I found about dr tour studying nanotechnology as an undergrad. His writings on faith shook me then and starting bearing fruit over time. ThAnks dr tour
@@thakurv1 His perspective on the supernatural is clearly articulated in an article called: ; Layman’s Reflections on Evolution and Creation. An Insider’s View of the Academy I quote: “Based upon my faith in the biblical text, I do believe (yes, faith and belief go beyond scientific evidence for this scientist) that God created the heavens and the earth and all that dwell therein, including a man named Adam and a woman named Eve.” - James Tour In other words, Tour does not give a toss about science, whenever it is in odds with his Jesus delusion. He is a liar for Jesus with no scientific integrity.
he is so charming! I learnt and laughed, such a great combination. Man we are truely blessed to live in the 21st century, where such wonderful teachers are so accessible.
Please Dr tour there's any way to open beta radiation in Fukushima see if you could organize a way to use the graphene in the carbon nanotubes Tilton Nuku to help the nuclear disaster at Fukushima before our entire Pacific Ocean is decimated
Mr. Tour, thank you so much for your obedience, diligence, intelligence, and your willingness to share all your work, with people outside the walls of academia. I never finished college, and never took a chemistry class, and I could listen to you speak all day. Sometimes I do listen to you all day. You brought me to Jesus Christ, and I can’t thank you enough for doing the work you do, and sharing it with us all 🙏
May I add to this praise, Dr. Tour, your humility - not just in your public speaking but your appeal to the academy. By this I mean your chemistry GENIUS in my opinion entitles you to WAY MORE fire-n-brimstone authoritative positioning, and you could SMOKE the academy as a whole with your criticisms - yet you come to them simply asking for proof and the opportunity to learn from them, should they have valid counsel to offer. In doing this, you seem to be being met with crickets chirping, yet still you stay your just wrath. When Jesus told us the meek will inherit the Earth, you put the example to that, sir. While I'm learning about the chemical impossibilities from you, your in-practice lesson of humility is the lesson I treasure the most. I pray to Jesus to learn from your example, and that He kill my pride.
Tour is talented and inspiring to those who don't understand the science well enough to know he's BSing them and want to believe in supernatural magic. He also misrepresents the science and quote-mines scientists out of context to promote unscientific ideas about the supernatural. It's hypocritical and dishonest and exactly what his audience wants him to do for them.
@@ronaldo101000 : At one time it wasn't illogical for humans to assume the forces around them operated like themselves because that was the only context they knew. The gods were elevated extensions of the family. They thought, had feelings, made rules, and passed judgement like parents. As science has provided better, testable explanations for the world we see, the defense of the supernatural has retreated to an invisible being existing before time... and beyond scrutiny. We can't learn anything from that or about that. We can continue to learn about the natural processes for which we have some actual evidence.
@@lrvogt1257 yeah your guys said a cell was just gunk and the universe was infinite WRONG. Knock God all you want bro. I'm just telling you if you think we all got here by evolution I will never buy it. I've always wandered how long would it take for some sticks in the woods to spell my name perfectly? Say LR VOGT. If took and threw sticks randomly into a pile how long would it take for those sticks get blown around moved etc until it spelled your name? That's nothing compared to dna
@@ronaldo101000 : What the hell is "your guys?" Based on your description, you have a profound misunderstanding of the process. Better to learn the subject first to argue from a position of knowledge than against extremely unscientific arguments no one is making.
I need to invest in this research and of course my faith in God. I dont have much money and so will have to start of with much Bible reading and prayer. Blessing to you all and thanks Doc.
@@user-dj5ce7cc2w The Bible/Torah/Koran was not handed to mankind by god, nor was it dictated to human stenographers by any gods. It has nothing to do with gods. In actuality, the Bible was VOTED to be the word of god by a group of men during the 4th century; and the Koran was just the demented dogma of a selfish and petty despot....
You find another brand and you know there are two watchmakers. The problem remains that watches are not alive, do not reproduce, and are not part of natural selection. This makes the argument wholly irrelevant to the issue and a failed attempt to con the gullible.
@@braggsean1026 : Are you still pressing the watchmaker argument? It doesn't work. Living things are not inanimate manufactured objects. czcams.com/video/PHmjHMbkOUM/video.html
Wow. It just doesn't get any better than that. After Jesus, this man is my favorite Jew in the world. My favorite human being!! Awesome. I sure would love to meet him.
And he blatantly misrepresents the scientists he criticizes to promote supernatural ideas for which he can provide nothing to show how they might effect the real world.
@@lrvogt1257 he does not criticize other scientists. Dr. Tour criticizes their origin of life ideas while simultaneously loving his fellow scientists. He prays for them and their salvation.
@@EdmundTrujillo : Oh yes he does. He tells people they aren't being truthful and that is a lie. I'm sure his smug sense of superiority comforts him as he prays for them.
@@eggendorfer156 : Facts are things which have been observed, quantified, tested, and verified. The supernatural is devoid of facts.There are only beliefs which can be anything you like.
@@eggendorfer156 : That's true but things that are completely unknowable are not reliable substitutes for scientificaly verifiable information. Regards.
Also a liar with no scientific integrety. As soon as science contradicts his superstition about Jesus, he tosses it out the window. Tour is a creationist clown, the smartest of the entire ilk but a still clown.
@@derhafi Come on Rob, the only liars without any scientific integrity are the evolutionists whose facts get exposed as frauds yet continue to use them in textbooks and lectures. Any theory that has to use lies, even lies that were exposed as hoaxes, cannot be true. It is actually embarrassing if you think about it. Drawing fictitious art depicting all kinds of animal and human embryos as having similar features and gill slits. LOL, that was Haekel. Getting sued by his own University. That was exposed as fraud in 1869 YET they are still being taught in school textbooks today, even in University to innocent students unaware, including you l am sure. All those "MANS" that were discovered throughout history, causing their discoverers to get wealthy or receive continuing Grant's, totally BOGUS, ALL OF 'EM. Piltdown, Java, etc. A pigs tooth here. A half orangutan cranium glued to whatever was thrust on the world, and millions of people were taught that was true. That is so fraudulent !! Lucy is hoax dude, or are you gonna defend bones found mile's apart as honest science, especially when the guy's grant was running out in a couple of weeks. Follow the money. All hoaxes, all lies, that is your evolution. Stop with the hate... If you have questions and concerns with and about God, do not stay outside the boat, swimming in place, perishing, shaking your fist at God...NO ! Don't do that ! Come on board, make your peace, and ask Him every vital question you want. The truth isn't afraid of being exposed because it is the truth. Come aboard Rob, Jesus Loves you very much, stop denying Him, it is only harming you. Have a good day.. No need for me to respond further, I have said all l needed to. Ultimately you will be held to account for your decision accepting or denying Jesus. Nuff said !
@@jbjoeychic "the only liars without any scientific integrity are the evolutionists whose facts get exposed as frauds yet continue to use them in textbooks and lectures." BOLD MOVE, yes, BOLD MOVE: DENYING Evolution during a worldwide pandemic that has killed 4.2 MILLION PEOPLE WORLDWIDE, due to the MUTATION OF A CORONAVIRUS INTO A NEW AND MORE LETHAL FORM exactly as explained under the Theory of Evolution! You USED to be able to POO POO away the Fossil evidence (despite any REAL research into them PROVES THEY *also* support common ancestry, HOWEVER, the "armchair debate game is over now" with GENETICS. FUN FACT: Genetics: a Science that didn't even exist in Darwin's time! Yet it explains clearly the HOW of Evolutionary Theory. The evidence for the Theory of Evolution AND common ancestry is SO INCONTROVERTIBLE, it moved a DEVOUT EVANGELICAL like Francis Collins to say: "As someone who's had the privilege of leading the human genome project, I've had the opportunity to study our own DNA instruction book at a level of detail that was never really possible before. It's also now been possible to compare our DNA with that of many other species. The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming. I would not necessarily wish that to be so, as a Bible-believing Christian. But it is so. It does not serve faith well to try to deny that." Sequencing the genome of living things makes it OBVIOUS that they evolved one from another, just as the tree of life showed you in school. And ANYONE can go study Genetics and see this for them self. Evolution and the Theory of Evolution is today the CORNERSTONE of medical science. 98% of scientists worldwide accept the Theory of Evolution, which means TENS OF THOUSANDS of scientists. Many THOUSANDS of which work in a field DIRECTLY PROVIDING EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT of the Theory of Evolution. Today, we know more about how Evolution works, than how Gravity works. So time to get past your BIBLICAL BIAS, and stop being an embarrassment to the human race.
Dr. George Wald wrote: “Time is in fact the hero of the plot. …Given so much time, the ‘impossible’ becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs the miracles.” This is a great faith statement, not in any way scientific. Dr. James Tour say: “People will often say to me, Oh, if you wait long enough, it’ll form. No, time is your enemy in organic chemistry!” This is in full accord with the second law of thermodynamics. To my mind this is unquestionably a scientific statement. To this I would add the result of the RATE efforts: “Thousands, Not Billions.”
Great perspective, Franjo! If I could add to that, even if we accept the Big Bang 13+ "billion years ago" that's only around 10^16 seconds, yet to have something like RNA/DNA to "accidentally" fall in place (especially when evolution requires it happen out on a primordial Earth, say under a rock somewhere), for just ONE nucleotide base (let alone a codon - 3x nuc. bases) to accidentally happen is in the area of 1 / 10^79! And it HAS to be accidental, otherwise there's a Designer and Atheism is thereby killed. So to buttress your point, even if Dr. Wald was right (which you demonstrated he isn't) 10^16 seconds is WAY SHORT of enough time for any statistical possibility of the Evolution model to happen, be that Darwinian OR Neutral Drift theory. The latter is defeated by the estimated limit of only 10^46 organisms living and dying since their "big bang" - again these being full code-set DNA machinations, which is in itself the cart before the horse when it comes to just that ONE "accidental" base nucleotide (1 / 10^79). The Human DNA has over 3 billion base nucleotides so that would take 3 x 10^9 TIMES (single nucleotide improbability), like flipping a dime and having it land on its edge so many times in a row.
@@Stormvetprime01 Please share the mathematics that you used to come up with that nonsense. What the hell even is an accidental base nucleotide. Does a rock rolling down a hill fit your definition of accidental. Does DNA forming naturally on an asteroid conform to your definition of accidental. And IF you had the slightest clue as to what you are spewing you would have already realized that origin of life researchers don't claim that a 3 billion unit nucleic acid formed by accident- creationists are the only ones that make that claim. Science knows better. It was formed by the natural process of natural selection. Religionists just like to misrepresent actual science because they have to. But I truly await the mathematics that you used to come up with your 'probabilities'.
@@Stormvetprime01 Will, I have been waiting patiently for months now for you to show the mathematics of the total nonsense that you spewed. Are you having a bit of difficulty with providing evidence of your claim or did you just realize like so many are doing these days that you were lied to and are now in recovery treatment from your cult?
I praise the Lord for his life. I saw him kneeling before the Yahweh in Pune in India. He is very humble. I saw two evangelists in turn translating his spiritual messages. I am studying his subject ORIGIN OF LIFE from 1980. I knew Dr.Duane T Gish , I .C.R..personally. He contributed lot of information to me. When I had some doubts on ORIGIN OF LIFE I used to write to him. He immediately answers my questions. Now he is with the Lord. We can now enrich our knowledge on O.O.L. Both of them are very helpful and humble. We need to introduce them to many people around the world. Let us pray for br James Tour.One membership member of Bhakth Singh Assembly introduced Lord Jesus'Christ. His wife I from Pakistan. E
We need more people like Dr Tour in our universities and in places of higher learning . Let’s pray that God may raise a generation. Habakkuk 2:14 will be fulfilled in the coming years
Thank you somuch for sharing your experience with the Lord Jesus Christ, to the whole world that still doesn't know Him yet who is the savior of every one who believe
@@maxredman5628 No, there is nothing that would indicate such nonsese. There is not one scientfic publication out there which claims that absolutly nothing created everything. Not one. An easy mistake to make for someone like you who gets his version of science from fundamental christians. What's it like to know nothing about the issue you attemt to criticise? That should bother you!
@@derhafi there may not be a "scientfic publication", but hawking, krauss, dawkins, et al... they are writing books and marketing the philosophy of 'nothing'... the one that you call "nonsese"...
@@maxredman5628 "there may not be a "scientfic publication"" There IS not, and scientific papers submitted to the peer-review process is where claims are formulated...nowhere else does it matter. That is btw the reason Tour does not not publish his rambelings in credible scientific journals...he got nothing and he knows that. That's why he does the rounds in fundamentalist church groups, right wing talk radio, publish in church magazines and show up on and jesus-tv shows intead. I'm really sorry that you missed basically all of the subject you attemt to criticise...but no, nobody claims such nonsese. Would you have read but one of those books, you'd know that nobody claimd that anything came from absolutrly nothing...Despite his catchy book title, Krauss spends literally the enirety of "a universe from nothing", which is not a scientific publication, explaining that absolutely nothing does not exist..there is no zero energy state anywhere. Layman's "nothing" has nothinn in common with the "nothing" phsicists refere to. You are a victim of your biased, cherry picking, quote mining sources. How about you get your science from scientists? Anyone who is actually working in the field in question and is not affiliated with the ill-named Discovery institute where they do no research at all, none, and of which one of its founders Howard F. Ahmanson, Jr. openly wants to replace democracy with a fundamentalist theocracy. THey are the only ones "marketing the philosophy of 'nothing'" whilst believing A divine being with supernatural powers, “God”, with no origin by himself (special pleading fallacy) and no demonstrable correation with reality, turns nothing into something. I agree, it is foolish nonsense! Believers seem to have no problem with that.
@@garywalker447 1.2) To Quote the Evolutionists. 'in the beginning there was nothing, no time, no space, no matter, Not even an Atom absolutely completely Nothing, Just a Dark Black Void, a magic dot appeared via a quantum fluctuation that no body has ever seen or will ever see for all time into infinity, unless they believe in Fantasy imagined fairytales from Fools like Lawrence Krauss (No satisfactory explanation on how or why the magic dot Appeared) it was a trillion times smaller than an atom, incredibly hot, incredibly dense (just like an evolutionist) spinning very very very fast, Space folding in on itself, then for no apparent reason in a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second it started Expanding/Exploded (it would have had to expand at the rate of expanding to the size of our solar system every 20 millionth of a second (Something like that) for the big bang to make any sense at all for the size of the known universe which is 93 billion light years wide reducing in speed as time went on) and it kept expanding after 3 minutes it expanded to the size of 100 thousand light years and kept expanding until it got as big as it currently is, creating all the Time Space and Matter we see in the known universe today, this inflatton according to evolutionists expanded billions of times faster than the speed of light. It's funny that evolutionists can invoke faster than the speed of light speeds when it suits them, but when creationists suggest the speed of light was not always constant (Starlight travel times) they laugh and ridicule us light has been. Measured to be slowing down btw, anyway back to it, they believe nothing created everything and that nothing is not really nothing that its something, that everything is not really everything that its actually nothing, I have seen Krauss explain how all the matter in the universe is half positive and half negative, and because of the 50% Positive energy and 50% Negative energy that these to things added together actually gets you a big fat 0 yes Zero, they actually believe everything equates to nothing and that Nothing equals everything,, I am Thinking a padded Cell is exactly the equation that they need. Also some Evolutionists try to get around the appearance of fine tuning and design by saying Aliens must have seeded us but Aliens couldn't have seeded us because somebody would have had to have seeded them so on and so on, that's a circular argument that will never end or can never work, this means there is only 2 options An All Powerful Holy Spirit Being that Spoke life into existence as we have only ever observed life creating life or Purely random chance via purely naturalistic means from chemicals washed out of rocks all brought into existence via a quantum fluctuation popping an infinitesimally small singularity into existence. They know the Universe had to have had a beginning, they know it's all going to burn out and become cold dead and dark one day, even if they had evidence of new Stars/Suns Forming which they don't but if they did, there is only a finite amount of Gas. (Energy). in the universe, they know 100% certain that it has to run out, Therefore they can't get around the fact that it had to have had a BEGINNING at some point, Somewhere somehow, That is why they have to think up fantastic wild theories and then use thousands of hypotheses to prop up the main central Theory As evolution is supposed to be the answer to and for everything. Please explain Atheist evolutionists Exactly how Nothing created everything, I will be sitting on the edge of my Seat with Baited Breath waiting for Zatt Explanation, LOL!!! Teach people they are nothing but Animals, then don't be surprised when they Act Like Animals. It takes Far more faith to believe Nothing created everything and us being nothing more than a cosmic accident that has no meaning, than it does to believe an all powerful Creator (The Lord Jesus Christ) Spoke everything into Existence from Nothing, as science has never observed non life creating life, the only thing science has observed is that it takes life to create life. they don't have a clue, they have many very weak theories and hypotheses but no scientific Facts to back them up, we should not give the big bang credibility by calling it a scientific Theory, because a scientific theory if it can not be tested and observed then reproduced, it has to be thrown away, then get a new theory to try and test it, that is what science is The Big Bang/Expansion is unscientific nonsense being portrayed as factual science, evolution is a faith based Religion more like a violent death cult definitely not Science, Pseudoscience yes. anything that can never be tested or observed and reproduced for all time, is not science, it is a hypothesis, basically a fantasy story a wish list of the way they want things to be, we are teaching children fantasy stories as though they're facts, that is wrong! no surgeon ever went to a book of evolutionary origins to learn what incisions to make and where to make them to perform an operation on a patient, no that surgeon will consult a book of Real Science about anatomy and surgical procedures before an operation, we should be teaching about real science that has real benefits in the real world, not fantasy stories of evolution that have zero basis in science. Love God Love your Family Love your Fellow man and then Last but not least Love your Country. Here is Steven Hawking Embarrassing himself claiming everything came from Nothing and how Nothing governs everything we do, Steven Hawking's unless he Believed on the Lord Jesus Christ and his Gospel, is in Hell and begging God for another chance Which he will not get because of all the minds he demented with his satanic lies, Hawking's now knows Heaven Hell and God exist, but he can't tell anybody about it, as the dead can't have any contact with people only demons Satan Angels and God Almighty can interact with people, and satan is going to be sure most people never see the supernatural with their own eyes, because that would be evidence, that only leaves God himself, I pray he opens people's eyes that they haven't caused him to withdraw from them to much, if they're involved in Sodomy they most probably will have caused God to withdraw from them, in that case they will most probably go their hole lives without ever getting a whisper of the supernatural then they will die and Go to Hell then to the lake of fire For eternity, where the smoke of their torment will rise up for ever and ever. Stephen Hawking M theory makes God unnecessary original quote czcams.com/video/nb7LCau_Z_Y/video.html Something of Nothing | Curiosity czcams.com/video/jcrRyK4uO8g/video.html A ridiculous curiosity, that is certain. SOMETHING FROM NOTHING ? [OFFICIAL] Richard Dawkins & Lawrence Krauss [HD] 02-04-12 czcams.com/video/YUe0_4rdj0U/video.html Hawking's admitting no scientist knows how life started on this Earth, and rambling on about nothing creating everything, Steven Hawking's talking exclusively. Questioning the universe | Stephen Hawking czcams.com/video/xjBIsp8mS-c/video.html The big bang fairytale Fantasy Story told by Irrational Geographic: Before Time and Space | National Geographic czcams.com/video/nVsHjnY-o9s/video.html Do you want a really good laugh watch this, this is Lying Evolutionist Scientists droning on with the most nonsensical rubbish, anybody that can believe this, either has their piggy Snout in the Scientific funding trough or is Completely stupid or deceitful or both. What Happened before the Big Bang?[Full Documentary]HD czcams.com/video/g-MT4mIyqc0/video.html The bible says God stretches out the universe. Isaiah 42:5 “Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:” King James Version (KJV) King James Bible Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: Of course when the people discovered the universe is stretching out, WHICH CONFIRMS THE BIBLE, what do the Wile E Coyote Super Geniuses do, they say We know God doesn't exist so let's concoct a Fairytale story about how a magic dot popped into existence via a quantum fluctuation and then expanded billions of times the speed of light for the Big Bang to make any sense, then would obviously slow down with time. Hmmm Yeah that'll do it LOL!! Remember this you can't get to the evolution of the first creatures that appeared on Earth without a beginning to the universe, so to assert the beginning doesn't matter and that how the first single celled organism appeared doesn't matter that the only thing that matters is how evolution progressed after that is absolutely ridiculous and mind numbingly Stupid, But I get that from evolutionists regularly. Hawking's explains how nothing Created Everything LOL!, anyone that believes this is insane. czcams.com/video/5W-3M_2nXFY/video.html James Tour: The Mystery of the Origin of Life czcams.com/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/video.html
@@ConstitutionalConservation You started off with a strawman argument against Big Bang Cosmology. Strawmaning is lying and I have NO respect for liars.
