@xuvetyn13 Lmao! Then we have three because there's two nostrils. What a genius! But wait, they all lead to the same hole which validates his point and makes you look like an idiot.
One thing which isn't often mentioned but it should be pointed out that it makes no sense to make things more complicated than needed, especially if started from scratch. People who have nut allergy can die simply by eating a nut. A freaking nut!
@arbadacarbada A good shepherd should take of his flock no? God does seem to make it more difficult than it has to be, by creating problems for us in the first place which we do not need to have.
Actually, a perfect design wouldn't be one that last forever. Even in business, you never want your product to last "forever." The designer could have created these "flaws" or "cons" in order to prevent problems such as "over-population." In which case, that would make the design SMART AS HELL rather then stupid.
Everything needs a counterpart, so with STRENGTH we also need WEAKNESS to balance things. So we may have purposely been created with weaknesses, again, making this a SMART design.
@kekapena Reproducing too much is another design flaw. You are therefore saying the design flaws that allow us to die accidentally and unnecessarily, help counter-act the flaw that's responsible for over reproducing.
We are already over-populating the Earth. A study said that this planet could sustain 10 million people until the sun expanded and destroyed it, but with human breeding rates and pollution, we'll likely all choke to death long before the planet bakes.
And a perfect product would be one that never needed to be replaced, so it would last forvever.
The universe is so far from perfect for HUMAN life is is laughable, but who are we to say the universe was made for us?
What if we are just a VERSION - a MODEL as you will. What if there is 100's or 1,000's of "Earth's" that were created by a higher power (whether that be God, aliens, whatever) & we are an early VERSION made. Think of cars, were the 1950's MODEL. They then re-designed the model, version 2, Earth 2, whatever... & they are better designed then the last design.
Or, we could be the most advanced design to date? Either way, this theory suggest something DID design us. Were always looking to improve.
We humans have car models, with imporved performance ,cause we learn how to built a car. So we know more things now that back in the 1950s. So our new model has all this new knowledge.
But god already has all the knowledge...
So why would he need to make different versions of each model??
@toulcas - That's basing God from the Bible. I'm not talking about God from the Bible, God for all I know or WE know is some alien on another planet in another galaxy, who created us. Now, who is there God? Who knows... just like you can ask who created GOD from the Bible? The God I am referring does not have to be perfect him/herself, therefore could be trying to perfect a model of US. You have to think outyside the box, or in other words, outside of the religion most commonly followed.
The dictionary definiton of God is a perfect being, a deity of supreme powers. god/gods/godesses are the un-perfect deities. Capital G is only used for the monotheistic, perfect God of, for example, Judaism, Chrisianity and Islam faiths. The old Roman gods, conversly, were gods, not Gods.
Just wanted to point that out. Other than that minor philosophical point, completely agree with you. We have no idea whatsoever how we were created, and we KNOW nothing about anything, really.
Stupid design? So Mr. Tyson, you would not have placed the penis/vagina/anus so close together? That is according to you, the entertainment system and the sewage disposable system should not be close to each other. Mr. Smart-pants / with all due respect to you, WHERE would you have placed the penis and vagina? Under the armpit? Perhaps one ear could have been used for breathing and the other for hearing and the mouth just for eating. Stupid design, he? do you know what humble means?
@bohinj53 He is right and I am going to take the word of a world famous astrophysicist who has devoted his life to the study of science over the angry, incoherent ramblings of a youtube troll (you). You talk humble? Show your credentials in the field of science to discount his. Oh wait...
@davidrzr - He may be a world famous astrophysicist, but he was so petty in his presentation. It was so apparent that he wanted to entertain the superficial crowd that it seems would laugh at anything. If he is as great as you say he is, why didn't he come up with a better design? He should have given a couple of alternative solutions to his rant. How would have he improved on the eat breath problem. And how would have he designed the entertainment waste disposal set up? Puerile, frivolous!
@davidrzr - I get the humor part... he likes to be astrophysicist and comedian at the same time. However, his quick jabs at intelligent design are puerile, frivolous! As the saying goes it doesn't take much intelligence or effort to give destructive criticism. It does take some brain to give constructive criticism. I would love to see a drawing or description of Tyson perfect body anatomy and see how he would have he designed the entertainment waste disposal and the eating-breathing set up or.
