@QualiaSoup, In 1965 NASA was devoting its efforts to put a man on the Moon, not Mars; although it was considering it as the next step. Just a minor detail you missed but the video is very well done.
This is insane, making long videos about what is just logical. I cannot fathom what enviroment and what kind of people one must have in their midst to feel the need to take the time to refute this stupidity. Ignorance must be fought in educational systems, the scientific method must be explained early and proven in practice in the school system so to disarm whatever ignorance is pushed onto the children outside school. Trying to convert adults are imo futile, stupidity has no cure in adults.
@aaronb00key - Uncommon sense, hehe? The thing is, we got some really heavy believers here in Sweden too, but creationism and alike is still more or less unheard of. Even the most hardcore christians here still believe in science & things like evolution - and of course that is due to what they learned in school. So it's really hard to grasp how people just don get things like this, I can't really understand how it's possible in times like these, with interner a.s.o...
@karikon11 "we know that a univere can exist so is it not resonarble to belive that more universes exist then just this one ?"
Its about as reasonable as believing in intelligent design and a creator, actually its even LESS reasonable then believing in the latter. And yet many scientists subscribe to this line of thought, but do not subscribe to a creator. Hence the lunacy if you will. Believing in a multiverse with no proof.
@karikon11 That provides part of the bases for the Multi verse Theory, which I think contains a lot of weight. Especially since Michio Kaku is working on it.
the fundamental 'belief' of science is that there exists a 'reality' independent of the mind. if there exists a reality independent of the mind, then science (or scientists) should be able to prove that there exists a reality independent of the mind, without using the mind. since they can't, science too is based on a 'belief' (of an existence of an objective reality) just like religious beliefs.
@dharshana81 Oh yeah much like religious beliefs.. Oh except for that part where thousands of cognitive phenomena are validated through consistent matching results by multiple participants unless you are questioning your own existence? You might as well try to refute logic.
if u want a wider understanding of science and what it represents, watch nassim haramein's unified field theory. what y understood is that science is another small bubble of understanding of reality and it's not ok when they say it's everything
@stitch24021 Hi! I would like to advice you about Haramein's work. The thing is that he's not a scientist, as he claims to be. The reason is because he tries to mix what he thinks he know about physics and numerology, mysticism and faith, which is a crazy idea very far from what the serious international scientific communities in the world attempt to do. Go to the Wikipedia and read what 'unification of forces' actually means. Given your curiosity, please watch Cosmos of Carl Sagan. Enjoy! : )
Hear what God of Israel YAHUSHUA-YAHUWAH (Son and Father are ONE) saying to our generation by His chosen prophets: Trumpetcallofgodonline. com ; Letter called "Purify Your Faith, and Come to the Father as It is Written": EXCERPT: "Only in the Bible and through these very Letters, of which I have given to My prophet of the end of this age, shall you find Him and know Him."
a theory is not the most powerful status that an explanation can attain! A theory is a theory, it can be wrong, think of Quantum Physics where two completely contradicting theories can co-exist. A theory can be proven or disproved!! in the view point of physics, there is no theorem, but the most powerful status of an explanation would be a Law. Like newton's second law of motion. F = ma. Proven to hold true at classical mechanics setup after centuries of discovery.
@vincentleest Do you know what a physical law is? It's a theory. According to the Oxford dictionary, it's a theoretical set of principles. So no, a theory is the most powerful. Even if it wasn't, you still can't ignore that gravity is a theory.
@Nicenice404 Not ignoring the fact that gravity is a theory. im just sayin there could be a better way to describe the physics of things attract. Someday, someone can come and say. you guys are completely wrong abt gravity becoz of xyz. n will we have a new theory that better describes what n y things happen..But at the end, we actually know nothing about anything. according to Godel's incompleteness theorem, we don't even know if the math system we are using is consistent or not..
@vincentleest Why don't we go back to the statement you made before.
"The highest status in science is not a law, not a theory."
I was correcting that and that alone. We don't know anything about anything? Sure we could be wrong, but the possibility of being wrong should not be the reason we think we're wrong. There is no reason to make such speculations until new evidence comes to light to prove us wrong.
@Nicenice404 Not ignoring the fact that gravity is a theory. im just sayin there could be a better way to describe the physics of things attract. Someday, someone can come and say. you guys are completely wrong abt gravity becoz of xyz. n will we have a new theory that better describes what n y things happen..But at the end, we actually know nothing about anything. according to Godel's incompleteness theorem, we don't even know if the math system we are using is consistent or not.
@vincentleest Word salads and an obvious lack of complete understanding does not make you appear intelligent. It only makes you look like a fool. Stop watching documentaries and actually make an attempt to truly understand the things you comment on. Especially Godel.
@uniteordie1 2 things that i want to reply to, A scientific theory is not a hunch or a guess but is a coherent explanation that DESCRIBES facts. <- I agree to this statement, but i would like to focus on the word describe. A scientific theory is verified after an experiment, and math equations can describe the physics. Science is about trying to get close to the truth, but you will never know whether you have reached the truth yet. people thought earth was the center of the universe
@uniteordie1 and yet Galileo came and said otherwise. People before Galileo came thought they were right but turns out what they have been taught was wrong. Same thing can happen to any theory in Science. to this point, i hope you're still agreeing w/ me. Maybe i have worded the first comment incorrectly, but the point i am trying to make is that Science do not explain why things happen, the "why" i am talking about is not the cause of things happen. F=ma, the box moves
@uniteordie1 becoz i applied net force to it. (accelerate to be exact) science do explain why the box is accelerating, but it doesn't explain why a box is accelerated in the relation of F=ma, why isn't it F=m^2a, or ma^2. Science have not provided any explanation to that. So, this is why i am saying, science doesn't explain things fully. 2) i learned about incompleteness theory in class when studying complexity and turing machines in college. i believe i understand the
@vincentleest F=ma was newton's first axiom, and while it must be assumed to step into mechanics, stress analysis, dynamics, etc., it has been done so on the basis that F=ma has given reliable results. There are plenty of laws that aren't true in all circumstances; Hooke's law, Newton's law of cooling, even N2L (F=/=ma, but F=d(mv)/dt ). After all, why would we use the THEORY of general relativity over Newton's LAW of gravitation? Because the law is wrong.
@uniteordie1 recursive axiomatic system pretty well, and i definitely did not watch any documentary about that. I was trying to make it easy for others to understand and avoid big words. Please do not prejudge and that's all i ask for.
@vincentleest No cause in fact most of newtanian physics was proven wrong by enistein light has no mass but has speed and can not be applicated in quantam physics a particle can exist in more places than one
@Luis568369 Well, that's why people add terms to the equation to it and say, "Now we think we know more about how the universe works".. but they are never sure that the universe behaves exactly like that.. there can be another guy just like enistein... and disprove the quantam physics, maybe there is no God's particle. All i am saying is.. physics is just a means of describing the universe using mathematics...and a description can always be not comprehensive..
