak that its impossible because genesis
@@AquaCoalaNestI disagree, Science is absolutely nothing like Politics. It's us stupid humans who make it political.
@@AquaCoalaNest also disagree, politics is about communication and leadership of the people, so there are no absolute truths and the performance of the person's presentation generates an impact
science should not be like this, it speaks badly of the audience that the impact of the presentation has the same importance as its content, when the focus of attention should never be the people presenting but the facts and logic scientific that is in the content
I for one vote to refer to Professor Dave as "The Tourmniator" from now on ^^ that debate was a pretty brutal assassination. 😄
That’s a good one!
Cheeky! 👍
I apologize for the rash comment I put in the related debate video. I foolishly made the mistake of judging your attitude too quickly without first getting to know your reasons better. I hope you can accept my apologies. I have removed the inappropriate comment, and I subscribed to your channel do get deeper into this topic.
Apology accepted!
Oh and I have an entire playlist debunking James that will be very revealing if you watch in order, and you will also learn a lot about this topic.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains im pumped to check this out
Hey Dave, just wanted to give a massive thanks for this wonderful review. It's a shame that even the moderator seemed so heavily biased and didn't jump in to correct any one of the many inaccuracies on Tour's part. It must be so infuriating having to deal with every one of these pricks on a constant basis. Cheers!
Tour and the moderator were as authentic as the moderator's ghastly hairpiece !
That Moderator was so biased. He only corrected you (incorrectly), he tells you off for "let's try to have a dialogue instead of people shouting at each other" uhhhhh.... where was he during any of James' unhinged screaming????????
He was beneath Tour, blowing smoke up his ass.
I bet my dinner that the DI bought that man's support.