@davidrzr - So since he was taking a jab at the supposedly utterly absurd concept (intelligent design)... since he is intelligent he ought to come up with a better plan. since eating and breathing from the same hole is a bad design... how would he have improved on the anatomy we all share? Let's see... the mouth under the left armpit..... the anus under the right armpit..... the penis.... well the index or middle finger for procreating and the penis at its' actual place for urination. how's that
@bohinj53 Took you 3 weeks to come up with that one? Here is the thing, you are nitpicking and criticizing his witty rant, but really you are doing so because you are offended since he is discounting intelligent design. I am going to stop arguing with you, because there is no point. If you cannot look at the enormous amount of evidence out there and such basic concepts touched on by Tyson, it would appear you have denounced reason.
@davidrzr - Thank you David for your reply. I appreciate your kind approach to a dialogue. Not always the case on youtube. You are missing my point my friend. We both agree that he discounts and ridicules intelligent design. I am not offended by that all. Nonetheless you and I know that intelligent design implies a creator. Now, since he criticizes the intelligent designer (whether real or imaginary)... I would have loved to see his better anatomical placement. Too much to ask? I think not!
@bohinj53 "I would have loved to see his better anatomical placement. Too much to ask? I think not!
"
The fact that you ask this question shows that your missing the point. It's not about challenging god to an "I can design it better" contest. If you really can't imagine a better design than what we have now, I don't know what to tell you. Imagine you're omnipotent - You think this is the best we can do?
If you ABSOLUTELY need someone to give you a better design is (cont).
@bohinj53 If you ABSOLUTELY need someone to give you a better design here it is.
Simply give the nose it's own pathway to the lungs.
This creates 2 immediate benefits. Being able to swallow without holding your breath and still being able to breath if you choke on food.
Anyone that has designed a network knows that redundancy is crucial. So when you build the nose and the mouth that utilize the same pathway, that's obviously crap design. I can see that and I'm not even omniscient.
@devious21 - One problem devious....When you channel something though a pipe os some sort (unless it is a closed circuit, such as an auto's cooling system) you need an air intake. Do you wonder what those pipes sticking out of the roofs are? They are air intakes, so that when you flush the toilet things will flow down the chute without any problem. Even when you pour liquid through a funnel, it flows better if you lift the funnel an inch or so from the bottle. So the design is not so crappy.
@bohinj53 " One problem devious....When you channel something though a pipe os some sort (unless it is a closed circuit, such as an auto's cooling system) you need an air intake."
I honestly have no idea what point you are trying to make or what point you are trying to refute. What comment does this pertain to and how is it relevant.
@devious21 - you are hiding behind your finger my friend. You know and I know that Tyson is poking fun at God.
And yes I know that Tyson is saying that eat/breath hole and sex/waste evacuation holes should be different. But the point still remains. If humans were not designed.... why call it stupid design? And if it were designed.... he should come up with a better suggestion. Or at least for the sake of argument..... he should have given a couple of better ideas. would you not say?
Why do you guys think the universe has to be perfect in order for God to exist? Who says God is all powerful? Who says God didn't create a incredible, beautiful, universe to the best of his ability? Have any scientists created an entire universe? Let alone create a single grain of sand?
@SanityIsSuchADrag Man was made perfect in God's image, isn't that what they say? Maybe that is your opinion, but the opinion of religious fundamentalists worldwide is that God IS all powerful and he is responsible for everything. There are no shortage of scripture/literature saying this not to mention all the fundamentalist preachers we see on TV saying all that. If you want to point the finger at someone, point it at your own religious community.
@Jadikarr I was being sarcastic, apparently that didn't get across to you. I was exposing the flaw in the idea that we only eat and breath through the same hole. That's not true, we also have a nose. So that argument Mr. Tyson proposed is utterly invalid, seeing the obvious flaw. I would be a bit frustrated you didn't understand that, but ill give leeway considering sarcasm is harder to express over the internet.
@MrExpound Part:1 -The point he was trying to make though, is that it is incredibly easy for us to choke, given that the food we eat, and the air we breath are taken into the body through the same passage. The air we breath through the nose, after leaving the nasal passage will enter the throat area, where air from the mouth will enter as well. The windpipe and esophagus are too close together.The only thing stopping the food/water from entering the lungs is the epiglottis. It's poor design.
@MrExpound Part 2: - A better design would be that of a whale or dolphin, those passages are no longer connected, so they can't actually choke on their food.
@Jadikarr A whale with a clogged blow hole is a dead whale, same for a dolphin. If a human has a clogged nose, he still has his mouth to directly intake oxygen to the lungs. No matter the cause, whales, dolphins and humans have unique breathing systems that have both negative and positive features. However, that doesn't settle as "stupid design" only stupid people.