@vincentleest true i agree with what your are saying here not with your post when you said a law is higher than theory in fact even laws can act like theory's gravity is both law and theory
@vincentleest You truly do not understand science or the philosophy of science. A law is not the most powerful status and you are thinking of theory in the every day use of the word. A scientific theory is completely different than a theory you personally may have about something. A scientific theory is not a hunch or a guess but is a coherent explanation that describes FACTS. A law does not posit an explanation of natural phenomenon. You may want to study the scientific method
This video is just sad. It has ZERO didactic merits. Although I understand and agree with most of what is said here, it is obvious that a video like this should be addressed to people WITHOUT a scientific background, and those people will not understand most of the video, due to the unnecessary use of technical vocabulary, boring pace and dull images. Why the fuck would anyone want to make a video like this, if only people who already believed in what it says can understand it? 0/10
I'm athiest however while I'm fully interested in science & the world around us & that Im not at all blinkered by any beliefs in gods etc, I'm the first to admit that I am not a scientist, I don't have a comprehensive understanding of science (I couldn't even get my head around the more complex theories in biology let alone Physics, Chemistry etc) & therefore I can only call science my belief because I believe in what scientists discover.... (Continued)
@IKillBabyKittensLOL A realization. A realization that I was lied to by my parents, how evidence absolutely contradicts my former beliefs, how liberating it feels to think rationally, how absurd and invalid the bible is, as well as how it blatantly contradicts the reality of documented history. I feel like I'm free, probably because I am.
I do not agree that given enough time everything will happen again and again. That is a totally illogical statement. Events outside the laws of physics do not occure. That being said, back to the subject. Not only do non scientific minds retard the advancement of knowledge but those of the scientists themselves are guilty of this. I've noticed tha many established scientists seem to support a status quo rather than rethink their conclusions... personal arrogance or or fear of lost status?
@UncleMatt69 In answer to your question, it's both and only depends on the consequences or if they're truly delusional. More often than not I would wager fear of lost status as that will impact ones livelihood, social status, future status. By our very nature, human beings, we will not always make the moral/ethical choice(s) that is right (given universal, objective moral/ethical standards). Incidentally, scientists ARE arrogant and why wouldn't they be? They're usually geniuses. ;}
while i agree with your video for the most part i must say that there is a great deal of corruption, politics, and lysenkoism in the scientific communities especially in the main stream scientific journals ask Dr Phyllis Mullenix if having verifiable evidence is all that is necessary to publish an article in a scientific journal, the reality is that it is quite a bit more complex than that
Unfortunately, the dissemination of false "facts", as well as the widespread suppression of pertinent facts, by various powerful interests (the status quo) thwart any attempt to validate facts as "true", with any level of confidence. Valid logic, based upon "bad facts" or upon an intentional dearth of available data ... upon mis-information, dis-information, and outright suppression , has clouded and diluted any semblance or "true science" and openned the door to inventive propaganda.
@phrankus2009 ... continued ... It has come to the point, for instance, that I am much more willing to believe in a case for continuous extraterrestrial intervention, based on "so-called myths" as recorded in ancient documents and "legends" than I am willing to believe in a case against "said UFOs and ETs", based upon "so called facts" (and the apparent suppression and discreditation of witness accounts) by the current status quo.
... I can no longer trust "facts" promulgated by the status quo
@phrankus2009 Exactly how coordinated do you believe propagandists to be? There's no denying that governments have successfully mislead the people in the past, and aren't likely to stop any time soon, but they are not so powerful that they can suppress individual investigation. They have authority and media to promote their own position, which is enough that they don't need to mess with others' positions. The rational response is skepticism, not the conclusion that facts cannot be attained
@spaz102 Modern mechanics would seem to indicate that reality is entirely subjective, in ANY case, significantly dependent upon the individual observer. Given that eternity is comprised of all probabilities, given enough time, eventually, everything will happen time and time, again. any truth which might be imagined, does exist. The scope and the durability of that truth, is certainly up for debate, between individual observers
@phrankus2009 While I agree that, given infinite time, any possibility will occur, that does not mean that all statements about the present are true. In your assertion that reality is subjective, I cannot agree to anything of the sort. Sure, two observers can have differing interpretations and perceptions of the same event, but the distortion lies in people, not reality itself. I don't know how significant these distortions are, but they certainly do not extend into our application of logic
@spaz102 Ok ... The logic of my example was clearly faulty and I had deleted the more pertinent portion of my original response, due to msg length limits ... The pertinent gist was that the deluge of mis-information and dis-information, in the current environmnt constitutes diminishing return on any investments, with regard to endeavors at personal investigation and, therefor, the current environment is fertile ground for apathy, cynacism, or wishful self-delusion ... or outright denial.
@phrankus2009 Ah, well in that you have my agreement. There are forces which are hard at work, trying to silence the freedom of discussion on the internet, in protests, and in schools. These forces have far more funding and authority than we do, and so any battle against them is bound to be an uphill one.
It has become far easier to accept the world as it is, than to fight for a better one. The result is that most people begrudgingly accept society with its flaws, and let it get worse
Ok paused at 0:30 when this dude implied evidence is used in theories. The only evidence behind the age of dinosaurs is a theory in itself. The assumption that carbon's half life is a given number without any proof then ignore all the evidence about how carbon dating is inaccurate by factors of unacceptable amounts then you take any other form of dating and its all guessing as well. Sorry but a lot of scientists and people who defend theories as if they're facts are hypocrites.
Tells them an age. What led me to this was actually thinking about the processes of science and how those in power use it to control us. But alas the people who don't research and just read out of a textbook in high school or took physics for generals in college will not have an understanding of the subject and conclude evolution is right because of personal bias, and being ostracized for having a different view!
@weeties4dasweeties I don't know where you get your information from, but in my science classes in high school (which was nearly 20 years ago now) and college (as recent as 5 years ago), I had to determine ages of samples not with tables, but with calculations. The thing you overlook is that those text books *have been heavily researched*, especially on something as fundamental as radioactive decay.
I'm not arguing about adaptation as that is proven, but radiometric decay is not proven science. Actually apply what they present but dont allow your personal bias that evolution is the correct theory when you research radiometric dating and radioactive decay. Just because carbon dating works does not mean that we can test radioactive decay to measure age, it's all based off charts thats it. They scientist get their sample test it for radioactive particles and then look at a chart which
Evolution is based of radiometric dating which is a bunk science if you would actually spend the time looking into it. Radiometric dating uses circular logic basing ages of charts. Also radioactive decay is not constant and random but, they claim we can use the law of large numbers to determine the age of fossils and other artifacts. How can we claim that radioactive decay does not speed up or slow down? we would have to experiment for millions and billions of years! It's a trap to control you.
You dont need radiometric dating or even "an age" to prove or base evolution on. Dating doesnt really come into it, except to say that the older species leading to a newer species is older so that it can be in place to lead to the newer. You dont need a specific age, you just need one species being older than the next.
@RippdUb No what you need is proof. Evolution isn't proven, not even close. In regards of the london tree moths, yes, but they're still the same species. Evolution is a religion more than it is a science. People blindly believe in it without any proof of its existence.
rofl. Theres been plenty of proof, you just choose to ignore it. Evolution is in fact a proven fact, proven time and again and in short lived species been quite observable. The only thing up for debate about it is the how and why of it. That you say its a religion more than a science is just proof of your ignorance, as it stands up to scientific method quite well. That you said its based on radiometric dating shows you havent got a fucking clue what you are talking about.
@RippdUb No its not proven. Not to the scale you choose to put your faith in anyways. There has yet to be a documented genetic change among observed species. So cram it. Its a theory, not a fact. The way scientists view it its a religious blind faith. They believe in something without proof. How does that follow the scientific method?