Common descend is from our origin ,but it reveals to me it’s simple explanation is that we are human and God says we human are created according to “ His “ Image(Gods Image).So we are Uniquely Created.We have the Mind of Christ.
“… Every one who is seriously engaged in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that the laws of nature manifest the existence of a spirit vastly superior to that of men, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble.” Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), founder of modern physics (Theory of Relativity inter alia) and 1921 Nobel prize winner
🦧 Thank you sir! I'm already a Christian and I thought your video would give me fodder to use when people doubt or persecute Jesus. I thought id be able to remember any tips or quips on my favorite subject! Hah! What a joke! Remember? 🤣 Repeat? 🤣 Understanding and teaching are very different things! May God bless you and yours! Thank you for your time!
A question on the immune system "evolving" - when I think of evolution, I picture RANDOM (in other words, mindless thus pointless) mutations which, in rare cases, supposedly results in a positive adaptation. If I understand Neutral Drift theory then, these pile up over generations until a new capability is expressed. So one's immune system can't wait for that process, because not "fixing" the invading malady probably means individual death, from which a future generation is no longer possible. So it seems the immune system DOESN'T evolve, if the above is the right definition, but seems to, in a yet-to-be understood mechanism, programmatically REACT to an invading "problem?" driven by a PURPOSE (healing/repair/immunity) of which any real use of the word "evolution" must be devoid of, otherwise one must admit to a transcendent, outside intelligence NOT FOUND in random mutation. Put another way, the immune system seems to have a job. Random Alka-Seltzer fizz of molecules follow the laws of thermodynamics which point to low energy and high entropy. Immunity reactions violate that law, as it points to low entropy and maintenance of high energy.
Also how do you explain Sentinelese people dying within a day or so after making contact with the outside world? Why doesn't God give them the same protection as us?
@@joeschmoe236 I think the posit that amino acids and so forth "accidentally" formed strands so as to create functional, correctly-folded proteins and ultimately life is the "zapped into existence" argument, since the odds against have now been proven staggeringly remote, even in all the seconds which would have passed if one would cede to the 'big bang' timescales. I can't grasp how anyone can accept that DNA, the most advanced information system known, just up and programmed itself out of a tidal pool or a mud puddle in a cave.
some science, not all. as long as you have missing links and have not observed or demostrated in the lab, which is often the case, it is still errantly called science.
“The question of whether there exists a Creator and Ruler of the Universe has been answered in the affirmative by some of the highest intellects that have ever existed.” -Charles Darwin, the founder of evolutionary biology, as cited in his book Descent of Man.
Fantastic lecture. One of Dr. James Tour's best. I'm a little late to the party, but I shared this video with everyone I know. The one question I wonder about is why do the nation's school boards not also require a course about the problems with abiogenesis if they openly allow evolution to be taught? A course which calls into question the tenets of evolution is no more about religion than a course on the problems of Newtonian Mechanics. How did these people in support of evolution manage to convince the schools that anything which critiques evolution is religion in disguise?
“I wonder about is why do the nation's school boards not also require a course about the problems with abiogenesis if they openly allow evolution to be taught?“ Because those are well established, evidence based fields of science and ID/creationism is pseudoscientific nonsense. “How did these people in support of evolution manage to convince the schools that anything which critiques evolution is religion in disguise?“ That is just a fact. Take Tour for example I quote: “Based upon my faith in the biblical text, I do believe (yes, faith and belief go beyond scientific evidence for this scientist) that God created the heavens and the earth and all that dwell therein, including a man named Adam and a woman named Eve.” - James Tour Openly admitting that no matter what is discovered with the scientific method, he will ignore it in favour of his faith. Tour, as all so called ID “scientists” are trying to undermine science to promote the supernatural. Tour is one of them but he's clever enough to speak on the subjects separately (primarily to non-science, pro-ID audiences who want their beliefs rationalized) because they contradict each other. It's a cheap scam. He can't defend the existence of his ID or any supernatural mechanism for producing anything. Nothing whatsoever, so he is left with the attempt to tear down the science that is seeking those natural mechanisms.
@@derhafi : Your Quote: "... Because those are well established, evidence based fields of science..." That's the whole point. There is no evidence for the evolution of a cell. Evolution textbooks are entirely based on speculation, not evidence. Every textbook about evolution has the words, "This is what COULD have happened" or "This is what MIGHT have happened." That is pure speculation. I challenge you to show me a text book on cell evolution that claims, "This is exactly what happened because we have evidence." Your Quote: "...so called ID “scientists” are trying to undermine science to promote the supernatural." What is the supernatural? Where do the borders lie between the "natural" and the "supernatural?" The conventional definition of "supernatural" is something that lies outside of nature. But how do we know whether or not everything we THINK is supernatural is actually part of nature? Scientists used to say that it is impossible for a particle to be in two or three places at the same time, or impossible for one solid particle to pass through another solid particle without damaging either, or the position of a particle could be defined with precision and is absolute. Then Quantum Mechanics came along and now scientists are saying that particles actually don't really exist and the entire universe is made up only of vibrations within one of 23 different fields. The bottom line is, the old materialistic world is dead. The new thinking is the universe is not solid or as predictable as we once thought. Everything is based on probabilities and not a single scientist objects to that. What used to be called the supernatural is now recognized as part of nature and no one truly knows where that border exists.
@@bobblacka918 There is, ever heard of lipids? Apart from that, the simplest form of life is a self-replicating molecule not a cell. “Evolution textbooks are entirely based on speculation, not evidence.” Nonsense. Abiogenesis is, as are all natural sciences an evidence based enquiry. Just because you (and Tour) ignore the work done in this field does not make it disappear. Tour is just wrong on every point he raises and he knows it. “I challenge you to show me a text book on cell evolution that claims, "This is exactly what happened because we have evidence."” You are one of those people who just don’t get how science works. Science does not make claims of absolute truth. It provides the best possible explanation according to the available evidence. Science tells you how the world most likely is, based on the best unscrutinised repeatable, testable, empirical evidence, always willing to change, should better evidence be unveiled, always willing to admit where the limits of knowledge are drawn. “But how do we know whether or not everything we THINK is supernatural is actually part of nature?” If it has a demonstrable correlation with nature, it is part of it. Neutrons and x-rays are, unicorns and gods are not (until some evidence that demonstrated said correlation is presented) It is not that hard. “Scientists used to say…….then...” Changing ones position on a subject when new data comes in is the smart and rational thing to do. That is an essential part of science and it’s success. It is in no way a disadvantage of scientific knowledge to change…we call that change: Progress “Quantum Mechanics came along and now scientists are saying that particles actually don't really exist and the entire universe is made up only of vibrations within one of 23 different fields.” That is not something that Quantum Mechanics claims. But how would you know since you get your science from theologians. Otherwise you’d not quote such dribble as: “The bottom line is, the old materialistic world is dead.” “The new thinking is the universe is not solid or as predictable as we once thought “ True “Everything is based on probabilities and not a single scientist objects to that.” Also true. How does that add credibility to the existence of anything supposed supernatural?
@@derhafi : I got my science from a university degree in physics, not from the Bible. I just don't exclude anything just because it sounds too "Biblical." In my world, every hypothesis is valid until proven beyond a doubt to be false.
@@bobblacka918 So the hypothesis that a pink unicorn had a hand in the ool, is viewed by you as credible until proven wrong beyond any reasonable doubt? Seriously? Your physics degree is perhaps as fictional as all the evidence for any supernatural alternative to abiogenesis.
A statistical impossibility is defined as “a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 1/10^50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a Rational, Reasonable argument." (*The probability of finding one particular atom out of all of the atoms in the universe has been estimated to be 1/10^80.) The probability of a functional 150 amino acid protein chain forming by chance is 1/10^164. It has been calculated that the probability of DNA forming by chance is 1/10^119,000. The probability of random chance protein-protein linkages in a cell is 1/10^79,000,000,000. Based on just these three cellular components, it would be far more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the cell was not formed by undirected random natural processes. Note: Abiogenesis Hypothesis posits that undirected random natural processes, i.e. random chance formation, of molecules led to living organisms. Natural selection has no effect on individual atoms and molecules on the micro scale in a prebiotic environment. (*For reference, peptides/proteins can vary in size from 3 amino acid chains to 34,000 amino acid chains. Some scientists consider 300-400 amino acid protein chains to be the average size. There are 42,000,000 protein molecules in just one (1) simple cell, each protein requiring precise assembly. There are approx. 30,000,000,000,000 cells in the human body.) A "Miracle" is considered to be an event with a probability of occurrence of 1/10^6. Abiogenesis, RNA World Hypothesis, and Multiverse all far, far, far exceed any "Miracle". Yet, these extremely irrational and unreasonable hypotheses are what many of the world’s top scientists ‘must’ believe in because of a prior commitment to a purely arbitrary, subjective, materialistic ideology. Every idea, number, concept, thought, theory, mathematical equation, abstraction, qualia, etc. existing within and expressed by anyone is "Immaterial" or "Non-material". The very idea or concept of "Materialism" is an immaterial entity and by it's own definition does not exist. Modern science seems to be stuck in archaic subjective ideologies that have inadequately attempted to define the "nature of reality" or the "reality of nature" for millenia. A Paradigm Shift in ‘Science’ is needed for humanity to advance. A major part of this Science Paradigm Shift would be the formal acknowledgment by the scientific community of the existence of "Immaterial" or "Non-material" entities as verified and confirmed by discoveries in Quantum Physics.
James Tour is confident and brilliant presenter, who knows his scientific stuff. John Lennox think he deserves Nobel Prize, I love listening to Him .God bless for being the defender of the Faith
@@garywalker447 how can you call it pseudoscience if someone call for the establishment to come and debate with him on the public forum. Pseudo are those who refused to debate in public because of fear of being exposed. Bring it on
@@jessejones3423 pseu·do·sci·ence /ˌso͞odōˈsīəns/ noun a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly or fraudulently regarded as being based on scientific method. Creation Science and Intelligent Design invoke a Designer/God that is not established by testable evidence therefore they fail the first test of the Scientific Method and are therefore pseudoscience.
@@garywalker447 hì you are absolutely wrong for describing any scientists who believe in God or creation as a pseudoscience. Physics Paul Davies says that the right scientific attitude is essentially theological " science can proceed only if the scientists adopts an essentially theological worldview " He point out that even the most atheistic scientists accepts as a law -like order in nature that is at least in part comprehensible to us. Albert Einstein famously said ; Science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspirations towards truth and understanding, This source of feeling, however spring from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational that is, comprehensible to reason He said I cannot conceive a genuine man of science without that profound faith on - quote the situation may be expressed by an image; Science without religion is lame and Religion without science is blind Einstein evidently did not suffer from Dawkins' delusion that all faith are blind. I think that you need to do more research to understand science,religion/God, and I hope the figures below helps you. THE WINNERS OF THE NOBEL PRIZE BY PERCENTAGE :CHRISTIANS PEACE 78.3% CHEMISTRY 72.5% PHYSICS 65.3% MEDICINE 62% ECONOMICS 54% LITERATURE 49.5% ATHEISTS, AGNOSTIC AND FREE THINKERS WINNERS PEACE PEACE 3.6% CHEMISTRY 7.1% PHYSICS 4.7% MEDICINE 8.9% LITERATURE 35% It is not that, if you believes in God or creation then you are not a GOOD SCIENTIST MANY THANKS
“People take it for granted that the physical world is both ordered and intelligible. The underlying order in nature-the laws of physics-are simply accepted as given, as brute facts. Nobody asks where they came from; at least they do not do so in polite company. However, even the most atheistic scientist accepts as an act of faith that the universe is not absurd, that there is a rational basis to physical existence manifested as law-like order in nature that is at least partly comprehensible to us. So science can proceed only if the scientist adopts an essentially theological worldview.” -Physicist Paul Davies, the winner of the 2001 Kelvin Medal issued by the Institute of Physics and the winner of the 2002 Faraday Prize issued by the Royal Society (amongst other awards), as cited from his acceptance address of the 1995 Templeton Prize. (Davies adheres to no standard religious creed.)
“All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.” Max Plank (the Father of Quantum Physics) ... It is curious how Max Plank's conclusions were so revolutionary in the field of science / physics (i.e. the immaterial (non-material) reality of nature and "the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind" as the ultimate force behind the fabric of reality). Yet, when microbiologists. biologists, geneticists, biochemists, other scientists, etc. come to the same conclusion (i.e. Intelligence/consciousness/mind is an integral and fundamental force behind the initial introduction and subsequent propagation of biological systems), they are rebuffed as being "unscientific".
Do you believe ALL 10 Comments are applicable for today? God Almighty Sanctified the 7t day long b4 there was sin in the world 🗺 Why remove just one Commandment? Saturday is still for us! We still keep the SABBATH holy 🌅 to 🌇!!!
“It may seem bizarre, but in my opinion science offers a surer path to God than religion.” - (Secular) Physicist Paul Davies, the winner of the 2001 Kelvin Medal issued by the Institute of Physics and the winner of the 2002 Faraday Prize issued by the Royal Society (amongst other awards), as cited in his book God and the New Physics. Davies adheres to no standard religious creed.
"It is only at the semantic level that we really have meaningful information; thus, we may establish the following theorem: Theorem 14: Any entity, to be accepted as information, must entail semantics; it must be meaningful. Semantics is an essential aspect of information because the meaning is the only invariant property. The statistical and syntactical properties can be altered appreciably when information is represented in another language (e.g., translated into Chinese), but the meaning does not change. Meanings always represent mental concepts; therefore, we have: Theorem 15: When its progress along the chain of transmission events is traced backward, every piece of information leads to a mental source, the mind of the sender." Dr. Werner Gitt (Former Head of the Department of Information Technology at Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Germany)
DNA code can be equated to a type of computer language. DNA code is more complex than regular computer language in that it is not binary (based on 0 and 1). It is quaternary (based on A T C G). And, as with every known language in existence, confirmed through scientific experiment and observation, is the product of only one thing ... mind/ consciouness /intelligence. ... "The discovery of the structure of DNA transformed biology profoundly, catalysing the sequencing of the human genome and engendering a new view of biology as an INFORMATION SCIENCE. Two features of DNA structure account for much of its remarkable impact on science: its DIGITAL nature and its complementarity, whereby one strand of the helix binds perfectly with its partner. DNA has two types of DIGITAL INFORMATION - the genes that ENCODE proteins, which are the MOLECULAR MACHINES of life, and the GENE REGULATORY NETWORKS that specify the behaviour of the genes." (Source: Nature Journal, Nature com) "Language: ALL DIGITAL communications require a formal language, which in this context consists of all the information that the sender and receiver of the digital communication must both possess, in advance, in order for the communication to be successful." (Wikipedia: Digital Data) ”The instructions in a gene that tell the cell how to make a specific protein. A, C, G, and T are the "letters" of the DNA code; they stand for the chemicals adenine (A), cytosine (C), guanine (G), and thymine (T), respectively, that make up the nucleotide bases of DNA. Each gene's code combines the four chemicals in various ways to spell out three-letter "words" that specify which amino acid is needed at every step in making a protein.” ( “Genetic Code - National Human Genome Research Institute” Genome . gov) ”Genetic code is the term we use for the way that the four bases of DNA--the A, C, G, and Ts--are strung together in a way that the cellular machinery, the ribosome, can read them and turn them into a protein. In the genetic code, each three nucleotides in a row count as a triplet and code for a single amino acid. So each sequence of three codes for an amino acid. And proteins are made up of sometimes hundreds of amino acids. So the code that would make one protein could have hundreds, sometimes even thousands, of triplets contained in it.” (Lawrence C. Brody, Ph.D., Genome dot gov) Modern scientific discoveries in Genetics (i.e. biology) have shown that functional / coded / digital Information (i.e. DNA code) is at the core of ALL Biological Systems. Without functional / coded / digital information, there is NO biology. The only known source (i.e. cause) in the universe that has been Observed in nature to be capable of producing functional / coded / digital information, such as that found even in the most primitive biological systems, is mind / consciousness / intelligence.
@@roddacanay1182 "confirmed through scientific experiment and observation, is the product of only one thing ... mind/ consciouness /intelligence. ... " You made that up.