@MrExpound "A whale with a clogged blow hole is a dead whale"
He wasn't saying an omnipotent being should give us the breathing system of a whale. He was saying there already occurs naturally, a mammal that has a breathing system that solves the ability to breath and eat separately.
If you had unlimited power, you could design a breathing system ANY POSSIBLE WAY that's SUPERIOR. But even without an omnipotent god, we can look to whales to solve a rudimentary issue that currently exists.
@devious21 Our physical nature is what we call inherently "stupid design" however, if people used their teeth, and eat proper meal sizes, would we have that same issue? Also, the notion "intelligent design", is not to manufacture an idea of superior design, rather a distinction that describes that the universe was purposefully made by an intelligence, and not by the notion of misguided and wildly lucky accidents.
@MrExpound "what we call inherently "stupid design" however, if people used their teeth.."
Ask any engineer and they will tell you, yes that's a stupid design. And they aren't omnipotent or omniscient. Imagine what they could do if they were an all powerful being.
For many people, the "intelligence" behind intelligent design, is an all knowing, all powerful god. People then attribute our design to that "being". That's arrogance.
If that being existed, he'd also have to be lazy or evil.
@MrExpound Also, the nose doesn't count as an elegantly designed solution. Anyone with a design or engineering background (or common sense) would recognize that the bottleneck is the throat. If you choke on something that entered through your mouth, it doesn't matter how many noses you have.
The nose just allows us to chew and breath at the same time. But the problem is that eating, breathing and talking - 3 completely separate functions - all have to utilize the throat.
@devious21 Apparently you are not reading my responses. I have pointed out that the notion "intelligent design", is not to manufacture an idea of superior design. People such as yourself, determined to argue "intelligent design" over look this concept and desperately conjure up a argument, when the foundation of your point, isn't even closely related in actual terms. 'Intelligent design' is not the foundation of 'superior design and functionality', rather a 'intended design and purpose.'
@MrExpound "Apparently you are not reading my responses. I have pointed out that the notion "intelligent design", is not to manufacture an idea of superior design."
What I'm saying is that the common argument for Intelligent Design is from a Superior all powerful, all knowing being. If that is not what you believe, then it's obviously not applicable.
But if you believe that all knowing, all powerful being designs a poor product...
@devious21 The downfall of the universe, and physics, is due to mans selfish desire for his own authority. Imagine what this place would be like if we chose not to go down our own path, and instead standing next to the "superior all powerful and all knowing being" you take for granted. It's mans fault for the entropy of this universe, and the decline in obedience results in death. Opps, we made a mistake...
"It's mans fault for the entropy of this universe, and the decline in obedience results in death."
Now you've left the realm of bad logic and entered into the realm of no logic.
We were originally talking about the comment you made about whales not being a perfect design. I was saying, that doesn't change the point he was making.
I also refuted your point regarding the nose as being well designed. You responded with "not believing in god is the downfall of the universe."
@devious21 I am still adhering to the same argument we have been talking about, you cannot understand. When I mentioned the downfall of this Universe, I was not speaking of mans morality or good-evil situations. I literally mean that the universe is malfunctioning as a superior design due to mans decisions. Its not Gods fault we are not in perfect condition, that is, man chose to obey his own rules, the the words "perfection" or "superior' became meaningless then on.
@MrExpound "I literally mean that the universe is malfunctioning as a superior design due to mans decisions. Its not Gods fault we are not in perfect condition"
Haha come on now. You are implying that the mistakes of man are more powerful than the supreme design of an omnipotent and omniscient god. Really?
Also, how could "man's decisions" possibly affect man's own design? I could understand it affecting the environment. Maybe even man's future design but that would be evolution.
@devious21 Your last response is arrogant and narrow minded, and I am not surprised. May it be that God is omnipotent, but that does not grant man to deserve the superior work of a 'omnipotent being' after selfish desires and poor decision making. We hindered ourselves after we decided to take the reigns of authority, that was our poor decision. Paradise was lost when we pushed God away. Now we live in a incomplete, imperfect universe, and our bodies have to cope with our poor sacrificial choice
@MrExpound You can call me arrogant and narrow minded if it helps. I'm going to continue to address your points.
"May it be that God is omnipotent, but that does not grant man to deserve the superior work of a 'omnipotent being' after selfish desires and poor decision making."
So now you're implying that we were actually designed better than we are now… But because of man's poor decision making - God downgraded our design?
Come on man. Ask yourself if you honestly believe that.
The problem with your argument is you are insisting that we are still designed (even though if we WERE designed, it was down very poorly)… BUT you insist that it's man's fault that his design is poor because of "man's poor decision making" AKA we upset god.