@llamapi3 you show your ingnorance again. As i said, in shorter lived species it has been observed often that a species can progress away from the original population and under a different set of environmental pressure has has adapted and speciation has occuurred. Close enough and it can breed to varying degree with the original population. Far enough away and it can no longer breed because it s become a new species. This is the very definition of evolution, seen and recorded time and again.
@RippdUb No. See you're just like a religious nut. Someone disagrees with you and you automatically call them ignorant. Quit putting your faith in something that isn't proven. Still no genetic evidence has shown to move evolution beyond theory. People will try and sight that the way micro organisms constantly change is further proof. Doesn't matter if 2 of those cold viruses are different, they're both the cold.
What you don't understand is that the reason a theory can't be called a fact is because theories change, facts do not, a theory is simply an explaination of natural phenomena- FACT; species will diversify and adapt to their environment through Natural Selection, the THEORY of evolution explains HOW and WHY. It's the same with gravity; It is a fact that objects fall, the THEORY of gravity explains HOW and WHY.
@llamapi3 and the reason radiometric dating doesn't need to be involved....
if it happens in a short lived species, that can produce generations within one man's life time, all he has to do is write the date down when it happens. get over it. evolution happens and the science community has now moved on to more pressing matters.
@RippdUb They found something to put their faith in you mean. :) When "science" is created simply because it provides an alternate explanation to the religious alternative, you aren't practicing science you are practicing exactly what you're fighting against, religion.
@llamapi3 lol keep dreaming dude. its all there in black and white, observed and reported on time and again, as per the scientific method- nothing created, all observable and very much repeated, so much so that its happening is undeniable, except by people who subscribe to bronze-age belief. Its even observable right there in your own back yard if you can get your head out of that outdated book to go see for your self. So much more beautiful than your god, coz its real.
@llamapi3 Didn't you watch the video? Science is about capturing reality. The computer you are using right now to read this comment is a product of SCIENCE.
Youtubers, please take a moment to consider this quote by the great Carl Sagan:
"Mindless entertainment in our free time should be replaced by intellectually valuable things that are equally entertaining. Brain Building by Marilyn vos Savant and other books like it do a good job of laying out all the ways education and intelligence can help us and more importantly how to foster intellectual growth. There are so many wonders that knowledge and the intellect can bring us." - Carl Sagan
The big bang is easily refuted by the conservation of angular momentum and The 1st law of thermodynamics states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. the facts will remain theory’s will fall. (Whether we like it not) And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: Have u lied? Have u stolen? Jesus said if you look at a women with lust you have committed adultery with here in your heart? If God judges u by the Ten Commandments will u be innocent or guilty?
@standingontruth1 Big Bang Cosmology violates neither of those laws and your statement that you think it does shows you do not understand it. Your view on the subject is precisely what this video is about. Or maybe you're just trolling for the lulz . . .
@standingontruth1 Have you ever spoken to a woman while she was on her menstrual cycle? If so, you are unclean, have been driven from the sight of the lord, and will not enter heaven...bad luck there.
@standingontruth1 The big bang does not state that matter or energy were created or destroyed. It simply states that the universe began from a singularity in which all the energy already existed. It makes no assumptions as to how it got there. Anyways, as for the conservation of angular momentum, a quick simulation or thought experiment will show that uneven distribution of matter throughout the universes causes things to bump into other things and thus change direction.
If you are a truth seeker, search "Truth Contest" in Google and click on the 1st result, then open The Present and read what it says. Everyone needs to see this. The Present will turn this world right-side up if it reaches enough people. You will see what I mean when you read the first page.
Very insightful and based off of truth. Basically you said everything I believe, while organizing thoughts that I hadn't yet completed :) Watching this video helped me have more confidence in my choices to support the reality around us, rather than be influenced by others who shed a a blind eye on factually supported theories.
bias, and fear of change also apply to science itself. I can point to a number of theories that were discarded or disparaged by other scientists. Including Darwin and Hawkings. Bias and unwillingess are alive and well in science as well.
and the comments for a clear simple video like this are predictably very stupid. If youtube is the lowest common denominator then humanity is in trouble.
If only the message of this video was true. Science likes everyone to think that science works along this method. The truth is the opposite. Scientists are very emotional beings who cheat, lie and keep their own little world a closed shop. Knowledge, progress is held back by orthodox scientific method. The peer review system has been shown to be flawed. The Theory of Evolution has been criticised by many leading academics. This video is akin to turning science into a religion, STOP!
@TheLogic1010 False association. SCIENTISTS are human, and thus some are prejudiced, untruthful, and are otherwise biased. But SCIENCE is not. Science is a SYSTEM, a tool, and it has specific measures in place to overcome the limitations and corruptions of people who would seek to abuse it. As long as these measures are in place, then the facts WILL win out in the end. They always do.
@NUTCASE71733 I don't have to make you believe in anything. Your views are completely valid as mine. Modern science is turning into a religion, I don't want that to happen. Do you??
Science says, "Question and doubt all you want. Try doing the same experiments and see what you come up with."
Religion says, "Our way is the only way. Do not question anything."
Please elucidate which experiments you've done that contradict published results AND which papers you've submitted based upon your "new results" that have been rejected by peer reviewed journals.
@TheLogic1010 "Your views are completely valid as mine."
Uh huh.
So, your views that an invisible sky daddy had sex with his mom and then killed himself, only to magically rise from the dead are just as valid as my view that two atoms of Hydrogen bonded to one atom of Oxygen is one of the essential molecules for life on earth?
@thesparitan Science/Religion: Just watch Richard Dawkins preaching to his sheep about Darwinism. Quantum Mechanics is heading to a region that science is having difficulty defining. Religion is difficult to define to. What are your thoughts?
@TheLogic1010 There is more evidence for evolution then there is for the theory of gravity. Second Darwin has little to do with evolution now and days, he is only the founder of the theory, its many orders of magnitude more complex and defined. QED is one of the most predictive models even to be created, so are you saying that QED is a religion or becoming one? I think a religion is a belief system based on faith, dogma and make believe supernatural creators.
@thesparitan The term evolution has been stolen and really is Darwinism. The Theory of Evolution is built on Darwinism. Darwinism is based on faith too!
@TheLogic1010 No, its evolution. It was never really called Darwinism by scientist. I don't think you know what you are talking about. You might want to actually learn what evolution is, your ignorance is showing here. Its not a religion it's a scientific theory that makes testable predictions that have come to pass already. you should read a book on the subject, because I don't want to have to teach you what evolution is.
@thesparitan I know that evolutionary theory is flawed and it has failed to make accurate predictions based on this theory. I trust the theory of gravtity, but not evolutionary theory. I don't want to enter any discussion with yourself about evolutionary theory. If your so sure of it then be happy and read Dawkins.
@TheLogic1010 I know you don't because you are completely uninformed. As for the predictions, thousands have come to pass. Examples include human chromosome #2, ring species, etc etc. Of course you don't believe in evolution because of your religious indoctrination you will never learn to accept science. If you didn't come here to discuss evolution then maybe you shouldn't be here. I doubt you even watched the video, you are just creationist trolling.