@@roddacanay1182 "digital Information (i.e. DNA code)" DNA is not digital, as you mentioned yourself. "The only known source (i.e. cause) in the universe that has been Observed in nature to be capable of producing functional / coded / digital information, such as that found even in the most primitive biological systems, is mind / consciousness / intelligence." DNA is according to all available evidence, ALL AVAILABLE EVIDENCE natually occuring. This "mind / consciousness / intelligence" in regards to DNA is purely fictional, it's an assumtion wrapped in a fallacy, this ill-defined metaphysical substance/ entity/ force/intelligence/power/ supernatural whatever, not subject to the known laws of physics, that supposingly interacts with the fabric of our reality in ways that have thus far eluded every controlled experiment ever performed in the history of science, exists only in the mind of those who belive in it.
Premise one: Something cannot originate from nothing. Premise two: For something to originate it requires a precursor that came from nothing. Each premise makes the other false.
"Major Atheist" interesting concept. Tour tends to chicken out when the time comes. At least that's what he did when Nick Matzke took him up on his “offer” to explain Evolution to him ("all expanses payed") he first attached a condition to the meeting, he stated, quote: “It shall not be recorded or extend beyond the three of us as this is not for show but for my edification.” and when he did not get his will of disclosure he bailed out. What does that tell you? It tells me he knows a) he is spilling bs about the process of evolution and b) he knows that even the disproval of it (good luck) would not add any credibility to any God proposal. Since his entire grift is based on this false suggstuion. in regards to evolution and abiogenesis alike, he is not so keen on public debates. He prefers the "security" of a scientifically illiterate audience.
@@derhafi Einstein followed Rabbi Spinoza theology... Dr Alvin Radkowsky designer of the US Naval nuclear power plants an observant Jew. Many other top physicists not atheists. There is no proof for or against a creator.. Therefore Atheism is a theology by default. Also explain recent UFO s as legitimate as per US Navy and Pente agon... Much we don't know or may never understand. Meanwhile I keep an open mind. Shalom
@@MitzvosGolem1 "Much we don't know or may never understand." as true as this is, using this as a justification to make shit up that has no demonstrable correlation with reality, out of an urge to fill this gaps, is fallaciouse and dishonest. "There is no proof for or against a creator.. Therefore Atheism is a theology by default." That is plain nonsense. Shalom
@@derhafi tell Einstein and Hans Bethe Dr Edward Teller and many others they are foolish after you obtain a PhD in Physics. Dr Richard Feynman also stated" it's possible". I have a M.S. Degree MIT Physics... and worked for Fermilab US department of Energy on Nuclear research. No one here walks around mocking religion. Shalom
@@MitzvosGolem1 I'm not saying that a God is impossible. I'm saying that I'm not convinced that there is anything supernatural (inclusing all gods ever) due to the lack of evidence that would warrant such a belief. That is wat Atheism is. Not that it matters what Einstein thought, but you should think twice before you play this fallacious "argument from authority" card the next time: "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." - Einstein January 3 1954
Science absolutely does not make Faith obsolete, because they're designed for different things. 1 - Science is designed to find answers that can be tested / proven. 2 - Faith is designed to provide psychological comfort. A supernatural being is in charge. The universe runs according to a predetermined plan. Don't worry, you're going straight to heaven.
Thank you for sharing this informative video. God bless you. Psalm 24 KJV 1. The earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein. 2 For he hath founded it upon the seas, and established it upon the floods. 3 Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? or who shall stand in his holy place? 4 He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully. 5 He shall receive the blessing from the Lord, and righteousness from the God of his salvation. 6 This is the generation of them that seek him, that seek thy face, O Jacob. Selah. 7 Lift up your heads, O ye gates; and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in. 8 Who is this King of glory? The Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle. 9 Lift up your heads, O ye gates; even lift them up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in. 10 Who is this King of glory? The Lord of hosts, he is the King of glory. Selah. John 14:6 6. Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me........
@@ScarlettOHare1 how did Jesus DNA have only 24 chromosomes? When all other humans have 43??? One thing that can't be manufactured in a lab is blood with 24 chromosomes. czcams.com/video/ZnGAbItjr2I/video.html Jonathon Gray backs up Ron Wyatt's findings with blood test proof 24 minutes in THERE IS A SAVIOUR and it's not Donald Trump.
There's only a collision between science and faith if one lets his faith dictate how he does his science. Doc Tour is a creationist. So his bias is that abiogenesis is false and, indeed, MUST be false. Since it's false, there is no pathway for abiogenesis to work. So it's a waste of time to try to find that path. It's therefore more productive to find the holes in abiogenesis, and prove that it cannot work. Doc Tour's faith made science obsolete. I don't think Tour really knows that abiogenesis is false -- only that his faith dictates it MUST be false. Tour is smart enough to know his position is not scientific. I suspect he enjoys his "hero" status among Christian apologists -- the "brilliant" scientist who justifies their need to hang on to Biblical explanations. He has so much invested in that position now that it would be a huge betrayal for him to alter his "no way" stand on abiogenesis. Tour is a smart guy. So smart, indeed, that he can outsmart himself.
[BOOK] Critique of intelligent design: materialism versus creationism from antiquity to the present JB Foster, B Clark, R York - 2008 - rter.ga … In The Triumph of Evolution and the Failure of Creationism, Eldredge exposes the deep flaws in creationists' arguments and calls … one of our leading evolutionary theorists is careful not to dehumanize the intellectual and political adherents of "intelligent design theory." It focuses … Cited by 37 Related articles All 2 versions
Tour believes a God used his divine power to create everything out f nothing...It is , what the Bible teaches, isn’t it? chapter one: A divine being with supernatural powers, “God”, with no origin by himself (special pleading fallacy), turns nothing into something. I agree, it is foolish nonsense! Believers seem to have no problem with that.. A bit of mathematical sound and emperical based physics, aka actual reality.. and believers go ..."that's ridiculouse”
@@derhafi black holes break (time space matter) laws .it's reality has different domains(nature) that are unknown to us and limited intelligence are limited to time space and matter .still black holes are out there .
@@fransiskito9113 There is a lot we don't understand in physics: the nature of dark matter and dark energy, what happens at the Big Bang or inside a black hole, why the particles and forces have the characteristics they do? We don't know this things....so what? That does add credibility to the idea of a supernatural God. "it's reality has different domains(nature) that are unknown to us" No, there are things we don't know...that does not mean that there ia a supernatural realm with influebnce on our reality. You suggest that there is a ill-defined creator/ a metaphysical substance/ entity/ force/intelligence/power/God/ supernatural realm whatever, not subject to the known laws of physics, that supposingly interacts with the fabric of our reality in ways that have thus far eluded every controlled experiment ever performed in the history of science. This suggestion is solely based on personal incredulity.
@@derhafi just like you said there's a lot we don't understand about creation/ physics. I think It'll be hard to understand the creators nature .robbie Let's put it this way If there's creation there's a creator. We cannot create nor distroy energy. Hopefully you know this law of energy . But lets talk about things we know about like 1*GREED 2*Pride 3*Anger/ hate 4*LUST-FULL-people. 5*ENVY 6* LAZINESS 7*GLUTTONY Let's discuss the root of all the worlds problems. Broken families, teen drug-addicts .wrathful disobedient to parents, spouse affairs, cheaters,alcoholics. Greedy politicians - corruption, poverty - robbery .cartels. Careless. Cruel to everyone ,murderers. Depression. Self hate. Self inflict. Suicide. Overdose... and many more. Let me know if you support or if you're against the 7 roots of sin.
@@fransiskito9113 “I think It'll be hard to understand the creators natur” Given the available evidence that would point to a “creator” it is really no that hard…a “creator” is an unfounded assumption with no demonstrable correaltion with reality. There is not one sound argument, let alone a trace of evidence that would support such a proposal. That is a pretty well defined understanding would you not agree? “If there's creation there's a creator.“ Again..an unfounded assumption. There are things where the evidence points to a creator. Houses, cars, birdsnests..Those creators, humans, birds etc.. all have a demonstrable correaltion with reality. Then, there are naturally occurring things, due to natural processes, predictable processes that we largely understand very well, like planets, stars and snowflakes..etc. And then there are things we don’t know…this is where you fallaciously attempt to wiggle in the God you happen to believe in like a well lubricated dildo. We don’t know…does not translate to “God did it” Gods are not the default position…they are as credible as unicorns until their existence is demonstrated. „We cannot create nor distroy energy“ That is very true, yet irrelevant. Or was there an argument for your „creator“ coming? If so, you left out this part. So…a list of the 7 deadly sins...At least according to a cobbled-together anthology of disjointed documents full of contradictions and supernatural claims, composed, revised, translated, distorted and 'improved' by hundreds of anonymous authors, editors and copyists, unknown to us and mostly unknown to each other, spanning nine centuries. Again. irrelevant. Or was there an argument for your „creator“ coming? If so, you left out this part, again. Are you suggesting we solve any problems by appealing to some fiction? If so..How? Are you suggesting that those add credibility to any God claim? If so..How? Have you actually ever put together an argument before?
It takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does in creation by God, so it is their religion and thus they defend it because they are faced with the truth they don't want to admit to. I don't need evidence to believe though, as Yashua lived and died and rose again from the dead and He gave us His Spirit to comfort and to teach us the truth and do believe Adonai is teaching through this lesson to those who are led astray by their science teachers into a fairy tale of evolution.
It's irrational and illogical to demand strict rules for the natural universe only to claim it's caused by a precursor that breaks every one of those rules. It's disingenuous to claim that Something can't come from nothing so it must have been created by something that came from nothing. That gets you no closer to a beginning and the supernatural is impossible to test because there is no evidence to be tested.
@@lrvogt1257 : It's easy to test for God. Just get down on your knees in a private place and ask God for forgiveness and help in receiving his blessings and he will come into your room just like he did for Dr. James Tour. When Jesus visits you in your own bedroom it's difficult to deny he exists.
@@bobblacka918 : And yet Tour can't use the same criteria, evidence, or proof he demands for the science he doesn't understand well. Anything that interferes with his supernatural beliefs he requires rigorous proof... but not for his own beliefs. What hypocrisy. Anyone can believe whatever they choose to believe but that's no reason for me to believe it.
@@lrvogt1257 : It's not a matter of understanding, it's a matter of evidence. You can't say Compound X plus heat makes Compound Y if you can't make that reaction work in the real world. That's all Dr. Tour is saying, i.e. "Show me the evidence." If you carefully read ANY book on evolution, they make statements like, "This could have happened." They never say: "This actually happened." It's all speculation and the authors of the text books know it. At least they abide by good ethical standards and let you know they don't have proof, but still it misleads a lot of students into thinking the scientists know exactly what happened when actually they don't.
@@bobblacka918 : There is often confusion on these sites between evolution and abiogenesis which is a completely different process. 1st, ALL science is described in terms of probability. Evolution is the most robust and verified scientific theory in science based on every single related field of inquiry. Tour admits his lack of expertise yet persists in mis-leading non-scientific audiences. Tour overstates and misrepresents scientist's claims about abiogenesis. He has quote mined scientists who have called him out on it. But my point is that it's total BS to whine about the science others are doing to find out how things work and then just claim it was done by some ultimate supernatural entity that simply willed it into existence. Now THAT is wild speculation or primitive mythology at best with ZERO evidence and not even a hint of a mechanism for how that could have happened. It's hypocritical and dishonest.
Now today, 10-10-2021 graphene, while maybe an incredible leap in technology. I'm afraid that it has been abused and is not being used in the same gesture of altruism that this gentleman speaks of. Or, he is part of the deception. Thoughts anyone?
47:03 I *disagree* !!!!! Start with the *assumption that homology and taxonomy imply descent, do a bunch of math and complex analysis to characterize the homology and call it evidence. Same exact thing could develop “evidence” that 2021 vehicles have a common ancestor. Kingdom vehicle, class automobile, family box trucks, genus light-duty box trucks, species bmw class 7 box truck. You can crunch numbers on those categories all you want it won’t be evidence that particular truck evolved by unguided processes nor had a common ancestor. They were DESIGNED AND CREATED and still have common characteristics and components and clear categories. 48:59 ... No, it doesn’t. It means designers used similar tactics in similar but distinct products. The devout Christian who created our taxonomy knew homology does not imply descent, unless already assumed.
The wedge at work: How intelligent design creationism is wedging its way into the cultural and academic mainstream B Forrest - Intelligent design creationism and its critics …, 2001 - books.google.com … the scientific failure of the wedge, the CRSC is tireless in advancing the rest of its strategy-(1) establishing a beachhead in higher education;(2) influencing public opinion by a steady stream of popular publications; and (3) most insidiously, insinuating “intelligent design theory” … Cited by 59 Related articles All 2 versions
Looking through the comments, I see the atheists have taken to calling Dr. Tour names, or braying about fairy tales, but none of them have discredited his science. If life and consciousness can spring forth from non-life, we should see new life forms emerging constantly.
That is not necessarily the case. The conditions for the origin of life may be much different than the conditions billions of years later. But they may be happening on other planets right now if conditions are right. And many animals show consciousness. Tour's flaw is he can't give the same scientific rigor to his ID that he demands of natural selection.
@@lrvogt1257 yes it is necessariy the case. human DNA has 3 billion base pairs of 4 different chemicals in CODE. FORGET THE MAYBES and the ifs. Its just your desire that their not be a creator you are accountable to. You are not alone.
@@ralphgoreham3516 : First, don't assume you know my motivations. Second, I don't get the logic. You've just replaced one unknown with a more extreme unknown. The more we dig into the natural processes, the more we have learned about them. We didn't even know about the double helix when I was born. There is no reason to stop inquiring while we're learning so much. Even if there were such a creator, we'd want to know the process. We know the 4 nucleotides appear naturally even in space. We know how cells work. We just need to keep looking how they got from one to the next. If there was a supernatural instigator... where and how did it happen? We know it happened about 3.8 billion years ago.
@@lrvogt1257 We do not know life began 3..8 billion years ago. If bacteria did, why did it take 2 billion years at least to get the junp to multi celled organisms. Also prokaryotes are a quarter the mass of Eukaryotes, thus evo not possible, there are no stages. It is well known origin of life research has gone nowhere in some 50 years. But you have faith continual enquiry will bring the answers. BTW what is the definition of a nucleotide? It is apparent you dont know. It is not possible to know how our creator created some 16 million types of insects, animals, marine and land that we have some idea to study in number and, 100s of 1000s of various plant life.
@@ralphgoreham3516 : The earliest direct evidence of life on Earth are microfossils of microorganisms permineralized in 3.465-billion-year-old Australian Apex chert rocks. You're making the old. "It seems impossible, therefore god" argument. Just because the moment life began is not known yet does not mean a lot has not been learned. I know for certain were not going to learn anything about what and how anything happened from Genesis. Evolution produces the diversity of life. This we know regardless of how it began. The dictionary definition of nucleotide is quite sufficient.
@@paisleymakonen6521 "We discussed the evidence for common descent and neutral theory. Soon after, he removed the challenge from his website" -Joshua Swamidass Peaceful Science (website) Swamidass is not an atheist.
@@paisleymakonen6521 You want to know how wrong Tour exactly is and what a shameless liar he is? Here you go: czcams.com/video/SixyZ7DkSjA/video.html czcams.com/video/ghJGnMwRHCs/video.html czcams.com/video/Jf72o6HmVNk/video.html
I understand why they need to give sort of Naturalistic Explanations for this type of thing, But a point to remember is if God Can Speak more than 200 Billion Galaxies into existence from the Power of his word alone then causing a few tiny fragments of Land surface to move apart and for a few drops of water to bust through some rock flood the Earth then Go back down again into its Ringwoodite container would be a Snap for Him, People always say how did the Ark Float how did all the Animals fit on the Ark, Noah could have made the Ark out of tissue paper and God could have made it float and fit a Billion Animals on it, Obviously God needed man to take part in his own and the Animals Temporal Salvation via an Ark, also he could have simply said DIE all life and it would have just Died, But where would be the lesson in that, we wouldn't have 40 million Cubic miles of Sedimentary rock full of Trillions and Trillions of Fossils for the Atheists to reject or not then would we, I think these scientific papers amuses God Greatly I certainly enjoy them as well, but I think you find if you make it to Heaven and you ask God, God will say, No my Child I simply Willed it to happen and it was So, But I did enjoy all your Arguments for my Flood and my Great Works, to God we are nothing more than a bunch of infant's fumbling around in the Dark trying to understand things we will never understand in any profound way, We need Faith true Faith that God Can do Anything he wants he is above and Created the Natural Laws he can tweak them as he pleases when he pleases with no need for Gravity Stretching or pulling or Comets hitting the Earth it's all for an Example of his power that we may have true Faith in Him :)
@@garywalker447 Really and can you give me evidence of your God Nothing as nothing created everything, so it is your God can you give me evidence for it :) To Quote the Evolutionists. 'in the beginning there was nothing, no time, no space, no matter, Not even an Atom absolutely completely Nothing, Just a Dark Black Void, a magic dot appeared via a quantum fluctuation that no body has ever seen or will ever see for all time into infinity, unless they believe in Fantasy imagined fairytales from Fools like Lawrence Krauss (No satisfactory explanation on how or why the magic dot Appeared) it was a trillion times smaller than an atom, incredibly hot, incredibly dense (just like an evolutionist) spinning very very very fast, Space folding in on itself, then for no apparent reason in a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second it started Expanding/Exploded (it would have had to expand at the rate of expanding to the size of our solar system every 20 millionth of a second (Something like that) for the big bang to make any sense at all for the size of the known universe reducing in speed as time went on) and it kept expanding after 3 minutes it expanded to the size of 100 thousand light years and kept expanding until it got as big as it currently is creating all the Time Space and Matter we see in the known universe today, this inflatton according to evolutionists expanded billions of times faster than the speed of light. It's funny that evolutionists can invoke faster than the speed of light speeds when it suits them, but when creationists suggest the speed of light was not always constant (Starlight travel times) they laugh and ridicule us light has been. Measured to be slowing down btw, anyway back to it, they believe nothing created everything and that nothing is not really nothing that its something, that everything is not really everything that its actually nothing, I have seen Krauss explain how all the matter in the universe is half positive and half negative, and because of the 50% Positive energy and 50% Negative energy that these to things added together actually gets you a big fat 0 yes Zero, they actually believe everything equates to nothing and that Nothing equals everything,, I am Thinking a padded Cell is exactly the equation that they need. Also some Evolutionists try to get around the appearance of fine tuning and design by saying Aliens must have seeded us but Aliens couldn't have seeded us because somebody would have had to have seeded them so on and so on, that's a circular argument that will never end or can never work, this means there is only 2 options An All Powerful Holy Spirit Being that Spoke life into existence as we have only ever observed life creating life or Purely random chance via purely naturalistic means from chemicals washed out of rocks all brought into existence via a quantum fluctuation popping an infinitesimally small singularity into existence. They know the Universe had to have had a beginning, they know it's all going to burn out and become cold dead and dark one day, even if they had evidence of new Stars/Suns Forming which they don't but if they did, there is only a finite amount of Gas. (Energy). in the universe, they know 100% certain that it has to run out, Therefore they can't get around the fact that it had to have had a BEGINNING at some point, Somewhere somehow, That is why they have to think up fantastic wild theories and then use thousands of hypotheses to prop up the main central Theory As evolution is supposed to be the answer to and for everything. Please explain Atheist evolutionists Exactly how Nothing created everything, I will be sitting on the edge of my Seat with Baited Breath waiting for Zatt Explanation, LOL!!! Teach people they are nothing but Animals, then don't be surprised when they Act Like Animals. It takes Far more faith to believe Nothing created everything and us being nothing more than a cosmic accident that has no meaning, than it does to believe an all powerful Creator (The Lord Jesus Christ) Spoke everything into Existence from Nothing, as science has never observed non life creating life, the only thing science has observed is that it takes life to create life. they don't have a clue, they have many very weak theories and hypotheses but no scientific Facts to back them up, we should not give the big bang credibility by calling it a scientific Theory, because a scientific theory if it can not be tested and observed then reproduced, it has to be thrown away, then get a new theory to try and test it, that is what science is The Big Bang/Expansion is unscientific nonsense being portrayed as factual science, evolution is a faith based Religion more like a violent death cult definitely not Science, Pseudoscience yes. anything that can never be tested or observed and reproduced for all time, is not science, it is a hypothesis, basically a fantasy story a wish list of the way they want things to be, we are teaching children fantasy stories as though they're facts, that is wrong! no surgeon ever went to a book of evolutionary origins to learn what incisions to make and where to make them to perform an operation on a patient, no that surgeon will consult a book of Real Science about anatomy and surgical procedures before an operation, we should be teaching about real science that has real benefits in the real world, not fantasy stories of evolution that have zero basis in science. Love God Love your Family Love your Fellow man and then Last but not least Love your Country. Here is Steven Hawking Embarrassing himself claiming everything came from Nothing and how Nothing governs everything we do, Steven Hawking's unless he Believed on the Lord Jesus Christ and his Gospel, is in Hell and begging God for another chance Which he will not get because of all the minds he demented with his satanic lies, Hawking's now knows Heaven Hell and God exist, but he can't tell anybody about it, as the dead can't have any contact with people only demons Satan Angels and God Almighty can interact with people, and satan is going to be sure most people never see the supernatural with their own eyes, because that would be evidence, that only leaves God himself, I pray he opens people's eyes that they haven't caused him to withdraw from them to much, if they're involved in Sodomy they most probably will have caused God to withdraw from them, in that case they will most probably go their hole lives without ever getting a whisper of the supernatural then they will die and Go to Hell then to the lake of fire For eternity, where the smoke of their torment will rise up for ever and ever. Stephen Hawking M theory makes God unnecessary original quote czcams.com/video/nb7LCau_Z_Y/video.html Something of Nothing | Curiosity czcams.com/video/jcrRyK4uO8g/video.html A ridiculous curiosity, that is certain. SOMETHING FROM NOTHING ? [OFFICIAL] Richard Dawkins & Lawrence Krauss [HD] 02-04-12 czcams.com/video/YUe0_4rdj0U/video.html Hawking's admitting no scientist knows how life started on this Earth, and rambling on about nothing creating everything, Steven Hawking's talking exclusively. Questioning the universe | Stephen Hawking czcams.com/video/xjBIsp8mS-c/video.html The big bang fairytale Fantasy Story told by Irrational Geographic: Before Time and Space | National Geographic czcams.com/video/nVsHjnY-o9s/video.html Do you want a really good laugh watch this, this is Lying Evolutionist Scientists droning on with the most nonsensical rubbish, anybody that can believe this, either has their piggy Snout in the Scientific funding trough or is Completely stupid or deceitful or both. What Happened before the Big Bang?[Full Documentary]HD czcams.com/video/g-MT4mIyqc0/video.html The bible says God stretches out the universe. Isaiah 42:5 “Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:” King James Version (KJV) King James Bible Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: Of course when the people discovered the universe is stretching out, WHICH CONFIRMS THE BIBLE, what do the Wile E Coyote Super Geniuses do, they say We know God doesn't exist so let's concoct a Fairytale story about how a magic dot popped into existence via a quantum fluctuation and then expanded billions of times the speed of light for the Big Bang to make any sense, then would obviously slow down with time. Hmmm Yeah that'll do it LOL!! Remember this you can't get to the evolution of the first creatures that appeared on Earth without a beginning to the universe, so to assert the beginning doesn't matter and that how the first single celled organism appeared doesn't matter that the only thing that matters is how evolution progressed after that is absolutely ridiculous and mind numbingly Stupid, But I get that from evolutionists regularly. Hawking's explains how nothing Created Everything LOL!, anyone that believes this is insane. czcams.com/video/5W-3M_2nXFY/video.html James Tour: The Mystery of the Origin of Life czcams.com/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/video.html
@@garywalker447 Your God: Do you want a really good laugh watch this, this is Lying Evolutionist Scientists droning on with the most nonsensical rubbish, anybody that can believe this, either has their piggy Snout in the Scientific funding trough or is Completely stupid or deceitful or all three. What Happened before the Big Bang?[Full Documentary]HD czcams.com/video/g-MT4mIyqc0/video.html
@@garywalker447 Your God NOTHING! The big bang fairytale Fantasy Story told by Irrational Geographic: Before Time and Space | National Geographic czcams.com/video/nVsHjnY-o9s/video.html
@@garywalker447 Your God NOTHING: SOMETHING FROM NOTHING ? [OFFICIAL] Richard Dawkins & Lawrence Krauss [HD] 02-04-12 czcams.com/video/YUe0_4rdj0U/video.html
“The more I study science, the more I believe in God.” --- Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), founder of modern physics (Theory of Relativity inter alia) and 1921 Nobel prize winner
This is a made-up quote. Here's a real one: "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." - Albert Einstein, 1954, Albert Einstein: The Human Side.
Kirk Cameron once proposed the "Croco-Duck" analogy suggesting that evolution can produce such a beast. He was wrong and likely knew it too. Dr. Tour is suggesting this too but in a more elaborate way, as he suggests that a change mechanism needs to be proposed to go from one life prototype to another. This is really silly.
"Does Science Make Faith Obsolete?" Yes. Going on reality does NOT require or need faith, indeed it requires NOT going on Faith. As can be seen in Dr. Tour many irrational beliefs, such as his belief that the Great Flood was a real event. Contrary to geology, biology and even written history. Now it is POSSIBLE to do science and be religious, as long as you don't let your beliefs overwhelm the evidence when doing science. Dr Tour's REAL science has nothing to do with his disproved beliefs. He is not a geologist or a biochemist. Ethelred Hardrede
Quantum Physics has shown that Reality is based on Probabilities. A statistical impossibility is defined as “a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 1/10^50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a Rational, Reasonable argument." The probability of finding one particular atom out of all of the atoms in the universe has been estimated to be 1/10^80. The probability of a functional 150 amino acid protein chain forming by chance is 1/10^164. It has been calculated that the probability of DNA forming by chance is 1/10^119,000. The probability of random chance protein-protein linkages in a cell is 1/10^79,000,000,000. Based on just these three cellular components, it would be far more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the cell was not formed by undirected random natural processes. Note: Abiogenesis Hypothesis posits that un-directed random natural processes, i.e. random chance formation, of molecules led to living organisms. Natural selection has no effect on individual atoms and molecules on the micro scale in a prebiotic environment. (*For reference, peptides/proteins can vary in size from 3 amino acid chains to 34,000 amino acid chains. Some scientists consider 300-400 amino acid protein chains to be the average size. There are 42,000,000 protein molecules in just one (1) simple cell, each protein requiring precise assembly. There are approx. 30,000,000,000,000 cells in the human body.) Furthermore, of all the physical laws and constants, just the Cosmological Constant alone is tuned to a level of 1/10^120; not to mention the fine-tuning of the Mass-Energy distribution of early universe which is 1/ 10^10^123. Therefore, in the fine-tuning argument, it would be more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the multi-verse is not the correct answer while trying to determine the origin of the universe. A "Miracle" is considered to be an event with a probability of occurrence of 1/10^6. Abiogenesis, RNA World Hypothesis, and Multiverse would all far, far, far exceed any "Miracle". Yet, these extremely Irrational and Unreasonable hypotheses are what many of the world’s top scientists ‘must’ believe in and promote because of a prior commitment to a strictly arbitrary, subjective, biased, narrow, limiting, materialistic ideology / worldview. Every idea, number, concept, thought, theory, mathematical equation, abstraction, qualia, Information, etc. existing within and expressed by anyone is "Immaterial" or "Non-material". The very idea or concept of "Materialism" is an immaterial entity and by it's own definition does not exist. Modern science seems to be stuck in archaic, subjective, biased ideologies that have inadequately attempted to define the "nature of reality" or the "reality of nature" for millenia. A Paradigm Shift in ‘Science’ is needed for humanity to advance. A major part of this Science Paradigm Shift would be the formal acknowledgment by the scientific community of the existence of "Immaterial" or "Non-material" entities as verified and confirmed by discoveries in Quantum Physics.
Creationism and intelligent design RT Pennock - Annual Review of Genomics and Human …, 2003 - annualreviews.org … Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics (61) is an 800-page sourcebook that includes representative … Their assumption is that design is the only alternative to evolution, and that creation will … Jerry Coyne criticized Behe for his “failure to deal honestly with the evidence for … Cited by 98 Related articles All 18 versions
"faith and belief go beyond scientific evidence" -this guy who pretends to be a scientist *edit: it was brought to my attention that apparently my point, highlighting the absurdity of taking the foundation of his entire career and its amazing truth-finding power only to throw it right out of the window when it comes to even just _testing_ the beliefs he considers most important, is null and void. Because this man "MAKES MOLECULES", like some kind of -GOD- kid in middle school chemistry class.
When Tour speak science, he brings me closer to God. When he speaks religion he takes me back to science and far from God. The problem is that Tour's science is free from the "churches" of science, his religion slave to religious churches.
Sorry but it is HIS problem. He is the one trying to sell a belief. Science is objective, religion subjective. I dont need Tour to believe. No one needs a church to believe.
Faith is a gift from God. You are not born with it. You just can’t believe and have conviction that it is true. How does someone know when they know something is true? It’s through experience which is what I’ve learned during my journey on this rock
@@garywalker447 Scientific theories require belief(they call it different names) from the scientific community to be pushed further into mainstream. If I'm wrong I'm chopping my d... right now! I agree it has to be based on evidence but not 100% otherwise it wouldn't be called a theory and you wouldn't start jumping on me if your faith hasn't been offended in the first place.
@@AbelbenAdam In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact"--part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist argument: evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in the world of science--that is, not believed in the scientific community to be as infallible as it once was." Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered. Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms. Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually emphasized the difference between his two great and separate accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a theory--natural selection--to explain the mechanism of evolution. - Stephen J. Gould, " Evolution as Fact and Theory"; Discover, May 1981
@@albejaine Wrong, it's been proven that the faith in the positive outcome of scientific experiment actually drags the curve. Think of it as a huge hard problem in the scientific butt..never mind, go back to sleep..
Science does not make faith obsolete because they are unrelated; the title of this video may as well be, "Do apples make bathtubs obsolete?" Firstly. faith was never a relevant or valid position because to believe something with absolute authority in the absence of evidence is the route to prideful misinformation. Faith is what holds ISIS together or what prompts a cult to drink the Kool-Aid. Secondly, science is a process for scrutinizing our assertions and assigning relative confidence to our beliefs.. Polar-oppositely, faith is the complete absence of scrutiny.
Please science starts off with faith, an idea, a belief also to believe, a confidence, an opinion, and all of these lead back to faith. It is faith that instigates investigation.
Dr. Tour would do well to abandon everything having to do with evolution and focus on God's word as translated in the KJV bible. In 6 days all things were created roughly 6,000 yrs ago. All men Liars only God is truthful.
You declared war on abiogenesis unnecessarily. Believers can always say this is how God made it. You are trampling on others first amendment rights. Crazed crusader.
@@baraskparas faith? Tour attacks specific branch of science, not faith. and Tour isnt actually attacking anything. he is defending his credibility, because he got debunked by random youtube channel so he is now desperatly trying to keep his followers before they realise that he has no idea about abiogenisis. so he made 13 part video of him being on a butthurt rant. its hilarious, its not attacking anyone, atleast, nobody is getting hurt from that "attack". its funny not painful
@@baraskparas i know i am. he knows nothing about abiogenisis, anybody who read even a little about it would know that he isnt talking about anything that abiogenisis actually suggests and parts that he clearly does know, he missrepresents because of dishonesty and because he needs to save his little reputation he has... dont get me wrong, Tour is an expert in his field of nanotechnology. but he is obviously clueless about abiogenisis. its like you are listening to a gardner criticizing all car mechanics about how they repair cars
Astonishing that he thinks Darwinian evolution is too improbable to believe. Yet he will believe Bible verses that scholars know Jesus never said. Imagine how oppressive it must feel to his graduate students to pretend that they too are Christians, just so they can get a PhD in chemistry from this guy.
@@derhafi I'm not confused at all. We only have an approximation to certain aspects of operational science. There are billions of things we don't know yet. All the theories regarding cosmogony are fabrications. They can't even explain how stars are formed
@@yoda9824 There are a lot of things we do not know ... I agree. Whoever, this does not make it rational to assume that something supernatural is responsible for everything we do not know yet. Especially when there was never any evidence for anything beyond the natural world. In fact we know of all forces and particles and the nature of such, which interact with us, further we can ba sure that there is nothing else. The standard model of particals and the quantum field theory make sure of that. They have a sigma 5 certainty. Look up what that means...... Because contrary to your belief, you are not as informed about science as you could be. Are you still in school? BTW, we know very well how stars form.
I found about dr tour studying nanotechnology as an undergrad. His writings on faith shook me then and starting bearing fruit over time. ThAnks dr tour
Let's see him apply his strident demands for scientific rigor to his unscientific belief in the supernatural. It's blatantly disingenuous.
@@lrvogt1257 lol, clearly you are the disingenuous one. I’ve already seen it and read his perspective on it.
@@thakurv1 and the liar cannot prove his god!!
@@thakurv1 His perspective on the supernatural is clearly articulated in an article called: ; Layman’s Reflections on Evolution and Creation. An Insider’s View of the Academy I quote: “Based upon my faith in the biblical text, I do believe (yes, faith and belief go beyond scientific evidence for this scientist) that God created the heavens and the earth and all that dwell therein, including a man named Adam and a woman named Eve.” - James Tour
In other words, Tour does not give a toss about science, whenever it is in odds with his Jesus delusion. He is a liar for Jesus with no scientific integrity.
@@briendoyle4680 jesus loves u brian
he is so charming! I learnt and laughed, such a great combination. Man we are truely blessed to live in the 21st century, where such wonderful teachers are so accessible.
Please Dr tour there's any way to open beta radiation in Fukushima see if you could organize a way to use the graphene in the carbon nanotubes Tilton Nuku to help the nuclear disaster at Fukushima before our entire Pacific Ocean is decimated
Mr. Tour, thank you so much for your obedience, diligence, intelligence, and your willingness to share all your work, with people outside the walls of academia. I never finished college, and never took a chemistry class, and I could listen to you speak all day. Sometimes I do listen to you all day. You brought me to Jesus Christ, and I can’t thank you enough for doing the work you do, and sharing it with us all 🙏
May I add to this praise, Dr. Tour, your humility - not just in your public speaking but your appeal to the academy. By this I mean your chemistry GENIUS in my opinion entitles you to WAY MORE fire-n-brimstone authoritative positioning, and you could SMOKE the academy as a whole with your criticisms - yet you come to them simply asking for proof and the opportunity to learn from them, should they have valid counsel to offer. In doing this, you seem to be being met with crickets chirping, yet still you stay your just wrath. When Jesus told us the meek will inherit the Earth, you put the example to that, sir.
While I'm learning about the chemical impossibilities from you, your in-practice lesson of humility is the lesson I treasure the most. I pray to Jesus to learn from your example, and that He kill my pride.
@@Stormvetprime01 رففلللب،رر ىففف٥غ٦٦عتغقف
InstaBlaster
😅😄🤣☺🤩☺🤩🙂🙃🤩🤩😃🤩😀🤩🤩🤩😀🤩🤩🙃🤩☺🙃😂😂🙂🤙🧚♂️👩👧👦
Wss
Thank you Dr. Tour! As a biologist this is eyes opening. Love you, thanks.
This man is talented articulate and inspiring
Tour is talented and inspiring to those who don't understand the science well enough to know he's BSing them and want to believe in supernatural magic. He also misrepresents the science and quote-mines scientists out of context to promote unscientific ideas about the supernatural. It's hypocritical and dishonest and exactly what his audience wants him to do for them.
@@lrvogt1257 theres just no way all this came together without an intelligent designer.
@@ronaldo101000 : At one time it wasn't illogical for humans to assume the forces around them operated like themselves because that was the only context they knew. The gods were elevated extensions of the family. They thought, had feelings, made rules, and passed judgement like parents. As science has provided better, testable explanations for the world we see, the defense of the supernatural has retreated to an invisible being existing before time... and beyond scrutiny. We can't learn anything from that or about that. We can continue to learn about the natural processes for which we have some actual evidence.
@@lrvogt1257 yeah your guys said a cell was just gunk and the universe was infinite WRONG. Knock God all you want bro. I'm just telling you if you think we all got here by evolution I will never buy it. I've always wandered how long would it take for some sticks in the woods to spell my name perfectly? Say LR VOGT. If took and threw sticks randomly into a pile how long would it take for those sticks get blown around moved etc until it spelled your name? That's nothing compared to dna
@@ronaldo101000 : What the hell is "your guys?" Based on your description, you have a profound misunderstanding of the process. Better to learn the subject first to argue from a position of knowledge than against extremely unscientific arguments no one is making.
I need to invest in this research and of course my faith in God. I dont have much money and so will have to start of with much Bible reading and prayer.