@thesparitan Your using the language of a religious fundamentalist boy! I don't accept Neo Darwinism as a way of explanation of how complex lifeforms came into being, get it right!! For the record I've worked in science, ignorant one! I don't do religion, have any faith or belief system. The same can't be true of yourself! Enjoy your faith! Oh, by the way. I've meet your god, Richard Dawkins. What a sad man he is!!
@TheLogic1010 Richard Dawkin's isn't my god, he is interesting to watch from time to time but I actually don't think he is the best debater for evolution or against religion. I don't have a faith system and I would be interested to hear what you think it is since you clearly know me so well. Honestly I think you are a joke, and I am positive you never worked near science because you do not even know what it is. Anyways, you aren't interested in debate so whats the point on this dialog?
LMAO You are hilarious. I think you are a joke but rather then us just trading insults do you have anything to actually contest? If not I will just have to end this dialog out of sheer futility.
@thesparitan I don't find TTOE funny! It has prevented science making any real progress. Scientists who have criticized TTOE have been sacked, blackmailed, bullied, careers ended etc. So while you have a little laugh and read your fairytale at bedtime peoples lives are being ruined because of this faith system! People like yourself hate it when people like myself who have experience and qualifications in science criticize TTOE. Get over it!
@TheLogic1010 That's ridiculous, they publish their studies. If you know about it, link me to it. It's not my job to do your research. But are you really telling me that there are animals that don't try to eat?
A Paradigm shift is above a theory. Evolution is taught in the Bhagavad Gita , along with the big bang, and other forms of science. One love and God lives
@trinitymike Not that I expect a reasoned reply, but... would you like to show me the evidence that proved finally that the devil doesn't exist?
Or might it be the case that the West's skepticism is really just the result of Naturalistic assumptions? It's pretty easy to "prove" that your opponent's positions are silly if you just, you know, presuppose it...
@QualiaSoup, In 1965 NASA was devoting its efforts to put a man on the Moon, not Mars; although it was considering it as the next step. Just a minor detail you missed but the video is very well done.
helljumpr5150 18 hours ago
That last statement, OOOOOHHHHHHHH!!!!
RossetaStoned91 1 week ago
Who disliked this?
RossetaStoned91 1 week ago
This is insane, making long videos about what is just logical. I cannot fathom what enviroment and what kind of people one must have in their midst to feel the need to take the time to refute this stupidity. Ignorance must be fought in educational systems, the scientific method must be explained early and proven in practice in the school system so to disarm whatever ignorance is pushed onto the children outside school. Trying to convert adults are imo futile, stupidity has no cure in adults.
Farmfield 2 weeks ago
Common sense isn't as common as you think
aaronb00key 1 week ago
@aaronb00key - Uncommon sense, hehe? The thing is, we got some really heavy believers here in Sweden too, but creationism and alike is still more or less unheard of. Even the most hardcore christians here still believe in science & things like evolution - and of course that is due to what they learned in school. So it's really hard to grasp how people just don get things like this, I can't really understand how it's possible in times like these, with interner a.s.o...
Farmfield 1 week ago
Why was this video related to Koko The Gorilla?? :O
Tait011 2 weeks ago
77 people want this video banned and replaced with superstitious readings of writings from stone age goat herders.
willweeverlearn 2 weeks ago
Great Video. Oh and Fuck those Religious Freaks in the Ass =)
andrewcnzz 3 weeks ago
How the fuck did multiple universes gain such fervor amongst scientists then when there is nothing to support this?
EquitesVeritatis 3 weeks ago
@EquitesVeritatis we know that a univere can exist so is it not resonarble to belive that more universes exist then just this one ?
karikon11 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@karikon11 "we know that a univere can exist so is it not resonarble to belive that more universes exist then just this one ?"
Its about as reasonable as believing in intelligent design and a creator, actually its even LESS reasonable then believing in the latter. And yet many scientists subscribe to this line of thought, but do not subscribe to a creator. Hence the lunacy if you will. Believing in a multiverse with no proof.
EquitesVeritatis 2 weeks ago
@karikon11 That provides part of the bases for the Multi verse Theory, which I think contains a lot of weight. Especially since Michio Kaku is working on it.
93Cobalt 6 days ago
Spot on.
Dorkus89Malorkus 3 weeks ago
So Should I just keep my mouth shut in class?
1Rectified 4 weeks ago
Great video, thank you
ministeroftuba 1 month ago
Brilliant piece, thank you.
pabobfin 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the fundamental 'belief' of science is that there exists a 'reality' independent of the mind. if there exists a reality independent of the mind, then science (or scientists) should be able to prove that there exists a reality independent of the mind, without using the mind. since they can't, science too is based on a 'belief' (of an existence of an objective reality) just like religious beliefs.
dharshana81 1 month ago
@dharshana81 Oh yeah much like religious beliefs.. Oh except for that part where thousands of cognitive phenomena are validated through consistent matching results by multiple participants unless you are questioning your own existence? You might as well try to refute logic.
FreedomAndEducation 1 week ago
Comment removed
dharshana81 1 month ago
i can't believe i just found out today about these videos that have been around for 4 years..
f50tube 1 month ago
if u want a wider understanding of science and what it represents, watch nassim haramein's unified field theory. what y understood is that science is another small bubble of understanding of reality and it's not ok when they say it's everything
stitch24021 1 month ago
@stitch24021 Hi! I would like to advice you about Haramein's work. The thing is that he's not a scientist, as he claims to be. The reason is because he tries to mix what he thinks he know about physics and numerology, mysticism and faith, which is a crazy idea very far from what the serious international scientific communities in the world attempt to do. Go to the Wikipedia and read what 'unification of forces' actually means. Given your curiosity, please watch Cosmos of Carl Sagan. Enjoy! : )
Lyrero 4 weeks ago
Beautiful video. Just beautiful.
DryBones60 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hear what God of Israel YAHUSHUA-YAHUWAH (Son and Father are ONE) saying to our generation by His chosen prophets: Trumpetcallofgodonline. com ; Letter called "Purify Your Faith, and Come to the Father as It is Written": EXCERPT: "Only in the Bible and through these very Letters, of which I have given to My prophet of the end of this age, shall you find Him and know Him."
Watch:
" youtube.com/watch?v=YZPmTH6sloo"
"youtube.com/watch?v=lutJYDxP6ys"
"youtube.com/watch?v=R9ike7PKd8U"
Regards.
TrumpetCallofGodLT 1 month ago
@TrumpetCallofGodLT SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU IDIOT. Please.
bchplse 1 month ago
You're like BrainPop except like x100 cooler
Goldbloodeddragon 1 month ago
We should sit every one of the Republican presidential nominees, tie them up Clockwork Orange style, and play stuff like this to them.
palerider1775 2 months ago
a theory is not the most powerful status that an explanation can attain! A theory is a theory, it can be wrong, think of Quantum Physics where two completely contradicting theories can co-exist. A theory can be proven or disproved!! in the view point of physics, there is no theorem, but the most powerful status of an explanation would be a Law. Like newton's second law of motion. F = ma. Proven to hold true at classical mechanics setup after centuries of discovery.
vincentleest 2 months ago
@vincentleest Do you know what a physical law is? It's a theory. According to the Oxford dictionary, it's a theoretical set of principles. So no, a theory is the most powerful. Even if it wasn't, you still can't ignore that gravity is a theory.
Nicenice404 2 months ago
@Nicenice404 Not ignoring the fact that gravity is a theory. im just sayin there could be a better way to describe the physics of things attract. Someday, someone can come and say. you guys are completely wrong abt gravity becoz of xyz. n will we have a new theory that better describes what n y things happen..But at the end, we actually know nothing about anything. according to Godel's incompleteness theorem, we don't even know if the math system we are using is consistent or not..
vincentleest 2 months ago
@vincentleest Why don't we go back to the statement you made before.
"The highest status in science is not a law, not a theory."
I was correcting that and that alone. We don't know anything about anything? Sure we could be wrong, but the possibility of being wrong should not be the reason we think we're wrong. There is no reason to make such speculations until new evidence comes to light to prove us wrong.
Nicenice404 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nicenice404 Not ignoring the fact that gravity is a theory. im just sayin there could be a better way to describe the physics of things attract. Someday, someone can come and say. you guys are completely wrong abt gravity becoz of xyz. n will we have a new theory that better describes what n y things happen..But at the end, we actually know nothing about anything. according to Godel's incompleteness theorem, we don't even know if the math system we are using is consistent or not.
vincentleest 2 months ago
@vincentleest Word salads and an obvious lack of complete understanding does not make you appear intelligent. It only makes you look like a fool. Stop watching documentaries and actually make an attempt to truly understand the things you comment on. Especially Godel.
uniteordie1 1 month ago
@uniteordie1 2 things that i want to reply to, A scientific theory is not a hunch or a guess but is a coherent explanation that DESCRIBES facts. <- I agree to this statement, but i would like to focus on the word describe. A scientific theory is verified after an experiment, and math equations can describe the physics. Science is about trying to get close to the truth, but you will never know whether you have reached the truth yet. people thought earth was the center of the universe
vincentleest 1 month ago
@uniteordie1 and yet Galileo came and said otherwise. People before Galileo came thought they were right but turns out what they have been taught was wrong. Same thing can happen to any theory in Science. to this point, i hope you're still agreeing w/ me. Maybe i have worded the first comment incorrectly, but the point i am trying to make is that Science do not explain why things happen, the "why" i am talking about is not the cause of things happen. F=ma, the box moves
vincentleest 1 month ago
@uniteordie1 becoz i applied net force to it. (accelerate to be exact) science do explain why the box is accelerating, but it doesn't explain why a box is accelerated in the relation of F=ma, why isn't it F=m^2a, or ma^2. Science have not provided any explanation to that. So, this is why i am saying, science doesn't explain things fully. 2) i learned about incompleteness theory in class when studying complexity and turing machines in college. i believe i understand the
vincentleest 1 month ago
@vincentleest You clearly don't understand math if you can't understand F=MA. LULZ.
JustinHEMI05 1 month ago
@vincentleest F=ma was newton's first axiom, and while it must be assumed to step into mechanics, stress analysis, dynamics, etc., it has been done so on the basis that F=ma has given reliable results. There are plenty of laws that aren't true in all circumstances; Hooke's law, Newton's law of cooling, even N2L (F=/=ma, but F=d(mv)/dt ). After all, why would we use the THEORY of general relativity over Newton's LAW of gravitation? Because the law is wrong.
Samuelwhatshisface 1 month ago
@uniteordie1 recursive axiomatic system pretty well, and i definitely did not watch any documentary about that. I was trying to make it easy for others to understand and avoid big words. Please do not prejudge and that's all i ask for.
vincentleest 1 month ago
@vincentleest No cause in fact most of newtanian physics was proven wrong by enistein light has no mass but has speed and can not be applicated in quantam physics a particle can exist in more places than one
Luis568369 2 months ago
@Luis568369 Well, that's why people add terms to the equation to it and say, "Now we think we know more about how the universe works".. but they are never sure that the universe behaves exactly like that.. there can be another guy just like enistein... and disprove the quantam physics, maybe there is no God's particle. All i am saying is.. physics is just a means of describing the universe using mathematics...and a description can always be not comprehensive..
vincentleest 2 months ago
@vincentleest true i agree with what your are saying here not with your post when you said a law is higher than theory in fact even laws can act like theory's gravity is both law and theory
Luis568369 2 months ago
@vincentleest You truly do not understand science or the philosophy of science. A law is not the most powerful status and you are thinking of theory in the every day use of the word. A scientific theory is completely different than a theory you personally may have about something. A scientific theory is not a hunch or a guess but is a coherent explanation that describes FACTS. A law does not posit an explanation of natural phenomenon. You may want to study the scientific method
uniteordie1 1 month ago
@vincentleest as well as the philosophy of science before you comment on things that you so obviously know nothing about. I recommend Karl Popper.
uniteordie1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We need to get this guy to be the president of every country ever.... I mean it (referring to of course QualiaSoup)
LynkJRayvonn 2 months ago
We need to get this guy to be the president of every country ever.... I mean it (referring to of course QualiaSoup)
LynkJRayvonn 2 months ago
@LynkJRayvonn WHY CAN'T I UPVOTE YOUR COMMENT!?
ImTheWiseGuy 2 months ago
Fantastic Vid. Keep up the good work
aden302000 2 months ago in playlist More videos from QualiaSoup
This has been flagged as spam show
This video is just sad. It has ZERO didactic merits. Although I understand and agree with most of what is said here, it is obvious that a video like this should be addressed to people WITHOUT a scientific background, and those people will not understand most of the video, due to the unnecessary use of technical vocabulary, boring pace and dull images. Why the fuck would anyone want to make a video like this, if only people who already believed in what it says can understand it? 0/10
schenonef 2 months ago
Comment removed
schenonef 2 months ago
(From 1st comment) Isn't it a little bit arrogant to say that only a full blown scientist should debate with a thiest about science versus religion?
KieraJayne 2 months ago
I'm athiest however while I'm fully interested in science & the world around us & that Im not at all blinkered by any beliefs in gods etc, I'm the first to admit that I am not a scientist, I don't have a comprehensive understanding of science (I couldn't even get my head around the more complex theories in biology let alone Physics, Chemistry etc) & therefore I can only call science my belief because I believe in what scientists discover.... (Continued)
KieraJayne 2 months ago
its amazing how long he takes to explain something that you can round up in one short sentence
originalidentity 2 months ago
this is the biggest load of crap on youtube.
originalidentity 2 months ago
@originalidentity
seriously?
zaehet 2 months ago
@zaehet its ok, hes new to youtube
Claythargic 2 months ago
Comment removed
originalidentity 2 months ago
Comment removed
originalidentity 2 months ago
@zaehet lol
originalidentity 2 months ago
@originalidentity Why is this the biggest load of crap on Youtube?
cornflakeclusters 2 months ago
I am now an atheist, as of today.
Jiaxis 2 months ago
@Jiaxis Congratulations!
c0y0tito 2 months ago
@Jiaxis Congrats. :) What made you change?
IKillBabyKittensLOL 2 months ago
@IKillBabyKittensLOL A realization. A realization that I was lied to by my parents, how evidence absolutely contradicts my former beliefs, how liberating it feels to think rationally, how absurd and invalid the bible is, as well as how it blatantly contradicts the reality of documented history. I feel like I'm free, probably because I am.