Blessing to you all and thanks Doc.
Go after it!
@@user-dj5ce7cc2w
The Bible/Torah/Koran was not handed to mankind by god, nor was it dictated to human stenographers by any gods.
It has nothing to do with gods.
In actuality, the Bible was VOTED to be the word of god by a group of men during the 4th century;
and the Koran was just the demented dogma of a selfish and petty despot....
czcams.com/play/PLqa478coickSNjHS853_eR2x7mog8WeSJ.html
"You find a watch in the desert you know there is a watchmaker."
I like Dr. Tour
You find another brand and you know there are two watchmakers.
The problem remains that watches are not alive, do not reproduce, and are not part of natural selection. This makes the argument wholly irrelevant to the issue and a failed attempt to con the gullible.
@@lrvogt1257 it was just my analogy to complex machines are probably created not accidental... IMHO
Sean Bragg : I think we can all agree that mechanical devices are created by people.
@@lrvogt1257 if people,... people hell of a lot smarter than I am and worthy of my praise at least
@@braggsean1026 : Are you still pressing the watchmaker argument? It doesn't work. Living things are not inanimate manufactured objects.
czcams.com/video/PHmjHMbkOUM/video.html
Wow. It just doesn't get any better than that. After Jesus, this man is my favorite Jew in the world. My favorite human being!! Awesome. I sure would love to meet him.
Dr. Tour blesses me every time I hear him speak. What a disciple.
And he blatantly misrepresents the scientists he criticizes to promote supernatural ideas for which he can provide nothing to show how they might effect the real world.
@@lrvogt1257 he does not criticize other scientists. Dr. Tour criticizes their origin of life ideas while simultaneously loving his fellow scientists. He prays for them and their salvation.
@@EdmundTrujillo : Oh yes he does. He tells people they aren't being truthful and that is a lie. I'm sure his smug sense of superiority comforts him as he prays for them.
@@lrvogt1257 sources?
@@EdmundTrujillo : The source is everything said on the subject by James Tour.
He is a very intelligent man, committed christian and wants to learn continually, an example for me. Thank you James Tour, very useful, what you do!
Too bad his demand for logic and rigor about science are completely abandoned when he talks about religion.
LR Vogt Sadly the logic and rigor of many atheists are completely abandoned facing facts. I was one of them.
@@eggendorfer156 : Facts are things which have been observed, quantified, tested, and verified. The supernatural is devoid of facts.There are only beliefs which can be anything you like.
LR Vogt. There are many facts, you can not measure. But it is not a proper platform to debate,I prefer personal talks, so I will not continue.
@@eggendorfer156 : That's true but things that are completely unknowable are not reliable substitutes for scientificaly verifiable information. Regards.
Thanking God that James Tour is a great Christian Gospel Spreader and America's greatest scientist !
Also a liar with no scientific integrety. As soon as science contradicts his superstition about Jesus, he tosses it out the window. Tour is a creationist clown, the smartest of the entire ilk but a still clown.
@@derhafi
Come on Rob, the only liars without any scientific integrity are the evolutionists whose facts get exposed as frauds yet continue to use them in textbooks and lectures.
Any theory that has to use lies, even lies that were exposed as hoaxes, cannot be true. It is actually embarrassing if you think about it.
Drawing fictitious art depicting all kinds of animal and human embryos as having similar features and gill slits. LOL, that was Haekel. Getting sued by his own University.
That was exposed as fraud in 1869 YET they are still being taught in school textbooks today, even in University to innocent students unaware, including you l am sure.
All those "MANS" that were discovered throughout history, causing their discoverers to get wealthy or receive continuing Grant's, totally BOGUS, ALL OF 'EM.
Piltdown, Java, etc. A pigs tooth here. A half orangutan cranium glued to whatever was thrust on the world, and millions of people were taught that was true. That is so fraudulent !!
Lucy is hoax dude, or are you gonna defend bones found mile's apart as honest science, especially when the guy's grant was running out in a couple of weeks. Follow the money.
All hoaxes, all lies, that is your evolution.
Stop with the hate...
If you have questions and concerns with and about God, do not stay outside the boat, swimming in place, perishing, shaking your fist at God...NO ! Don't do that !
Come on board, make your peace, and ask Him every vital question you want. The truth isn't afraid of being exposed because it is the truth.
Come aboard Rob, Jesus Loves you very much, stop denying Him, it is only harming you.
Have a good day..
No need for me to respond further,
I have said all l needed to.
Ultimately you will be held to account for your decision accepting or denying Jesus.
Nuff said !
@@jbjoeychic "the only liars without any scientific integrity are the evolutionists whose facts get exposed as frauds yet continue to use them in textbooks and lectures."
BOLD MOVE, yes, BOLD MOVE:
DENYING Evolution during a worldwide pandemic that has killed 4.2 MILLION PEOPLE WORLDWIDE, due to the MUTATION OF A CORONAVIRUS INTO A NEW AND MORE LETHAL FORM exactly as explained under the Theory of Evolution!
You USED to be able to POO POO away the Fossil evidence (despite any REAL research into them PROVES THEY *also* support common ancestry, HOWEVER, the "armchair debate game is over now" with GENETICS.
FUN FACT: Genetics: a Science that didn't even exist in Darwin's time! Yet it explains clearly the HOW of Evolutionary Theory.
The evidence for the Theory of Evolution AND common ancestry is SO INCONTROVERTIBLE, it moved a DEVOUT EVANGELICAL like Francis Collins to say:
"As someone who's had the privilege of leading the human genome project, I've had the opportunity to study our own DNA instruction book at a level of detail that was never really possible before. It's also now been possible to compare our DNA with that of many other species. The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming. I would not necessarily wish that to be so, as a Bible-believing Christian. But it is so. It does not serve faith well to try to deny that."
Sequencing the genome of living things makes it OBVIOUS that they evolved one from another, just as the tree of life showed you in school. And ANYONE can go study Genetics and see this for them self.
Evolution and the Theory of Evolution is today the CORNERSTONE of medical science. 98% of scientists worldwide accept the Theory of Evolution, which means TENS OF THOUSANDS of scientists. Many THOUSANDS of which work in a field DIRECTLY PROVIDING EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT of the Theory of Evolution.
Today, we know more about how Evolution works, than how Gravity works. So time to get past your BIBLICAL BIAS, and stop being an embarrassment to the human race.
God bless you, brother, for speaking openly from your gifted perspective!
Dr. George Wald wrote: “Time is in fact the hero of the plot. …Given so much time, the ‘impossible’ becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs the miracles.” This is a great faith statement, not in any way scientific.
Dr. James Tour say: “People will often say to me, Oh, if you wait long enough, it’ll form. No, time is your enemy in organic chemistry!” This is in full accord with the second law of thermodynamics. To my mind this is unquestionably a scientific statement.
To this I would add the result of the RATE efforts: “Thousands, Not Billions.”
Great perspective, Franjo! If I could add to that, even if we accept the Big Bang 13+ "billion years ago" that's only around 10^16 seconds, yet to have something like RNA/DNA to "accidentally" fall in place (especially when evolution requires it happen out on a primordial Earth, say under a rock somewhere), for just ONE nucleotide base (let alone a codon - 3x nuc. bases) to accidentally happen is in the area of 1 / 10^79! And it HAS to be accidental, otherwise there's a Designer and Atheism is thereby killed.
So to buttress your point, even if Dr. Wald was right (which you demonstrated he isn't) 10^16 seconds is WAY SHORT of enough time for any statistical possibility of the Evolution model to happen, be that Darwinian OR Neutral Drift theory. The latter is defeated by the estimated limit of only 10^46 organisms living and dying since their "big bang" - again these being full code-set DNA machinations, which is in itself the cart before the horse when it comes to just that ONE "accidental" base nucleotide (1 / 10^79). The Human DNA has over 3 billion base nucleotides so that would take 3 x 10^9 TIMES (single nucleotide improbability), like flipping a dime and having it land on its edge so many times in a row.
@@Stormvetprime01 Please share the mathematics that you used to come up with that nonsense. What the hell even is an accidental base nucleotide. Does a rock rolling down a hill fit your definition of accidental. Does DNA forming naturally on an asteroid conform to your definition of accidental. And IF you had the slightest clue as to what you are spewing you would have already realized that origin of life researchers don't claim that a 3 billion unit nucleic acid formed by accident- creationists are the only ones that make that claim. Science knows better. It was formed by the natural process of natural selection. Religionists just like to misrepresent actual science because they have to. But I truly await the mathematics that you used to come up with your 'probabilities'.
@@Stormvetprime01 Will, I have been waiting patiently for months now for you to show the mathematics of the total nonsense that you spewed. Are you having a bit of difficulty with providing evidence of your claim or did you just realize like so many are doing these days that you were lied to and are now in recovery treatment from your cult?
@@sparky5584 that's for you to research libtard.
@@Stormvetprime01 I see you noticed how silly it was and how easy it would be to shred to pieces. Have a wonderful life. Ten to the 79th how quaint.
I discovered this man while watching some One For Israel videos. Amazing... Blessed is the name of the LORD.
I praise the Lord for his life.
I saw him kneeling before the Yahweh in Pune in India. He is very humble. I saw two evangelists in turn translating his spiritual messages.
I am studying his subject ORIGIN OF LIFE from 1980.
I knew Dr.Duane T Gish , I .C.R..personally. He contributed lot of information to me. When I had some doubts on ORIGIN OF LIFE I used to write to him. He immediately answers my questions. Now he is with the Lord.
We can now enrich our knowledge on O.O.L.
Both of them are very helpful and humble. We need to introduce them to many people around the world. Let us pray for br James Tour.One membership member of Bhakth Singh Assembly introduced Lord Jesus'Christ. His wife I from Pakistan.
E
My first language is not English. So I watch his CZcams videos when l get òpportunities.
A.K.Skariah ( Raju )
We need more people like Dr Tour in our universities and in places of higher learning . Let’s pray that God may raise a generation. Habakkuk 2:14 will be fulfilled in the coming years
Thanks be to GOD for someone like you Dr Tour... and Bro Eli Soriano...
Here is a world class scientist, but with such a humble personality. Christianity... !
Amen! Thank You Jesus! Thank You God! May God bless you.
I love this man!
Powerful! Thanks 🙏
Thank you somuch for sharing your experience with the Lord Jesus Christ, to the whole world that still doesn't know Him yet who is the savior of every one who believe
this lecture should have garnered tens of millions of views already...
Why?
@@derhafi let me ask you... do you believe on the scientific impossibility that nothing created everything?
@@maxredman5628 No, there is nothing that would indicate such nonsese. There is not one scientfic publication out there which claims that absolutly nothing created everything. Not one.
An easy mistake to make for someone like you who gets his version of science from fundamental christians.
What's it like to know nothing about the issue you attemt to criticise? That should bother you!
@@derhafi there may not be a "scientfic publication", but hawking, krauss, dawkins, et al... they are writing books and marketing the philosophy of 'nothing'... the one that you call "nonsese"...
@@maxredman5628 "there may not be a "scientfic publication"" There IS not, and scientific papers submitted to the peer-review process is where claims are formulated...nowhere else does it matter.
That is btw the reason Tour does not not publish his rambelings in credible scientific journals...he got nothing and he knows that. That's why he does the rounds in fundamentalist church groups, right wing talk radio, publish in church magazines and show up on and jesus-tv shows intead.
I'm really sorry that you missed basically all of the subject you attemt to criticise...but no, nobody claims such nonsese. Would you have read but one of those books, you'd know that nobody claimd that anything came from absolutrly nothing...Despite his catchy book title, Krauss spends literally the enirety of "a universe from nothing", which is not a scientific publication, explaining that absolutely nothing does not exist..there is no zero energy state anywhere. Layman's "nothing" has nothinn in common with the "nothing" phsicists refere to.
You are a victim of your biased, cherry picking, quote mining sources. How about you get your science from scientists? Anyone who is actually working in the field in question and is not affiliated with the ill-named Discovery institute where they do no research at all, none, and of which one of its founders Howard F. Ahmanson, Jr. openly wants to replace democracy with a fundamentalist theocracy.
THey are the only ones "marketing the philosophy of 'nothing'" whilst believing A divine being with supernatural powers, “God”, with no origin by himself (special pleading fallacy) and no demonstrable correation with reality, turns nothing into something.
I agree, it is foolish nonsense! Believers seem to have no problem with that.
Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Amen!!!
Love James Tour, Thankyou Heavenly Father that he is on our side, in Jesus Name by the Power of the Holy Ghost Amen.
A great example of a moron, loving a liar praising a fairy tale.
@@garywalker447 A Great example of a Keyboard Warrior Pussy that hides behind their mommy's skirt strings :)
@@garywalker447 1.2) To Quote the Evolutionists.
'in the beginning there was nothing, no time, no space, no matter, Not even an Atom absolutely completely Nothing, Just a Dark Black Void, a magic dot appeared via a quantum fluctuation that no body has ever seen or will ever see for all time into infinity, unless they believe in Fantasy imagined fairytales from Fools like Lawrence Krauss (No satisfactory explanation on how or why the magic dot Appeared) it was a trillion times smaller than an atom, incredibly hot, incredibly dense (just like an evolutionist) spinning very very very fast, Space folding in on itself, then for no apparent reason in a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second it started Expanding/Exploded (it would have had to expand at the rate of expanding to the size of our solar system every 20 millionth of a second (Something like that) for the big bang to make any sense at all for the size of the known universe which is 93 billion light years wide reducing in speed as time went on) and it kept expanding after 3 minutes it expanded to the size of 100 thousand light years and kept expanding until it got as big as it currently is, creating all the Time Space and Matter we see in the known universe today, this inflatton according to evolutionists expanded billions of times faster than the speed of light.
It's funny that evolutionists can invoke faster than the speed of light speeds when it suits them, but when creationists suggest the speed of light was not always constant (Starlight travel times) they laugh and ridicule us light has been. Measured to be slowing down btw, anyway back to it, they believe nothing created everything and that nothing is not really nothing that its something, that everything is not really everything that its actually nothing, I have seen Krauss explain how all the matter in the universe is half positive and half negative, and because of the 50% Positive energy and 50% Negative energy that these to things added together actually gets you a big fat 0 yes Zero, they actually believe everything equates to nothing and that Nothing equals everything,, I am Thinking a padded Cell is exactly the equation that they need.
Also some Evolutionists try to get around the appearance of fine tuning and design by saying Aliens must have seeded us but Aliens couldn't have seeded us because somebody would have had to have seeded them so on and so on, that's a circular argument that will never end or can never work, this means there is only 2 options An All Powerful Holy Spirit Being that Spoke life into existence as we have only ever observed life creating life or Purely random chance via purely naturalistic means from chemicals washed out of rocks all brought into existence via a quantum fluctuation popping an infinitesimally small singularity into existence. They know the Universe had to have had a beginning, they know it's all going to burn out and become cold dead and dark one day, even if they had evidence of new Stars/Suns Forming which they don't but if they did, there is only a finite amount of Gas. (Energy). in the universe, they know 100% certain that it has to run out, Therefore they can't get around the fact that it had to have had a BEGINNING at some point, Somewhere somehow, That is why they have to think up fantastic wild theories and then use thousands of hypotheses to prop up the main central Theory As evolution is supposed to be the answer to and for everything.
Please explain Atheist evolutionists Exactly how Nothing created everything, I will be sitting on the edge of my Seat with Baited Breath waiting for Zatt Explanation, LOL!!!
Teach people they are nothing but Animals, then don't be surprised when they Act Like Animals.
It takes Far more faith to believe Nothing created everything and us being nothing more than a cosmic accident that has no meaning, than it does to believe an all powerful Creator (The Lord Jesus Christ) Spoke everything into Existence from Nothing, as science has never observed non life creating life, the only thing science has observed is that it takes life to create life.
they don't have a clue, they have many very weak theories and hypotheses but no scientific Facts to back them up, we should not give the big bang credibility by calling it a scientific Theory, because a scientific theory if it can not be tested and observed then reproduced, it has to be thrown away, then get a new theory to try and test it, that is what science is The Big Bang/Expansion is unscientific nonsense being portrayed as factual science, evolution is a faith based Religion more like a violent death cult definitely not Science, Pseudoscience yes.
anything that can never be tested or observed and reproduced for all time, is not science, it is a hypothesis, basically a fantasy story a wish list of the way they want things to be, we are teaching children fantasy stories as though they're facts, that is wrong! no surgeon ever went to a book of evolutionary origins to learn what incisions to make and where to make them to perform an operation on a patient, no that surgeon will consult a book of Real Science about anatomy and surgical procedures before an operation, we should be teaching about real science that has real benefits in the real world, not fantasy stories of evolution that have zero basis in science. Love God Love your Family Love your Fellow man and then Last but not least Love your Country.
Here is Steven Hawking Embarrassing himself claiming everything came from Nothing and how Nothing governs everything we do, Steven Hawking's unless he Believed on the Lord Jesus Christ and his Gospel, is in Hell and begging God for another chance Which he will not get because of all the minds he demented with his satanic lies, Hawking's now knows Heaven Hell and God exist, but he can't tell anybody about it, as the dead can't have any contact with people only demons Satan Angels and God Almighty can interact with people, and satan is going to be sure most people never see the supernatural with their own eyes, because that would be evidence, that only leaves God himself, I pray he opens people's eyes that they haven't caused him to withdraw from them to much, if they're involved in Sodomy they most probably will have caused God to withdraw from them, in that case they will most probably go their hole lives without ever getting a whisper of the supernatural then they will die and Go to Hell then to the lake of fire For eternity, where the smoke of their torment will rise up for ever and ever.
Stephen Hawking M theory makes God unnecessary original quote
czcams.com/video/nb7LCau_Z_Y/video.html
Something of Nothing | Curiosity
czcams.com/video/jcrRyK4uO8g/video.html
A ridiculous curiosity, that is certain.
SOMETHING FROM NOTHING ? [OFFICIAL] Richard Dawkins & Lawrence Krauss [HD] 02-04-12
czcams.com/video/YUe0_4rdj0U/video.html
Hawking's admitting no scientist knows how life started on this Earth, and rambling on about nothing creating everything, Steven Hawking's talking exclusively.
Questioning the universe | Stephen Hawking
czcams.com/video/xjBIsp8mS-c/video.html
The big bang fairytale Fantasy Story told by Irrational Geographic:
Before Time and Space | National Geographic
czcams.com/video/nVsHjnY-o9s/video.html
Do you want a really good laugh watch this, this is Lying Evolutionist Scientists droning on with the most nonsensical rubbish, anybody that can believe this, either has their piggy Snout in the Scientific funding trough or is Completely stupid or deceitful or both.