Jiaxis 2 months ago
I do not agree that given enough time everything will happen again and again. That is a totally illogical statement. Events outside the laws of physics do not occure. That being said, back to the subject. Not only do non scientific minds retard the advancement of knowledge but those of the scientists themselves are guilty of this. I've noticed tha many established scientists seem to support a status quo rather than rethink their conclusions... personal arrogance or or fear of lost status?
UncleMatt69 3 months ago
Comment removed
killerkerara 3 months ago
@UncleMatt69 In answer to your question, it's both and only depends on the consequences or if they're truly delusional. More often than not I would wager fear of lost status as that will impact ones livelihood, social status, future status. By our very nature, human beings, we will not always make the moral/ethical choice(s) that is right (given universal, objective moral/ethical standards). Incidentally, scientists ARE arrogant and why wouldn't they be? They're usually geniuses. ;}
tjstevens74 2 months ago
while i agree with your video for the most part i must say that there is a great deal of corruption, politics, and lysenkoism in the scientific communities especially in the main stream scientific journals ask Dr Phyllis Mullenix if having verifiable evidence is all that is necessary to publish an article in a scientific journal, the reality is that it is quite a bit more complex than that
xcvsdxvsx 3 months ago
4 out of 5 dentists choose Crest ... (in a survey sponsored by Crest).
phrankus2009 3 months ago
Unfortunately, the dissemination of false "facts", as well as the widespread suppression of pertinent facts, by various powerful interests (the status quo) thwart any attempt to validate facts as "true", with any level of confidence. Valid logic, based upon "bad facts" or upon an intentional dearth of available data ... upon mis-information, dis-information, and outright suppression , has clouded and diluted any semblance or "true science" and openned the door to inventive propaganda.
phrankus2009 3 months ago
@phrankus2009 ... continued ... It has come to the point, for instance, that I am much more willing to believe in a case for continuous extraterrestrial intervention, based on "so-called myths" as recorded in ancient documents and "legends" than I am willing to believe in a case against "said UFOs and ETs", based upon "so called facts" (and the apparent suppression and discreditation of witness accounts) by the current status quo.
... I can no longer trust "facts" promulgated by the status quo
phrankus2009 3 months ago
@phrankus2009 Exactly how coordinated do you believe propagandists to be? There's no denying that governments have successfully mislead the people in the past, and aren't likely to stop any time soon, but they are not so powerful that they can suppress individual investigation. They have authority and media to promote their own position, which is enough that they don't need to mess with others' positions. The rational response is skepticism, not the conclusion that facts cannot be attained
spaz102 3 months ago
@spaz102 Modern mechanics would seem to indicate that reality is entirely subjective, in ANY case, significantly dependent upon the individual observer. Given that eternity is comprised of all probabilities, given enough time, eventually, everything will happen time and time, again. any truth which might be imagined, does exist. The scope and the durability of that truth, is certainly up for debate, between individual observers
phrankus2009 3 months ago
@phrankus2009 While I agree that, given infinite time, any possibility will occur, that does not mean that all statements about the present are true. In your assertion that reality is subjective, I cannot agree to anything of the sort. Sure, two observers can have differing interpretations and perceptions of the same event, but the distortion lies in people, not reality itself. I don't know how significant these distortions are, but they certainly do not extend into our application of logic
spaz102 3 months ago
@spaz102 Ok ... The logic of my example was clearly faulty and I had deleted the more pertinent portion of my original response, due to msg length limits ... The pertinent gist was that the deluge of mis-information and dis-information, in the current environmnt constitutes diminishing return on any investments, with regard to endeavors at personal investigation and, therefor, the current environment is fertile ground for apathy, cynacism, or wishful self-delusion ... or outright denial.
phrankus2009 3 months ago
@phrankus2009 Ah, well in that you have my agreement. There are forces which are hard at work, trying to silence the freedom of discussion on the internet, in protests, and in schools. These forces have far more funding and authority than we do, and so any battle against them is bound to be an uphill one.
It has become far easier to accept the world as it is, than to fight for a better one. The result is that most people begrudgingly accept society with its flaws, and let it get worse
spaz102 3 months ago
@phrankus2009 I guess you're an Alex Jones viewer too.
iomithelegend 1 month ago
Ok paused at 0:30 when this dude implied evidence is used in theories. The only evidence behind the age of dinosaurs is a theory in itself. The assumption that carbon's half life is a given number without any proof then ignore all the evidence about how carbon dating is inaccurate by factors of unacceptable amounts then you take any other form of dating and its all guessing as well. Sorry but a lot of scientists and people who defend theories as if they're facts are hypocrites.
llamapi3 3 months ago
@llamapi3 You're right! Evidence of anything being over 6000 years contradicts the bible and is therefore wrong
ImJustSlime 3 months ago
Tell'em Bro ! Put'em in their place.
swampzoid 3 months ago
Tells them an age. What led me to this was actually thinking about the processes of science and how those in power use it to control us. But alas the people who don't research and just read out of a textbook in high school or took physics for generals in college will not have an understanding of the subject and conclude evolution is right because of personal bias, and being ostracized for having a different view!
weeties4dasweeties 4 months ago
@weeties4dasweeties So, were did life come from then?
xphreakyphilx 4 months ago
@weeties4dasweeties I don't know where you get your information from, but in my science classes in high school (which was nearly 20 years ago now) and college (as recent as 5 years ago), I had to determine ages of samples not with tables, but with calculations. The thing you overlook is that those text books *have been heavily researched*, especially on something as fundamental as radioactive decay.
JackMcQuack 3 months ago
I'm not arguing about adaptation as that is proven, but radiometric decay is not proven science. Actually apply what they present but dont allow your personal bias that evolution is the correct theory when you research radiometric dating and radioactive decay. Just because carbon dating works does not mean that we can test radioactive decay to measure age, it's all based off charts thats it. They scientist get their sample test it for radioactive particles and then look at a chart which
weeties4dasweeties 4 months ago
Evolution is based of radiometric dating which is a bunk science if you would actually spend the time looking into it. Radiometric dating uses circular logic basing ages of charts. Also radioactive decay is not constant and random but, they claim we can use the law of large numbers to determine the age of fossils and other artifacts. How can we claim that radioactive decay does not speed up or slow down? we would have to experiment for millions and billions of years! It's a trap to control you.
weeties4dasweeties 4 months ago
@weeties4dasweeties "Evolution is based of radiometric dating..."
You dont need radiometric dating or even "an age" to prove or base evolution on. Dating doesnt really come into it, except to say that the older species leading to a newer species is older so that it can be in place to lead to the newer. You dont need a specific age, you just need one species being older than the next.
RippdUb 4 months ago
@RippdUb No what you need is proof. Evolution isn't proven, not even close. In regards of the london tree moths, yes, but they're still the same species. Evolution is a religion more than it is a science. People blindly believe in it without any proof of its existence.
llamapi3 3 months ago
@llamapi3
rofl. Theres been plenty of proof, you just choose to ignore it. Evolution is in fact a proven fact, proven time and again and in short lived species been quite observable. The only thing up for debate about it is the how and why of it. That you say its a religion more than a science is just proof of your ignorance, as it stands up to scientific method quite well. That you said its based on radiometric dating shows you havent got a fucking clue what you are talking about.
RippdUb 3 months ago
@RippdUb No its not proven. Not to the scale you choose to put your faith in anyways. There has yet to be a documented genetic change among observed species. So cram it. Its a theory, not a fact. The way scientists view it its a religious blind faith. They believe in something without proof. How does that follow the scientific method?
llamapi3 3 months ago
@llamapi3 you show your ingnorance again. As i said, in shorter lived species it has been observed often that a species can progress away from the original population and under a different set of environmental pressure has has adapted and speciation has occuurred. Close enough and it can breed to varying degree with the original population. Far enough away and it can no longer breed because it s become a new species. This is the very definition of evolution, seen and recorded time and again.
RippdUb 3 months ago
@RippdUb No. See you're just like a religious nut. Someone disagrees with you and you automatically call them ignorant. Quit putting your faith in something that isn't proven. Still no genetic evidence has shown to move evolution beyond theory. People will try and sight that the way micro organisms constantly change is further proof. Doesn't matter if 2 of those cold viruses are different, they're both the cold.
llamapi3 3 months ago
@llamapi3 A Scientific theory is the highest status an explaination can attain, which is explained in this video if you watched this video.
VColossalV 3 months ago
What you don't understand is that the reason a theory can't be called a fact is because theories change, facts do not, a theory is simply an explaination of natural phenomena- FACT; species will diversify and adapt to their environment through Natural Selection, the THEORY of evolution explains HOW and WHY. It's the same with gravity; It is a fact that objects fall, the THEORY of gravity explains HOW and WHY.
VColossalV 3 months ago
@llamapi3 and the reason radiometric dating doesn't need to be involved....
if it happens in a short lived species, that can produce generations within one man's life time, all he has to do is write the date down when it happens. get over it. evolution happens and the science community has now moved on to more pressing matters.
RippdUb 3 months ago
@RippdUb They found something to put their faith in you mean. :) When "science" is created simply because it provides an alternate explanation to the religious alternative, you aren't practicing science you are practicing exactly what you're fighting against, religion.
llamapi3 3 months ago
@llamapi3 lol keep dreaming dude. its all there in black and white, observed and reported on time and again, as per the scientific method- nothing created, all observable and very much repeated, so much so that its happening is undeniable, except by people who subscribe to bronze-age belief. Its even observable right there in your own back yard if you can get your head out of that outdated book to go see for your self. So much more beautiful than your god, coz its real.
RippdUb 3 months ago
@llamapi3 Didn't you watch the video? Science is about capturing reality. The computer you are using right now to read this comment is a product of SCIENCE.
VColossalV 3 months ago
@VColossalV An incredible feat of science if I do say so myself.
Arthreas 3 months ago
@weeties4dasweeties religion is a trap to control you, and they have succeeded
julianzolo 3 months ago
Beautiful stuff.
taofist 4 months ago
99% of the retards on youtube should watch this...
rflooker 4 months ago
Philip Starck should watch this video.
WarbananaOfDA 4 months ago
William Lane Craig should watch this video.
MomoTheBellyDancer 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Youtubers, please take a moment to consider this quote by the great Carl Sagan:
"Mindless entertainment in our free time should be replaced by intellectually valuable things that are equally entertaining. Brain Building by Marilyn vos Savant and other books like it do a good job of laying out all the ways education and intelligence can help us and more importantly how to foster intellectual growth. There are so many wonders that knowledge and the intellect can bring us." - Carl Sagan
TheLogicalBrain 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
darwin loves me, this i know.
iamsuperfritz 5 months ago
I literally clapped at the end of this video.
TillDeathDoUsPart84 5 months ago
jesus said this jesus said that, how do you know? the bible was written by men FACT
ATABOFACID 5 months ago
The big bang is easily refuted by the conservation of angular momentum and The 1st law of thermodynamics states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. the facts will remain theory’s will fall. (Whether we like it not) And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: Have u lied? Have u stolen? Jesus said if you look at a women with lust you have committed adultery with here in your heart? If God judges u by the Ten Commandments will u be innocent or guilty?
standingontruth1 5 months ago
Comment removed
atonement19 5 months ago
@standingontruth1 Big Bang Cosmology violates neither of those laws and your statement that you think it does shows you do not understand it. Your view on the subject is precisely what this video is about. Or maybe you're just trolling for the lulz . . .
wkrepelin 5 months ago in playlist More videos from QualiaSoup
@standingontruth1 Do you eat shellfish?
IKillBabyKittensLOL 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« The big bang is easily refuted by the conservation of angular momentum »
What does angular momentum have to do with Big Bang cosmology?
O, wait, you're parroting Hovind, aren't you? Hint: Hovind knows jack shit about biology and cosmology.
XGralgrathor 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« The 1st law of thermodynamics states that energy cannot be created or destroyed »
So? If it can't, then it wasn't. What does that have to do with the Big Bang model?
XGralgrathor 5 months ago
« Have u lied? »
Have you mindlessly copied what other people say without bothering to look up information on the subject yourself?
MrGralgrathor 5 months ago
@standingontruth1 Have you ever spoken to a woman while she was on her menstrual cycle? If so, you are unclean, have been driven from the sight of the lord, and will not enter heaven...bad luck there.
AmosTheTalented 5 months ago
@standingontruth1 The big bang does not state that matter or energy were created or destroyed. It simply states that the universe began from a singularity in which all the energy already existed. It makes no assumptions as to how it got there. Anyways, as for the conservation of angular momentum, a quick simulation or thought experiment will show that uneven distribution of matter throughout the universes causes things to bump into other things and thus change direction.
avielMenter 4 months ago
1:41 Skirt
canadianelite42 5 months ago in playlist More videos from QualiaSoup
This has been flagged as spam show
If you are a truth seeker, search "Truth Contest" in Google and click on the 1st result, then open The Present and read what it says. Everyone needs to see this. The Present will turn this world right-side up if it reaches enough people. You will see what I mean when you read the first page.
SeekTruthN0w 5 months ago
This video made me dance to Disco Inferno. Try to guest how?
jamesmax 5 months ago
Briliiant, as always QualiaSoup. Clear, concise and insightful explanation.
axeld93 6 months ago
Your voice sounds like Gaius Baltar.
bhorwith22 6 months ago
69 people are creationists.
bhorwith22 6 months ago
Very insightful and based off of truth. Basically you said everything I believe, while organizing thoughts that I hadn't yet completed :) Watching this video helped me have more confidence in my choices to support the reality around us, rather than be influenced by others who shed a a blind eye on factually supported theories.
Rockstar11P 6 months ago
ksics fasses sent me here
cabrewer11 6 months ago
Fox news needs to watch this video
megamogx 6 months ago
this should be retitled: Skewed View on Life
mannyamaya 6 months ago
bias, and fear of change also apply to science itself. I can point to a number of theories that were discarded or disparaged by other scientists. Including Darwin and Hawkings. Bias and unwillingess are alive and well in science as well.
wbnc66 6 months ago
I think... Scratch that. I KNOW I need to get my roommate to watch this one. :-)
419Films 6 months ago
and the comments for a clear simple video like this are predictably very stupid. If youtube is the lowest common denominator then humanity is in trouble.
ElliottWaveForex 6 months ago
If only the message of this video was true. Science likes everyone to think that science works along this method. The truth is the opposite. Scientists are very emotional beings who cheat, lie and keep their own little world a closed shop. Knowledge, progress is held back by orthodox scientific method. The peer review system has been shown to be flawed. The Theory of Evolution has been criticised by many leading academics. This video is akin to turning science into a religion, STOP!