What Happened before the Big Bang?[Full Documentary]HD
czcams.com/video/g-MT4mIyqc0/video.html
The bible says God stretches out the universe.
Isaiah 42:5
“Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:”
King James Version (KJV)
King James Bible
Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain:
Of course when the people discovered the universe is stretching out, WHICH CONFIRMS THE BIBLE, what do the Wile E Coyote Super Geniuses do, they say We know God doesn't exist so let's concoct a Fairytale story about how a magic dot popped into existence via a quantum fluctuation and then expanded billions of times the speed of light for the Big Bang to make any sense, then would obviously slow down with time. Hmmm Yeah that'll do it LOL!!
Remember this you can't get to the evolution of the first creatures that appeared on Earth without a beginning to the universe, so to assert the beginning doesn't matter and that how the first single celled organism appeared doesn't matter that the only thing that matters is how evolution progressed after that is absolutely ridiculous and mind numbingly Stupid, But I get that from evolutionists regularly.
Hawking's explains how nothing Created Everything LOL!, anyone that believes this is insane.
czcams.com/video/5W-3M_2nXFY/video.html
James Tour: The Mystery of the Origin of Life
czcams.com/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/video.html
@@ConstitutionalConservation Faith is lying to yourself. If your faith were true, there would be evidence.
@@ConstitutionalConservation You started off with a strawman argument against Big Bang Cosmology.
Strawmaning is lying and I have NO respect for liars.
Common descend is from our origin ,but it reveals to me it’s simple explanation is that we are human and God says we human are created according to “ His “ Image(Gods Image).So we are Uniquely Created.We have the Mind of Christ.
Incredible
I've been trying and doing fairly well reading my Bible every day . In Genesis 41 now .
“… Every one who is seriously engaged in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that the laws of nature manifest the existence of a spirit vastly superior to that of men, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble.” Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), founder of modern physics (Theory of Relativity inter alia) and 1921 Nobel prize winner
Any one knows if this conference has subtitles in spanish somewhere?, cannot find it, would be great blessing for many, thks.
Wow love him!
YES Amen to that!!
🦧 Thank you sir! I'm already a Christian and I thought your video would give me fodder to use when people doubt or persecute Jesus. I thought id be able to remember any tips or quips on my favorite subject!
Hah! What a joke!
Remember? 🤣
Repeat? 🤣
Understanding and teaching are very different things! May God bless you and yours!
Thank you for your time!
czcams.com/play/PLqa478coickSNjHS853_eR2x7mog8WeSJ.html
If I was younger, I would try to join your lab.
How do you make water purification system by this please!
A question on the immune system "evolving" - when I think of evolution, I picture RANDOM (in other words, mindless thus pointless) mutations which, in rare cases, supposedly results in a positive adaptation. If I understand Neutral Drift theory then, these pile up over generations until a new capability is expressed. So one's immune system can't wait for that process, because not "fixing" the invading malady probably means individual death, from which a future generation is no longer possible.
So it seems the immune system DOESN'T evolve, if the above is the right definition, but seems to, in a yet-to-be understood mechanism, programmatically REACT to an invading "problem?" driven by a PURPOSE (healing/repair/immunity) of which any real use of the word "evolution" must be devoid of, otherwise one must admit to a transcendent, outside intelligence NOT FOUND in random mutation. Put another way, the immune system seems to have a job. Random Alka-Seltzer fizz of molecules follow the laws of thermodynamics which point to low energy and high entropy. Immunity reactions violate that law, as it points to low entropy and maintenance of high energy.
If we were zapped into existence as perfect fully developed humans why do we have vestigial organs?
Also how do you explain Sentinelese people dying within a day or so after making contact with the outside world? Why doesn't God give them the same protection as us?
@@joeschmoe236 you mean like some say the appendix is?
@@joeschmoe236 I think the posit that amino acids and so forth "accidentally" formed strands so as to create functional, correctly-folded proteins and ultimately life is the "zapped into existence" argument, since the odds against have now been proven staggeringly remote, even in all the seconds which would have passed if one would cede to the 'big bang' timescales. I can't grasp how anyone can accept that DNA, the most advanced information system known, just up and programmed itself out of a tidal pool or a mud puddle in a cave.
Very good point God is amazing!
If they did this with everything, which is to give both sides, most, if not all ppl would make wiser decisions as to what to believe may be true..
Science = observed fact ie evidence
Faith = Absence of evidence
Spiritual Blindness - failure to see the evidence
some science, not all. as long as you have missing links and have not observed or demostrated in the lab, which is often the case, it is still errantly called science.
actually it strengthens it !
Praise Hesus!
There are many questions about evolution but it fits
Sir kindly pray for me tto to get Holy sprit
“The question of whether there exists a Creator and Ruler of the Universe has been answered in the affirmative by some of the highest intellects that have ever existed.” -Charles Darwin, the founder of evolutionary biology, as cited in his book Descent of Man.
Fantastic lecture. One of Dr. James Tour's best. I'm a little late to the party, but I shared this video with everyone I know. The one question I wonder about is why do the nation's school boards not also require a course about the problems with abiogenesis if they openly allow evolution to be taught? A course which calls into question the tenets of evolution is no more about religion than a course on the problems of Newtonian Mechanics. How did these people in support of evolution manage to convince the schools that anything which critiques evolution is religion in disguise?
“I wonder about is why do the nation's school boards not also require a course about the problems with abiogenesis if they openly allow evolution to be taught?“ Because those are well established, evidence based fields of science and ID/creationism is pseudoscientific nonsense.
“How did these people in support of evolution manage to convince the schools that anything which critiques evolution is religion in disguise?“ That is just a fact. Take Tour for example I quote: “Based upon my faith in the biblical text, I do believe (yes, faith and belief go beyond scientific evidence for this scientist) that God created the heavens and the earth and all that dwell therein, including a man named Adam and a woman named Eve.” - James Tour
Openly admitting that no matter what is discovered with the scientific method, he will ignore it in favour of his faith.
Tour, as all so called ID “scientists” are trying to undermine science to promote the supernatural. Tour is one of them but he's clever enough to speak on the subjects separately (primarily to non-science, pro-ID audiences who want their beliefs rationalized) because they contradict each other. It's a cheap scam. He can't defend the existence of his ID or any supernatural mechanism for producing anything. Nothing whatsoever, so he is left with the attempt to tear down the science that is seeking those natural mechanisms.
@@derhafi : Your Quote: "... Because those are well established, evidence based fields of science..."
That's the whole point. There is no evidence for the evolution of a cell. Evolution textbooks are entirely based on speculation, not evidence. Every textbook about evolution has the words, "This is what COULD have happened" or "This is what MIGHT have happened." That is pure speculation. I challenge you to show me a text book on cell evolution that claims, "This is exactly what happened because we have evidence."
Your Quote: "...so called ID “scientists” are trying to undermine science to promote the supernatural."
What is the supernatural? Where do the borders lie between the "natural" and the "supernatural?" The conventional definition of "supernatural" is something that lies outside of nature. But how do we know whether or not everything we THINK is supernatural is actually part of nature?
Scientists used to say that it is impossible for a particle to be in two or three places at the same time, or impossible for one solid particle to pass through another solid particle without damaging either, or the position of a particle could be defined with precision and is absolute. Then Quantum Mechanics came along and now scientists are saying that particles actually don't really exist and the entire universe is made up only of vibrations within one of 23 different fields.
The bottom line is, the old materialistic world is dead. The new thinking is the universe is not solid or as predictable as we once thought. Everything is based on probabilities and not a single scientist objects to that. What used to be called the supernatural is now recognized as part of nature and no one truly knows where that border exists.
@@bobblacka918 There is, ever heard of lipids? Apart from that, the simplest form of life is a self-replicating molecule not a cell.
“Evolution textbooks are entirely based on speculation, not evidence.” Nonsense. Abiogenesis is, as are all natural sciences an evidence based enquiry. Just because you (and Tour) ignore the work done in this field does not make it disappear. Tour is just wrong on every point he raises and he knows it.
“I challenge you to show me a text book on cell evolution that claims, "This is exactly what happened because we have evidence."” You are one of those people who just don’t get how science works. Science does not make claims of absolute truth. It provides the best possible explanation according to the available evidence.
Science tells you how the world most likely is, based on the best unscrutinised repeatable, testable, empirical evidence, always willing to change, should better evidence be unveiled, always willing to admit where the limits of knowledge are drawn.
“But how do we know whether or not everything we THINK is supernatural is actually part of nature?” If it has a demonstrable correlation with nature, it is part of it. Neutrons and x-rays are, unicorns and gods are not (until some evidence that demonstrated said correlation is presented) It is not that hard.
“Scientists used to say…….then...” Changing ones position on a subject when new data comes in is the smart and rational thing to do. That is an essential part of science and it’s success. It is in no way a disadvantage of scientific knowledge to change…we call that change: Progress
“Quantum Mechanics came along and now scientists are saying that particles actually don't really exist and the entire universe is made up only of vibrations within one of 23 different fields.” That is not something that Quantum Mechanics claims. But how would you know since you get your science from theologians. Otherwise you’d not quote such dribble as: “The bottom line is, the old materialistic world is dead.”
“The new thinking is the universe is not solid or as predictable as we once thought “ True “Everything is based on probabilities and not a single scientist objects to that.” Also true. How does that add credibility to the existence of anything supposed supernatural?
@@derhafi : I got my science from a university degree in physics, not from the Bible. I just don't exclude anything just because it sounds too "Biblical." In my world, every hypothesis is valid until proven beyond a doubt to be false.
@@bobblacka918 So the hypothesis that a pink unicorn had a hand in the ool, is viewed by you as credible until proven wrong beyond any reasonable doubt? Seriously?
Your physics degree is perhaps as fictional as all the evidence for any supernatural alternative to abiogenesis.
Can you repair antipsychotic damage.
A statistical impossibility is defined as “a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 1/10^50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a Rational, Reasonable argument." (*The probability of finding one particular atom out of all of the atoms in the universe has been estimated to be 1/10^80.) The probability of a functional 150 amino acid protein chain forming by chance is 1/10^164. It has been calculated that the probability of DNA forming by chance is 1/10^119,000. The probability of random chance protein-protein linkages in a cell is 1/10^79,000,000,000. Based on just these three cellular components, it would be far more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the cell was not formed by undirected random natural processes. Note: Abiogenesis Hypothesis posits that undirected random natural processes, i.e. random chance formation, of molecules led to living organisms. Natural selection has no effect on individual atoms and molecules on the micro scale in a prebiotic environment. (*For reference, peptides/proteins can vary in size from 3 amino acid chains to 34,000 amino acid chains. Some scientists consider 300-400 amino acid protein chains to be the average size. There are 42,000,000 protein molecules in just one (1) simple cell, each protein requiring precise assembly. There are approx. 30,000,000,000,000 cells in the human body.)
A "Miracle" is considered to be an event with a probability of occurrence of 1/10^6. Abiogenesis, RNA World Hypothesis, and Multiverse all far, far, far exceed any "Miracle". Yet, these extremely irrational and unreasonable hypotheses are what many of the world’s top scientists ‘must’ believe in because of a prior commitment to a purely arbitrary, subjective, materialistic ideology.
Every idea, number, concept, thought, theory, mathematical equation, abstraction, qualia, etc. existing within and expressed by anyone is "Immaterial" or "Non-material". The very idea or concept of "Materialism" is an immaterial entity and by it's own definition does not exist. Modern science seems to be stuck in archaic subjective ideologies that have inadequately attempted to define the "nature of reality" or the "reality of nature" for millenia. A Paradigm Shift in ‘Science’ is needed for humanity to advance. A major part of this Science Paradigm Shift would be the formal acknowledgment by the scientific community of the existence of "Immaterial" or "Non-material" entities as verified and confirmed by discoveries in Quantum Physics.
James Tour is confident and brilliant presenter, who knows his scientific stuff. John Lennox think he deserves Nobel Prize, I love listening to Him .God bless for being the defender of the Faith
There is no Nobel Prize for pseudoscience bullshit.
@@garywalker447 how can you call it pseudoscience if someone call for the establishment to come and debate with him on the public forum. Pseudo are those who refused to debate in public because of fear of being exposed. Bring it on
@@jessejones3423 pseu·do·sci·ence
/ˌso͞odōˈsīəns/
noun
a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly or fraudulently regarded as being based on scientific method.
Creation Science and Intelligent Design invoke a Designer/God that is not established by testable evidence therefore they fail the first test of the Scientific Method and are therefore pseudoscience.
@@garywalker447 hì you are absolutely wrong for describing any scientists who believe in God or creation as a pseudoscience.
Physics Paul Davies says that the right scientific attitude is essentially theological " science can proceed only if the scientists adopts an essentially theological worldview " He point out that even the most atheistic scientists accepts as a law -like order in nature that is at least in part comprehensible to us. Albert Einstein famously said ; Science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspirations towards truth and understanding, This source of feeling, however spring from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational that is, comprehensible to reason
He said I cannot conceive a genuine man of science without that profound faith on - quote the situation may be expressed by an image; Science without religion is lame and Religion without science is blind
Einstein evidently did not suffer from Dawkins' delusion that all faith are blind.
I think that you need to do more research to understand science,religion/God, and I hope the figures below helps you.
THE WINNERS OF THE NOBEL PRIZE BY PERCENTAGE :CHRISTIANS
PEACE 78.3%
CHEMISTRY 72.5%
PHYSICS 65.3%
MEDICINE 62%
ECONOMICS 54%
LITERATURE 49.5%
ATHEISTS, AGNOSTIC AND FREE THINKERS WINNERS PEACE
PEACE 3.6%
CHEMISTRY 7.1%
PHYSICS 4.7%
MEDICINE 8.9%
LITERATURE 35%
It is not that, if you believes in God or creation then you are not a GOOD SCIENTIST
MANY THANKS
@@jessejones3423 I did not say you could not believe in god(s) and not do science but sorry, Creationism/intelligent design IS pseudoscience.
“People take it for granted that the physical world is both ordered and intelligible. The underlying order in nature-the laws of physics-are simply accepted as given, as brute facts. Nobody asks where they came from; at least they do not do so in polite company. However, even the most atheistic scientist accepts as an act of faith that the universe is not absurd, that there is a rational basis to physical existence manifested as law-like order in nature that is at least partly comprehensible to us. So science can proceed only if the scientist adopts an essentially theological worldview.” -Physicist Paul Davies, the winner of the 2001 Kelvin Medal issued by the Institute of Physics and the winner of the 2002 Faraday Prize issued by the Royal Society (amongst other awards), as cited from his acceptance address of the 1995 Templeton Prize. (Davies adheres to no standard religious creed.)
I do not see any critical comments. I wonder why?
Because you have not looked?
Dr. May Ling take note!
“All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.” Max Plank (the Father of Quantum Physics) ... It is curious how Max Plank's conclusions were so revolutionary in the field of science / physics (i.e. the immaterial (non-material) reality of nature and "the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind" as the ultimate force behind the fabric of reality). Yet, when microbiologists. biologists, geneticists, biochemists, other scientists, etc. come to the same conclusion (i.e. Intelligence/consciousness/mind is an integral and fundamental force behind the initial introduction and subsequent propagation of biological systems), they are rebuffed as being "unscientific".
Science confirms and supports Faith!
Do you believe ALL 10 Comments are applicable for today? God Almighty Sanctified the 7t day long b4 there was sin in the world 🗺 Why remove just one Commandment? Saturday is still for us! We still keep the SABBATH holy 🌅 to 🌇!!!
“It may seem bizarre, but in my opinion science offers a surer path to God than religion.” - (Secular) Physicist Paul Davies, the winner of the 2001 Kelvin Medal issued by the Institute of Physics and the winner of the 2002 Faraday Prize issued by the Royal Society (amongst other awards), as cited in his book God and the New Physics. Davies adheres to no standard religious creed.
"It is only at the semantic level that we really have meaningful information; thus, we may establish the following theorem: Theorem 14: Any entity, to be accepted as information, must entail semantics; it must be meaningful. Semantics is an essential aspect of information because the meaning is the only invariant property. The statistical and syntactical properties can be altered appreciably when information is represented in another language (e.g., translated into Chinese), but the meaning does not change. Meanings always represent mental concepts; therefore, we have: Theorem 15: When its progress along the chain of transmission events is traced backward, every piece of information leads to a mental source, the mind of the sender." Dr. Werner Gitt (Former Head of the Department of Information Technology at Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Germany)
DNA code can be equated to a type of computer language. DNA code is more complex than regular computer language in that it is not binary (based on 0 and 1). It is quaternary (based on A T C G). And, as with every known language in existence, confirmed through scientific experiment and observation, is the product of only one thing ... mind/ consciouness /intelligence. ...
"The discovery of the structure of DNA transformed biology profoundly, catalysing the sequencing of the human genome and engendering a new view of biology as an INFORMATION SCIENCE. Two features of DNA structure account for much of its remarkable impact on science: its DIGITAL nature and its complementarity, whereby one strand of the helix binds perfectly with its partner. DNA has two types of DIGITAL INFORMATION - the genes that ENCODE proteins, which are the MOLECULAR MACHINES of life, and the GENE REGULATORY NETWORKS that specify the behaviour of the genes." (Source: Nature Journal, Nature com)
"Language: ALL DIGITAL communications require a formal language, which in this context consists of all the information that the sender and receiver of the digital communication must both possess, in advance, in order for the communication to be successful." (Wikipedia: Digital Data)
”The instructions in a gene that tell the cell how to make a specific protein. A, C, G, and T are the "letters" of the DNA code; they stand for the chemicals adenine (A), cytosine (C), guanine (G), and thymine (T), respectively, that make up the nucleotide bases of DNA. Each gene's code combines the four chemicals in various ways to spell out three-letter "words" that specify which amino acid is needed at every step in making a protein.” ( “Genetic Code - National Human Genome Research Institute” Genome . gov)
”Genetic code is the term we use for the way that the four bases of DNA--the A, C, G, and Ts--are strung together in a way that the cellular machinery, the ribosome, can read them and turn them into a protein. In the genetic code, each three nucleotides in a row count as a triplet and code for a single amino acid. So each sequence of three codes for an amino acid. And proteins are made up of sometimes hundreds of amino acids. So the code that would make one protein could have hundreds, sometimes even thousands, of triplets contained in it.” (Lawrence C. Brody, Ph.D., Genome dot gov)
Modern scientific discoveries in Genetics (i.e. biology) have shown that functional / coded / digital Information (i.e. DNA code) is at the core of ALL Biological Systems. Without functional / coded / digital information, there is NO biology. The only known source (i.e. cause) in the universe that has been Observed in nature to be capable of producing functional / coded / digital information, such as that found even in the most primitive biological systems, is mind / consciousness / intelligence.