TheLogic1010 6 months ago
@TheLogic1010 lol rertard
FredDeluca 6 months ago
@TheLogic1010 False association. SCIENTISTS are human, and thus some are prejudiced, untruthful, and are otherwise biased. But SCIENCE is not. Science is a SYSTEM, a tool, and it has specific measures in place to overcome the limitations and corruptions of people who would seek to abuse it. As long as these measures are in place, then the facts WILL win out in the end. They always do.
Azadeth666 6 months ago
@TheLogic1010
No people like you WANT us to beleive it's a religionso we can turn to the bibl ad get sucked into the dark ages again. Not happening.
NUTCASE71733 6 months ago
@NUTCASE71733 I don't have to make you believe in anything. Your views are completely valid as mine. Modern science is turning into a religion, I don't want that to happen. Do you??
TheLogic1010 6 months ago
@TheLogic1010 - Modern Science is a religion?
NO
Science says, "Question and doubt all you want. Try doing the same experiments and see what you come up with."
Religion says, "Our way is the only way. Do not question anything."
Please elucidate which experiments you've done that contradict published results AND which papers you've submitted based upon your "new results" that have been rejected by peer reviewed journals.
SafetyKap 6 months ago
@TheLogic1010 "Your views are completely valid as mine."
Uh huh.
So, your views that an invisible sky daddy had sex with his mom and then killed himself, only to magically rise from the dead are just as valid as my view that two atoms of Hydrogen bonded to one atom of Oxygen is one of the essential molecules for life on earth?
Alrighty then.
SafetyKap 6 months ago
@SafetyKap There I was being nice to and you make an absolute fool of yourself. You never answered my question but endulged in your fantasies. Shame!
TheLogic1010 6 months ago
@TheLogic1010 i personally dont want any religions at all on the planet, that would be fantastic
goaliedude32 5 months ago
@goaliedude32 Your missing my point!
TheLogic1010 5 months ago
@TheLogic1010 How exactly is science becoming a religion? And how do you define a religion?
thesparitan 5 months ago
@thesparitan Science/Religion: Just watch Richard Dawkins preaching to his sheep about Darwinism. Quantum Mechanics is heading to a region that science is having difficulty defining. Religion is difficult to define to. What are your thoughts?
TheLogic1010 5 months ago
@TheLogic1010 There is more evidence for evolution then there is for the theory of gravity. Second Darwin has little to do with evolution now and days, he is only the founder of the theory, its many orders of magnitude more complex and defined. QED is one of the most predictive models even to be created, so are you saying that QED is a religion or becoming one? I think a religion is a belief system based on faith, dogma and make believe supernatural creators.
thesparitan 5 months ago
@thesparitan The term evolution has been stolen and really is Darwinism. The Theory of Evolution is built on Darwinism. Darwinism is based on faith too!
TheLogic1010 5 months ago
@TheLogic1010 No, its evolution. It was never really called Darwinism by scientist. I don't think you know what you are talking about. You might want to actually learn what evolution is, your ignorance is showing here. Its not a religion it's a scientific theory that makes testable predictions that have come to pass already. you should read a book on the subject, because I don't want to have to teach you what evolution is.
thesparitan 5 months ago
@thesparitan I know that evolutionary theory is flawed and it has failed to make accurate predictions based on this theory. I trust the theory of gravtity, but not evolutionary theory. I don't want to enter any discussion with yourself about evolutionary theory. If your so sure of it then be happy and read Dawkins.
TheLogic1010 5 months ago
@TheLogic1010 I know you don't because you are completely uninformed. As for the predictions, thousands have come to pass. Examples include human chromosome #2, ring species, etc etc. Of course you don't believe in evolution because of your religious indoctrination you will never learn to accept science. If you didn't come here to discuss evolution then maybe you shouldn't be here. I doubt you even watched the video, you are just creationist trolling.
thesparitan 5 months ago
@thesparitan Your using the language of a religious fundamentalist boy! I don't accept Neo Darwinism as a way of explanation of how complex lifeforms came into being, get it right!! For the record I've worked in science, ignorant one! I don't do religion, have any faith or belief system. The same can't be true of yourself! Enjoy your faith! Oh, by the way. I've meet your god, Richard Dawkins. What a sad man he is!!
TheLogic1010 5 months ago
@TheLogic1010 Richard Dawkin's isn't my god, he is interesting to watch from time to time but I actually don't think he is the best debater for evolution or against religion. I don't have a faith system and I would be interested to hear what you think it is since you clearly know me so well. Honestly I think you are a joke, and I am positive you never worked near science because you do not even know what it is. Anyways, you aren't interested in debate so whats the point on this dialog?
thesparitan 5 months ago
@TheLogic1010 "I worked in science"
LMAO You are hilarious. I think you are a joke but rather then us just trading insults do you have anything to actually contest? If not I will just have to end this dialog out of sheer futility.
thesparitan 5 months ago
@thesparitan I don't find TTOE funny! It has prevented science making any real progress. Scientists who have criticized TTOE have been sacked, blackmailed, bullied, careers ended etc. So while you have a little laugh and read your fairytale at bedtime peoples lives are being ruined because of this faith system! People like yourself hate it when people like myself who have experience and qualifications in science criticize TTOE. Get over it!
TheLogic1010 5 months ago
@TheLogic1010 I thought I told you we are done here. No more, not for you. Go away annoying ignorant theist.
thesparitan 5 months ago
@thesparitan You kept the ball rolling when it was over!
TheLogic1010 5 months ago
@TheLogic1010 Which prediction of evolution has failed to pass?
avielMenter 4 months ago
@avielMenter. It has been shown by researchers that (uni of bristol) that not all species compete for food and resources.
TheLogic1010 4 months ago
@TheLogic1010 Can I see the study?
avielMenter 4 months ago
@avielMenter You will have to ask the uni!
TheLogic1010 4 months ago
@TheLogic1010 That's ridiculous, they publish their studies. If you know about it, link me to it. It's not my job to do your research. But are you really telling me that there are animals that don't try to eat?
avielMenter 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
« The term evolution has been stolen »
...?
« Darwinism is based on faith too! »
Nope. It's based on a little thing scientists like to call 'evidence'.
XGralgrathor 5 months ago
66 people are afraid of science.
PlasteredDragon 7 months ago
Honestly one of the best vids I've seen on the youtubes.
melowar78 7 months ago
Anyone who doesn't understand and agree with the message in this video is sooooo 1500's.
How does it feel, fool?
aboyborninjune 7 months ago
A Paradigm shift is above a theory. Evolution is taught in the Bhagavad Gita , along with the big bang, and other forms of science. One love and God lives
truthseeker010101 7 months ago
The devil is playing this guy like a fiddle.
logicalcreationist 7 months ago
@logicalcreationist LOL....It's 2011....Belief in Ghosties and invisible Boogymen controlling people is soooo 1500s.
trinitymike 7 months ago
@trinitymike Not that I expect a reasoned reply, but... would you like to show me the evidence that proved finally that the devil doesn't exist?
Or might it be the case that the West's skepticism is really just the result of Naturalistic assumptions? It's pretty easy to "prove" that your opponent's positions are silly if you just, you know, presuppose it...
philWynk 7 months ago