@@roddacanay1182 "confirmed through scientific experiment and observation, is the product of only one thing ... mind/ consciouness /intelligence. ... "
You made that up.
@@roddacanay1182 "digital Information (i.e. DNA code)" DNA is not digital, as you mentioned yourself.
"The only known source (i.e. cause) in the universe that has been Observed in nature to be capable of producing functional / coded / digital information, such as that found even in the most primitive biological systems, is mind / consciousness / intelligence."
DNA is according to all available evidence, ALL AVAILABLE EVIDENCE natually occuring.
This "mind / consciousness / intelligence" in regards to DNA is purely fictional, it's an assumtion wrapped in a fallacy, this ill-defined metaphysical substance/ entity/ force/intelligence/power/ supernatural whatever, not subject to the known laws of physics, that supposingly interacts with the fabric of our reality in ways that have thus far eluded every controlled experiment ever performed in the history of science, exists only in the mind of those who belive in it.
My dog can run fast, jump, and catch a Frisbee in his mouth. No human I know can do that !!
That settels it for me...Odin is real!
EMD Merck licensed the procedure for making graphene oxide …
So, where's the demonstration of the supernatural?
Premise one: Something cannot originate from nothing.
Premise two: For something to originate it requires a precursor that came from nothing.
Each premise makes the other false.
Has Dr Tour debated major atheists?
"Major Atheist" interesting concept. Tour tends to chicken out when the time comes. At least that's what he did when Nick Matzke took him up on his “offer” to explain Evolution to him ("all expanses payed") he first attached a condition to the meeting, he stated, quote: “It shall not be recorded or extend beyond the three of us as this is not for show but for my edification.” and when he did not get his will of disclosure he bailed out. What does that tell you?
It tells me he knows a) he is spilling bs about the process of evolution and b) he knows that even the disproval of it (good luck) would not add any credibility to any God proposal. Since his entire grift is based on this false suggstuion. in regards to evolution and abiogenesis alike, he is not so keen on public debates. He prefers the "security" of a scientifically illiterate audience.
3:55 Girl Scout cookies
Dr Gerald Schroeder PhD MIT physicist defends creation.
With what? Wishful thinking and fallacies?
@@derhafi Einstein followed Rabbi Spinoza theology...
Dr Alvin Radkowsky designer of the US Naval nuclear power plants an observant Jew.
Many other top physicists not atheists.
There is no proof for or against a creator..
Therefore Atheism is a theology by default.
Also explain recent UFO s as legitimate as per US Navy and Pente
agon...
Much we don't know or may never understand.
Meanwhile I keep an open mind.
Shalom
@@MitzvosGolem1 "Much we don't know or may never understand." as true as this is, using this as a justification to make shit up that has no demonstrable correlation with reality, out of an urge to fill this gaps, is fallaciouse and dishonest.
"There is no proof for or against a creator..
Therefore Atheism is a theology by default." That is plain nonsense.
Shalom
@@derhafi tell Einstein and Hans Bethe Dr Edward Teller and many others they are foolish after you obtain a PhD in Physics.
Dr Richard Feynman also stated" it's possible".
I have a M.S. Degree MIT Physics... and worked for Fermilab US department of Energy on Nuclear research.
No one here walks around mocking religion.
Shalom
@@MitzvosGolem1 I'm not saying that a God is impossible. I'm saying that I'm not convinced that there is anything supernatural (inclusing all gods ever) due to the lack of evidence that would warrant such a belief. That is wat Atheism is.
Not that it matters what Einstein thought, but you should think twice before you play this fallacious "argument from authority" card the next time:
"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." - Einstein January 3 1954
Science absolutely does not make Faith obsolete, because they're designed for different things.
1 - Science is designed to find answers that can be tested / proven.
2 - Faith is designed to provide psychological comfort. A supernatural being is in charge. The universe runs according to a predetermined plan. Don't worry, you're going straight to heaven.
Thank you for sharing this informative video. God bless you.
Psalm 24 KJV
1. The earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.
2 For he hath founded it upon the seas, and established it upon the floods.
3 Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? or who shall stand in his holy place?
4 He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.
5 He shall receive the blessing from the Lord, and righteousness from the God of his salvation.
6 This is the generation of them that seek him, that seek thy face, O Jacob. Selah.
7 Lift up your heads, O ye gates; and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in.
8 Who is this King of glory? The Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle.
9 Lift up your heads, O ye gates; even lift them up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in.
10 Who is this King of glory? The Lord of hosts, he is the King of glory. Selah.
John 14:6
6. Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me........
If Eve was created by GOD from Adam's rib, was Eve's DNA the same as Adam's DNA...?
Except for the sex chromosomes, it could be.
Adam has an X and Y chromosome in each cell. Eve would have X and X.
@@ScarlettOHare1 how did Jesus DNA have only 24 chromosomes?
When all other humans have 43???
One thing that can't be manufactured in a lab is blood with 24 chromosomes.
czcams.com/video/ZnGAbItjr2I/video.html
Jonathon Gray backs up Ron Wyatt's findings with blood test proof 24 minutes in
THERE IS A SAVIOUR
and it's not Donald Trump.
There's only a collision between science and faith if one lets his faith dictate how he does his science.
Doc Tour is a creationist. So his bias is that abiogenesis is false and, indeed, MUST be false. Since it's false, there is no pathway for abiogenesis to work. So it's a waste of time to try to find that path. It's therefore more productive to find the holes in abiogenesis, and prove that it cannot work.
Doc Tour's faith made science obsolete.
I don't think Tour really knows that abiogenesis is false -- only that his faith dictates it MUST be false.
Tour is smart enough to know his position is not scientific. I suspect he enjoys his "hero" status among Christian apologists -- the "brilliant" scientist who justifies their need to hang on to Biblical explanations. He has so much invested in that position now that it would be a huge betrayal for him to alter his "no way" stand on abiogenesis.
Tour is a smart guy. So smart, indeed, that he can outsmart himself.
[BOOK] Critique of intelligent design: materialism versus creationism from antiquity to the present
JB Foster, B Clark, R York - 2008 - rter.ga
… In The Triumph of Evolution and the Failure of Creationism, Eldredge exposes the deep flaws
in creationists' arguments and calls … one of our leading evolutionary theorists is careful not to
dehumanize the intellectual and political adherents of "intelligent design theory." It focuses …
Cited by 37 Related articles All 2 versions
I'll be so epic if Mr.Tour had a debate with bill nye . In evolution and creation.
Bill believes "nothing created everything"
Tour believes a God used his divine power to create everything out f nothing...It is , what the Bible teaches, isn’t it? chapter one: A divine being with supernatural powers, “God”, with no origin by himself (special pleading fallacy), turns nothing into something. I agree, it is foolish nonsense! Believers seem to have no problem with that..
A bit of mathematical sound and emperical based physics, aka actual reality.. and believers go ..."that's ridiculouse”
@@derhafi black holes break (time space matter) laws .it's reality has different domains(nature) that are unknown to us and limited intelligence are limited to time space and matter .still black holes are out there .
@@fransiskito9113 There is a lot we don't understand in physics: the nature of dark matter and dark energy, what happens at the Big Bang or inside a black hole, why the particles and forces have the characteristics they do?
We don't know this things....so what? That does add credibility to the idea of a supernatural God.
"it's reality has different domains(nature) that are unknown to us" No, there are things we don't know...that does not mean that there ia a supernatural realm with influebnce on our reality.
You suggest that there is a ill-defined creator/ a metaphysical substance/ entity/ force/intelligence/power/God/ supernatural realm whatever, not subject to the known laws of physics, that supposingly interacts with the fabric of our reality in ways that have thus far eluded every controlled experiment ever performed in the history of science.
This suggestion is solely based on personal incredulity.
@@derhafi just like you said there's a lot we don't understand about creation/ physics. I think It'll be hard to understand the creators nature .robbie
Let's put it this way
If there's creation there's a creator.
We cannot create nor distroy energy. Hopefully you know this law of energy .
But lets talk about things we know about like
1*GREED
2*Pride
3*Anger/ hate
4*LUST-FULL-people.
5*ENVY
6* LAZINESS
7*GLUTTONY
Let's discuss the root of all the worlds problems. Broken families, teen drug-addicts .wrathful disobedient to parents, spouse affairs, cheaters,alcoholics. Greedy politicians - corruption, poverty - robbery .cartels.
Careless. Cruel to everyone ,murderers. Depression. Self hate. Self inflict. Suicide. Overdose... and many more.
Let me know if you support or if you're against the 7 roots of sin.
@@fransiskito9113 “I think It'll be hard to understand the creators natur” Given the available evidence that would point to a “creator” it is really no that hard…a “creator” is an unfounded assumption with no demonstrable correaltion with reality. There is not one sound argument, let alone a trace of evidence that would support such a proposal. That is a pretty well defined understanding would you not agree?
“If there's creation there's a creator.“ Again..an unfounded assumption. There are things where the evidence points to a creator. Houses, cars, birdsnests..Those creators, humans, birds etc.. all have a demonstrable correaltion with reality.
Then, there are naturally occurring things, due to natural processes, predictable processes that we largely understand very well, like planets, stars and snowflakes..etc.
And then there are things we don’t know…this is where you fallaciously attempt to wiggle in the God you happen to believe in like a well lubricated dildo.
We don’t know…does not translate to “God did it” Gods are not the default position…they are as credible as unicorns until their existence is demonstrated.
„We cannot create nor distroy energy“ That is very true, yet irrelevant. Or was there an argument for your „creator“ coming? If so, you left out this part.
So…a list of the 7 deadly sins...At least according to a cobbled-together anthology of disjointed documents full of contradictions and supernatural claims, composed, revised, translated, distorted and 'improved' by hundreds of anonymous authors, editors and copyists, unknown to us and mostly unknown to each other, spanning nine centuries.
Again. irrelevant. Or was there an argument for your „creator“ coming? If so, you left out this part, again. Are you suggesting we solve any problems by appealing to some fiction? If so..How? Are you suggesting that those add credibility to any God claim? If so..How?
Have you actually ever put together an argument before?
It takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does in creation by God, so it is their religion and thus they defend it because they are faced with the truth they don't want to admit to. I don't need evidence to believe though, as Yashua lived and died and rose again from the dead and He gave us His Spirit to comfort and to teach us the truth and do believe Adonai is teaching through this lesson to those who are led astray by their science teachers into a fairy tale of evolution.
It's irrational and illogical to demand strict rules for the natural universe only to claim it's caused by a precursor that breaks every one of those rules. It's disingenuous to claim that Something can't come from nothing so it must have been created by something that came from nothing. That gets you no closer to a beginning and the supernatural is impossible to test because there is no evidence to be tested.
@@lrvogt1257 : It's easy to test for God. Just get down on your knees in a private place and ask God for forgiveness and help in receiving his blessings and he will come into your room just like he did for Dr. James Tour. When Jesus visits you in your own bedroom it's difficult to deny he exists.
@@bobblacka918 : And yet Tour can't use the same criteria, evidence, or proof he demands for the science he doesn't understand well. Anything that interferes with his supernatural beliefs he requires rigorous proof... but not for his own beliefs. What hypocrisy. Anyone can believe whatever they choose to believe but that's no reason for me to believe it.
@@lrvogt1257 : It's not a matter of understanding, it's a matter of evidence. You can't say Compound X plus heat makes Compound Y if you can't make that reaction work in the real world. That's all Dr. Tour is saying, i.e. "Show me the evidence."
If you carefully read ANY book on evolution, they make statements like, "This could have happened." They never say: "This actually happened." It's all speculation and the authors of the text books know it. At least they abide by good ethical standards and let you know they don't have proof, but still it misleads a lot of students into thinking the scientists know exactly what happened when actually they don't.
@@bobblacka918 : There is often confusion on these sites between evolution and abiogenesis which is a completely different process. 1st, ALL science is described in terms of probability. Evolution is the most robust and verified scientific theory in science based on every single related field of inquiry. Tour admits his lack of expertise yet persists in mis-leading non-scientific audiences. Tour overstates and misrepresents scientist's claims about abiogenesis. He has quote mined scientists who have called him out on it. But my point is that it's total BS to whine about the science others are doing to find out how things work and then just claim it was done by some ultimate supernatural entity that simply willed it into existence. Now THAT is wild speculation or primitive mythology at best with ZERO evidence and not even a hint of a mechanism for how that could have happened. It's hypocritical and dishonest.
Now today, 10-10-2021 graphene, while maybe an incredible leap in technology.
I'm afraid that it has been abused and is not being used in the same gesture of altruism that this gentleman speaks of.
Or, he is part of the deception.
Thoughts anyone?
47:03 I *disagree* !!!!!
Start with the *assumption that homology and taxonomy imply descent, do a bunch of math and complex analysis to characterize the homology and call it evidence. Same exact thing could develop “evidence” that 2021 vehicles have a common ancestor. Kingdom vehicle, class automobile, family box trucks, genus light-duty box trucks, species bmw class 7 box truck. You can crunch numbers on those categories all you want it won’t be evidence that particular truck evolved by unguided processes nor had a common ancestor. They were DESIGNED AND CREATED and still have common characteristics and components and clear categories. 48:59 ... No, it doesn’t. It means designers used similar tactics in similar but distinct products. The devout Christian who created our taxonomy knew homology does not imply descent, unless already assumed.
The wedge at work: How intelligent design creationism is wedging its way into the cultural and academic mainstream
B Forrest - Intelligent design creationism and its critics …, 2001 - books.google.com
… the scientific failure of the wedge, the CRSC is tireless in advancing the rest of its strategy-(1)
establishing a beachhead in higher education;(2) influencing public opinion by a steady stream
of popular publications; and (3) most insidiously, insinuating “intelligent design theory” …
Cited by 59 Related articles All 2 versions
None of this would pass peer review.
Looking through the comments, I see the atheists have taken to calling Dr. Tour names, or braying about fairy tales, but none of them have discredited his science. If life and consciousness can spring forth from non-life, we should see new life forms emerging constantly.
That is not necessarily the case. The conditions for the origin of life may be much different than the conditions billions of years later. But they may be happening on other planets right now if conditions are right. And many animals show consciousness. Tour's flaw is he can't give the same scientific rigor to his ID that he demands of natural selection.
@@lrvogt1257 yes it is necessariy the case. human DNA has 3 billion base pairs of 4 different chemicals in CODE. FORGET THE MAYBES and the ifs. Its just your desire that their not be a creator you are accountable to. You are not alone.
@@ralphgoreham3516 : First, don't assume you know my motivations. Second, I don't get the logic. You've just replaced one unknown with a more extreme unknown.
The more we dig into the natural processes, the more we have learned about them. We didn't even know about the double helix when I was born. There is no reason to stop inquiring while we're learning so much.
Even if there were such a creator, we'd want to know the process. We know the 4 nucleotides appear naturally even in space. We know how cells work. We just need to keep looking how they got from one to the next. If there was a supernatural instigator... where and how did it happen? We know it happened about 3.8 billion years ago.
@@lrvogt1257 We do not know life began 3..8 billion years ago.
If bacteria did, why did it take 2 billion years at least to get the junp to multi celled organisms. Also prokaryotes are a quarter the mass of Eukaryotes, thus evo not possible, there are no stages. It is well known origin of life research has gone nowhere in some 50 years. But you have faith continual enquiry will bring the answers. BTW what is the definition of a nucleotide? It is apparent you dont know. It is not possible to know how our creator created some 16 million types of insects, animals, marine and land that we have some idea to study in number and, 100s of 1000s of various plant life.
@@ralphgoreham3516 : The earliest direct evidence of life on Earth are microfossils of microorganisms permineralized in 3.465-billion-year-old Australian Apex chert rocks. You're making the old. "It seems impossible, therefore god" argument. Just because the moment life began is not known yet does not mean a lot has not been learned. I know for certain were not going to learn anything about what and how anything happened from Genesis. Evolution produces the diversity of life. This we know regardless of how it began. The dictionary definition of nucleotide is quite sufficient.
Dr Tour lost a challenge he had on his website and has since removed it. The challenger was scientist Joshua Swamidass.
Uhhh... no, its there, Google it. .atheist are usually wrong or lying.
@@paisleymakonen6521 "We discussed the evidence for common descent and neutral theory. Soon after, he removed the challenge from his website"
-Joshua Swamidass
Peaceful Science (website)
Swamidass is not an atheist.
@@paisleymakonen6521 You want to know how wrong Tour exactly is and what a shameless liar he is? Here you go:
czcams.com/video/SixyZ7DkSjA/video.html
czcams.com/video/ghJGnMwRHCs/video.html
czcams.com/video/Jf72o6HmVNk/video.html
Yeah
Answer yes
I understand why they need to give sort of Naturalistic Explanations for this type of thing, But a point to remember is if God Can Speak more than 200 Billion Galaxies into existence from the Power of his word alone then causing a few tiny fragments of Land surface to move apart and for a few drops of water to bust through some rock flood the Earth then Go back down again into its Ringwoodite container would be a Snap for Him, People always say how did the Ark Float how did all the Animals fit on the Ark, Noah could have made the Ark out of tissue paper and God could have made it float and fit a Billion Animals on it, Obviously God needed man to take part in his own and the Animals Temporal Salvation via an Ark, also he could have simply said DIE all life and it would have just Died, But where would be the lesson in that, we wouldn't have 40 million Cubic miles of Sedimentary rock full of Trillions and Trillions of Fossils for the Atheists to reject or not then would we, I think these scientific papers amuses God Greatly I certainly enjoy them as well, but I think you find if you make it to Heaven and you ask God, God will say, No my Child I simply Willed it to happen and it was So, But I did enjoy all your Arguments for my Flood and my Great Works, to God we are nothing more than a bunch of infant's fumbling around in the Dark trying to understand things we will never understand in any profound way, We need Faith true Faith that God Can do Anything he wants he is above and Created the Natural Laws he can tweak them as he pleases when he pleases with no need for Gravity Stretching or pulling or Comets hitting the Earth it's all for an Example of his power that we may have true Faith in Him :)
@@garywalker447 Really and can you give me evidence of your God Nothing as nothing created everything, so it is your God can you give me evidence for it :)
To Quote the Evolutionists.
'in the beginning there was nothing, no time, no space, no matter, Not even an Atom absolutely completely Nothing, Just a Dark Black Void, a magic dot appeared via a quantum fluctuation that no body has ever seen or will ever see for all time into infinity, unless they believe in Fantasy imagined fairytales from Fools like Lawrence Krauss (No satisfactory explanation on how or why the magic dot Appeared) it was a trillion times smaller than an atom, incredibly hot, incredibly dense (just like an evolutionist) spinning very very very fast, Space folding in on itself, then for no apparent reason in a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second it started Expanding/Exploded (it would have had to expand at the rate of expanding to the size of our solar system every 20 millionth of a second (Something like that) for the big bang to make any sense at all for the size of the known universe reducing in speed as time went on) and it kept expanding after 3 minutes it expanded to the size of 100 thousand light years and kept expanding until it got as big as it currently is creating all the Time Space and Matter we see in the known universe today, this inflatton according to evolutionists expanded billions of times faster than the speed of light.
It's funny that evolutionists can invoke faster than the speed of light speeds when it suits them, but when creationists suggest the speed of light was not always constant (Starlight travel times) they laugh and ridicule us light has been. Measured to be slowing down btw, anyway back to it, they believe nothing created everything and that nothing is not really nothing that its something, that everything is not really everything that its actually nothing, I have seen Krauss explain how all the matter in the universe is half positive and half negative, and because of the 50% Positive energy and 50% Negative energy that these to things added together actually gets you a big fat 0 yes Zero, they actually believe everything equates to nothing and that Nothing equals everything,, I am Thinking a padded Cell is exactly the equation that they need.
Also some Evolutionists try to get around the appearance of fine tuning and design by saying Aliens must have seeded us but Aliens couldn't have seeded us because somebody would have had to have seeded them so on and so on, that's a circular argument that will never end or can never work, this means there is only 2 options An All Powerful Holy Spirit Being that Spoke life into existence as we have only ever observed life creating life or Purely random chance via purely naturalistic means from chemicals washed out of rocks all brought into existence via a quantum fluctuation popping an infinitesimally small singularity into existence. They know the Universe had to have had a beginning, they know it's all going to burn out and become cold dead and dark one day, even if they had evidence of new Stars/Suns Forming which they don't but if they did, there is only a finite amount of Gas. (Energy). in the universe, they know 100% certain that it has to run out, Therefore they can't get around the fact that it had to have had a BEGINNING at some point, Somewhere somehow, That is why they have to think up fantastic wild theories and then use thousands of hypotheses to prop up the main central Theory As evolution is supposed to be the answer to and for everything.
Please explain Atheist evolutionists Exactly how Nothing created everything, I will be sitting on the edge of my Seat with Baited Breath waiting for Zatt Explanation, LOL!!!
Teach people they are nothing but Animals, then don't be surprised when they Act Like Animals.
It takes Far more faith to believe Nothing created everything and us being nothing more than a cosmic accident that has no meaning, than it does to believe an all powerful Creator (The Lord Jesus Christ) Spoke everything into Existence from Nothing, as science has never observed non life creating life, the only thing science has observed is that it takes life to create life.
they don't have a clue, they have many very weak theories and hypotheses but no scientific Facts to back them up, we should not give the big bang credibility by calling it a scientific Theory, because a scientific theory if it can not be tested and observed then reproduced, it has to be thrown away, then get a new theory to try and test it, that is what science is The Big Bang/Expansion is unscientific nonsense being portrayed as factual science, evolution is a faith based Religion more like a violent death cult definitely not Science, Pseudoscience yes.
anything that can never be tested or observed and reproduced for all time, is not science, it is a hypothesis, basically a fantasy story a wish list of the way they want things to be, we are teaching children fantasy stories as though they're facts, that is wrong! no surgeon ever went to a book of evolutionary origins to learn what incisions to make and where to make them to perform an operation on a patient, no that surgeon will consult a book of Real Science about anatomy and surgical procedures before an operation, we should be teaching about real science that has real benefits in the real world, not fantasy stories of evolution that have zero basis in science. Love God Love your Family Love your Fellow man and then Last but not least Love your Country.
Here is Steven Hawking Embarrassing himself claiming everything came from Nothing and how Nothing governs everything we do, Steven Hawking's unless he Believed on the Lord Jesus Christ and his Gospel, is in Hell and begging God for another chance Which he will not get because of all the minds he demented with his satanic lies, Hawking's now knows Heaven Hell and God exist, but he can't tell anybody about it, as the dead can't have any contact with people only demons Satan Angels and God Almighty can interact with people, and satan is going to be sure most people never see the supernatural with their own eyes, because that would be evidence, that only leaves God himself, I pray he opens people's eyes that they haven't caused him to withdraw from them to much, if they're involved in Sodomy they most probably will have caused God to withdraw from them, in that case they will most probably go their hole lives without ever getting a whisper of the supernatural then they will die and Go to Hell then to the lake of fire For eternity, where the smoke of their torment will rise up for ever and ever.
Stephen Hawking M theory makes God unnecessary original quote
czcams.com/video/nb7LCau_Z_Y/video.html
Something of Nothing | Curiosity
czcams.com/video/jcrRyK4uO8g/video.html
A ridiculous curiosity, that is certain.
SOMETHING FROM NOTHING ? [OFFICIAL] Richard Dawkins & Lawrence Krauss [HD] 02-04-12
czcams.com/video/YUe0_4rdj0U/video.html
Hawking's admitting no scientist knows how life started on this Earth, and rambling on about nothing creating everything, Steven Hawking's talking exclusively.
Questioning the universe | Stephen Hawking
czcams.com/video/xjBIsp8mS-c/video.html
The big bang fairytale Fantasy Story told by Irrational Geographic:
Before Time and Space | National Geographic
czcams.com/video/nVsHjnY-o9s/video.html
Do you want a really good laugh watch this, this is Lying Evolutionist Scientists droning on with the most nonsensical rubbish, anybody that can believe this, either has their piggy Snout in the Scientific funding trough or is Completely stupid or deceitful or both.
What Happened before the Big Bang?[Full Documentary]HD
czcams.com/video/g-MT4mIyqc0/video.html
The bible says God stretches out the universe.
Isaiah 42:5
“Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:”
King James Version (KJV)
King James Bible
Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain:
Of course when the people discovered the universe is stretching out, WHICH CONFIRMS THE BIBLE, what do the Wile E Coyote Super Geniuses do, they say We know God doesn't exist so let's concoct a Fairytale story about how a magic dot popped into existence via a quantum fluctuation and then expanded billions of times the speed of light for the Big Bang to make any sense, then would obviously slow down with time. Hmmm Yeah that'll do it LOL!!
Remember this you can't get to the evolution of the first creatures that appeared on Earth without a beginning to the universe, so to assert the beginning doesn't matter and that how the first single celled organism appeared doesn't matter that the only thing that matters is how evolution progressed after that is absolutely ridiculous and mind numbingly Stupid, But I get that from evolutionists regularly.
Hawking's explains how nothing Created Everything LOL!, anyone that believes this is insane.
czcams.com/video/5W-3M_2nXFY/video.html
James Tour: The Mystery of the Origin of Life
czcams.com/video/zU7Lww-sBPg/video.html
@@ConstitutionalConservation Wow what a load of bullshit. Did you expect me to read all this shit?
@@garywalker447 Your God:
Do you want a really good laugh watch this, this is Lying Evolutionist Scientists droning on with the most nonsensical rubbish, anybody that can believe this, either has their piggy Snout in the Scientific funding trough or is Completely stupid or deceitful or all three.
What Happened before the Big Bang?[Full Documentary]HD
czcams.com/video/g-MT4mIyqc0/video.html
@@garywalker447 Your God NOTHING!
The big bang fairytale Fantasy Story told by Irrational Geographic:
Before Time and Space | National Geographic
czcams.com/video/nVsHjnY-o9s/video.html
@@garywalker447 Your God NOTHING:
SOMETHING FROM NOTHING ? [OFFICIAL] Richard Dawkins & Lawrence Krauss [HD] 02-04-12
czcams.com/video/YUe0_4rdj0U/video.html
“The more I study science, the more I believe in God.” --- Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), founder of modern physics (Theory of Relativity inter alia) and 1921 Nobel prize winner
This is a made-up quote. Here's a real one: "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
- Albert Einstein, 1954, Albert Einstein: The Human Side.
Kirk Cameron once proposed the "Croco-Duck" analogy suggesting that evolution can produce such a beast. He was wrong and likely knew it too. Dr. Tour is suggesting this too but in a more elaborate way, as he suggests that a change mechanism needs to be proposed to go from one life prototype to another. This is really silly.
...Does science make faith obsolete?
Yes!
Explain please
@@bobsoya9681 ...stop reading the Bible and start reading a physics text book.
In your narrow mind that's an answer.
When you remove your brain and keep it somewhere before reading the Bible that's what make you not to answer simple a question on a public media
@@bobsoya9681 ..."Explain please" is too general a question. If you want a more comprehensive answer you must be more specific.
Religion is big business and a great tax dodge resulting in powerful leaders telling people what to think and how to live.
Interesting to hear a non-evolutionary biologist tell all the other evolutionary biologist experts that they are wrong.
"Does Science Make Faith Obsolete?"
Yes.
Going on reality does NOT require or need faith, indeed it requires NOT going on Faith. As can be seen in Dr. Tour many irrational beliefs, such as his belief that the Great Flood was a real event. Contrary to geology, biology and even written history.
Now it is POSSIBLE to do science and be religious, as long as you don't let your beliefs overwhelm the evidence when doing science. Dr Tour's REAL science has nothing to do with his disproved beliefs. He is not a geologist or a biochemist.
Ethelred Hardrede
Quantum Physics has shown that Reality is based on Probabilities.
A statistical impossibility is defined as “a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 1/10^50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a Rational, Reasonable argument." The probability of finding one particular atom out of all of the atoms in the universe has been estimated to be 1/10^80. The probability of a functional 150 amino acid protein chain forming by chance is 1/10^164. It has been calculated that the probability of DNA forming by chance is 1/10^119,000. The probability of random chance protein-protein linkages in a cell is 1/10^79,000,000,000. Based on just these three cellular components, it would be far more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the cell was not formed by undirected random natural processes. Note: Abiogenesis Hypothesis posits that un-directed random natural processes, i.e. random chance formation, of molecules led to living organisms. Natural selection has no effect on individual atoms and molecules on the micro scale in a prebiotic environment. (*For reference, peptides/proteins can vary in size from 3 amino acid chains to 34,000 amino acid chains. Some scientists consider 300-400 amino acid protein chains to be the average size. There are 42,000,000 protein molecules in just one (1) simple cell, each protein requiring precise assembly. There are approx. 30,000,000,000,000 cells in the human body.) Furthermore, of all the physical laws and constants, just the Cosmological Constant alone is tuned to a level of 1/10^120; not to mention the fine-tuning of the Mass-Energy distribution of early universe which is 1/ 10^10^123. Therefore, in the fine-tuning argument, it would be more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the multi-verse is not the correct answer while trying to determine the origin of the universe.
A "Miracle" is considered to be an event with a probability of occurrence of 1/10^6. Abiogenesis, RNA World Hypothesis, and Multiverse would all far, far, far exceed any "Miracle". Yet, these extremely Irrational and Unreasonable hypotheses are what many of the world’s top scientists ‘must’ believe in and promote because of a prior commitment to a strictly arbitrary, subjective, biased, narrow, limiting, materialistic ideology / worldview.
Every idea, number, concept, thought, theory, mathematical equation, abstraction, qualia, Information, etc. existing within and expressed by anyone is "Immaterial" or "Non-material". The very idea or concept of "Materialism" is an immaterial entity and by it's own definition does not exist. Modern science seems to be stuck in archaic, subjective, biased ideologies that have inadequately attempted to define the "nature of reality" or the "reality of nature" for millenia. A Paradigm Shift in ‘Science’ is needed for humanity to advance. A major part of this Science Paradigm Shift would be the formal acknowledgment by the scientific community of the existence of "Immaterial" or "Non-material" entities as verified and confirmed by discoveries in Quantum Physics.
Creationism and intelligent design
RT Pennock - Annual Review of Genomics and Human …, 2003 - annualreviews.org
… Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics (61) is an 800-page sourcebook that includes
representative … Their assumption is that design is the only alternative to evolution, and that creation
will … Jerry Coyne criticized Behe for his “failure to deal honestly with the evidence for …
Cited by 98 Related articles All 18 versions
But whats the point of this‼️‼️☹️and others going to use iz for for wrong memory of computers to con people. Why bigger force bigger crash😱‼️
Dr. tour see if you can join REASON TO BELIEVE.
"faith and belief go beyond scientific evidence" -this guy who pretends to be a scientist
*edit: it was brought to my attention that apparently my point, highlighting the absurdity of taking the foundation of his entire career and its amazing truth-finding power only to throw it right out of the window when it comes to even just _testing_ the beliefs he considers most important, is null and void. Because this man "MAKES MOLECULES", like some kind of -GOD- kid in middle school chemistry class.
you must be a very unhappy man. Did you know this man MAKES MOLECULES. Sad.
When Tour speak science, he brings me closer to God. When he speaks religion he takes me back to science and far from God. The problem is that Tour's science is free from the "churches" of science, his religion slave to religious churches.
Goy George
That's your problem not his problem and when you understand that you'll realize why your comment is a reflection of you and not him.
Sorry but it is HIS problem. He is the one trying to sell a belief. Science is objective, religion subjective. I dont need Tour to believe. No one needs a church to believe.
Faith is a gift from God. You are not born with it. You just can’t believe and have conviction that it is true. How does someone know when they know something is true? It’s through experience which is what I’ve learned during my journey on this rock
Goy George
So he must deny his truth to make your truth
Wish you would study the Bible like you study molecules & atoms.
You have accepted Caesar Constantine's layout of Catholicism, as fact.
Matt Powell has a giant inflatable banana in his backyard he calls Dr. Peel
poor atheists
@
Your paying tithes to Dawkins instead for his rubbish books.
@@70AD-user45 No, Dawkins is not a liar.
Gods Will created life by speaking from it. :)
Which God and how exactly does this work? Divine magic?
There is no science without faith just like there's no religion without faith.
AI will make both obsolete.
Wrong. Science has no need of faith. Science requires evidence. Faith requires gullibility.
@@garywalker447 Scientific theories require belief(they call it different names) from the scientific community to be pushed further into mainstream. If I'm wrong I'm chopping my d... right now! I agree it has to be based on evidence but not 100% otherwise it wouldn't be called a theory and you wouldn't start jumping on me if your faith hasn't been offended in the first place.
@@AbelbenAdam In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact"--part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist argument: evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in the world of science--that is, not believed in the scientific community to be as infallible as it once was."
Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.
Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.
Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually emphasized the difference between his two great and separate accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a theory--natural selection--to explain the mechanism of evolution.
- Stephen J. Gould, " Evolution as Fact and Theory"; Discover, May 1981
Science is a deviation from faith or belief.
@@albejaine Wrong, it's been proven that the faith in the positive outcome of scientific experiment actually drags the curve. Think of it as a huge hard problem in the scientific butt..never mind, go back to sleep..
Hack
Science does not make faith obsolete because they are unrelated; the title of this video may as well be, "Do apples make bathtubs obsolete?" Firstly. faith was never a relevant or valid position because to believe something with absolute authority in the absence of evidence is the route to prideful misinformation. Faith is what holds ISIS together or what prompts a cult to drink the Kool-Aid. Secondly, science is a process for scrutinizing our assertions and assigning relative confidence to our beliefs.. Polar-oppositely, faith is the complete absence of scrutiny.
You have to explain your own existence to your own satisfaction. Everything else is irrelevant.
Please science starts off with faith, an idea, a belief also to believe, a confidence, an opinion, and all of these lead back to faith. It is faith that instigates investigation.
Christian definition of Faith
Test all things and hold fast to what is good.
Cal Worthington Jr. You have to believe in evolution...
Don Helland that's not science though. . Science can only satisfy itself. Its only as relevant as the data suggest.
Dr. Tour would do well to abandon everything having to do with evolution and focus on God's word as translated in the KJV bible. In 6 days all things were created roughly 6,000 yrs ago. All men Liars only God is truthful.
You declared war on abiogenesis unnecessarily. Believers can always say this is how God made it. You are trampling on others first amendment rights. Crazed crusader.
dont be silly.
first amendment right gives him right to criticize abiogenisis.
same it gives you the right to criticize him.
@@spatrk6634 sorry. Tell me your faith and I can post 13 videos attacking it. Who does that?
@@baraskparas faith?
Tour attacks specific branch of science, not faith.
and Tour isnt actually attacking anything.
he is defending his credibility, because he got debunked by random youtube channel so he is now desperatly trying to keep his followers before they realise that he has no idea about abiogenisis.
so he made 13 part video of him being on a butthurt rant. its hilarious, its not attacking anyone, atleast, nobody is getting hurt from that "attack".
its funny not painful
I suppose you’re right
@@baraskparas i know i am.
he knows nothing about abiogenisis, anybody who read even a little about it would know that he isnt talking about anything that abiogenisis actually suggests and parts that he clearly does know, he missrepresents because of dishonesty and because he needs to save his little reputation he has...
dont get me wrong, Tour is an expert in his field of nanotechnology. but he is obviously clueless about abiogenisis.
its like you are listening to a gardner criticizing all car mechanics about how they repair cars
Astonishing that he thinks Darwinian evolution is too improbable to believe. Yet he will believe Bible verses that scholars know Jesus never said. Imagine how oppressive it must feel to his graduate students to pretend that they too are Christians, just so they can get a PhD in chemistry from this guy.
You are trying to debunk abiogenesis because you know it happened and you don’t like it Tour.
Human science is a poor reflection of Divine science.
Look up how science works. You seem to be confused on that matter...big time!
@@derhafi I'm not confused at all. We only have an approximation to certain aspects of operational science. There are billions of things we don't know yet.
All the theories regarding cosmogony are fabrications. They can't even explain how stars are formed
@@yoda9824 There are a lot of things we do not know ... I agree. Whoever, this does not make it rational to assume that something supernatural is responsible for everything we do not know yet. Especially when there was never any evidence for anything beyond the natural world. In fact we know of all forces and particles and the nature of such, which interact with us, further we can ba sure that there is nothing else. The standard model of particals and the quantum field theory make sure of that. They have a sigma 5 certainty. Look up what that means...... Because contrary to your belief, you are not as informed about science as you could be. Are you still in school?
BTW, we know very well how stars form.