How can you blame the design on the behavior that the design produced after the fact? There is a huge circular problem with what you're proposing.
@devious21 Actually, the Bible says clearly that the down fall of man results in death. MEANING we are now susceptible to death. I am saying we were once genetically different, prior to our downfall there was no death. This is a hard concept for you, because you base much of your science on Uniformitarianism. Once you acknowledge this, you can see that our before our downfall, we could have been perfect. However, such concept is now meaningless hereinafter.
@MrExpound "This is a hard concept for you, because you base much of your science on Uniformitarianism. "
This is a hard concept for me because I base much of my beliefs on things that can be justified. Sounds like you base your beliefs on making shit up.
You're basing that opinion on an assumption about a speculation of someones interpretation of a third hand experience in a book of which we can't verify the authors and do not have the originals.
You are admitting that we're poorly designed and saying god did it on purpose to spite man...
..That is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what most Intelligent Design'ers believe. They believe the body is so amazing it HAD to be designed.
If you are saying that there's nothing divine about our design and it was designed poorly by god as opposed to developed over time through natural selection - that's not really an argument. It's just an unfounded assertion.
@devious21 Actually, I am not refuting ID's point. Intelligent Design has nothing to do with the superiority of the design, or how perfect it is. I am repeating myself if you haven't notice, get the hint. Intelligent Design only points out that creation was made through a being, an intelligence per se. It doesn't mean that the design itself was "superior". I myself could be a world class artist and still choose to draw stick figures if I wanted to.
@MrExpound " Actually, I am not refuting ID's point."
Yes you are.
"Intelligent Design has nothing to do with the superiority of the design, or how perfect it is."
ID's point is that the human body is so amazing it couldn't have occurred naturally. That absolutely is speaking to the superiority of the design. Otherwise, they would accept that fact that it was "designed" by natural selection.
"I am repeating myself if you haven't notice, get the hint"
@MrExpound "I myself could be a world class artist and still choose to draw stick figures if I wanted to."
Again, that's a slap in the face to intelligent design's WHOLE justification for design. That fact that it's too amazing to have occurred naturally, so therefor a god did it. At least ID has some kind of reasoning for why they think god did it. It's poor reasoning but at least it's there.
You're not even attempting that. You are just saying we are designed because the bible says.
@devious21 Regardless of how sophisticated the human body is, a tiny rock in this Universe is intelligent design, because in the real terminology of intelligent design, it is the fact that it was put into existence with a purpose. It says no where in the Bible that we are perfectly design, in fact, it explains how no one is. So why would I make the trouble and say we are so amazing and perfect? That is completely redundant. And yes, I am going strictly from what the Bible says, no where else.
@MrExpound "It says no where in the Bible that we are perfectly design, in fact, it explains how no one is."
This is the problem. Neil is addressing intelligent design. You obviously aren't from that camp. You are defending your own position, which he isn't addressing.
" It says no where in the Bible that we are perfectly design, why would I make the trouble and say we are so amazing and perfect?"
You are not. The intelligent design movement IS. And that's who Neil is addressing in this video.
His argument sound good, but if we correct the so-called design imperfections, we end up with an eternal universe that will never end, no asteroid strikes to the earth(so Dinosaurs don't go extinct and we humans don't evolve to our current state, due to being eaten), all life becomes immortal due to a lack of natural disasters and diseases, and it all becomes a Twilight Zone episode where everything is perfect and there is no struggle to survive, no thirst for life....a very boring existence.
The only "real" part of "evolution" is the part about natural variations within species due to DNA recombination in reproduction and neutral mutations
The part of evolution that talks about radical macroevolutionary transformative change and shared ancestors (which are conveniently never found is a load of bull)
If you're referring to microevolution then yes, that's real. But the speculative nonsense evolutionists throw in there is not
Really? You just don't like how true what he's saying is.
Funny how some people love to ignore the 90% of the Bible that is absolutely ridiculous (read: Leviticus), and yet harp on a single mispronounced word when it's convenient to do so.
no, cause if that were the case than about 4 thousand people cant even find a button, this guy is so damn close minded on things the more he finds out about the universe and everything the more his vision narrows, only fools say its intelligent design, its harmonic design, the thing's in the universe he's worried about or bitching about or whatever we dont have to worry cause it's outside the earth and so far we're protected, and as far as genitals go where does he want one? on his head?
@redshift40 haha i see, so anyone with a differeing opinion on a subject is by default a troll, because "only trolls post differeing opinions" am i right? only positive feedback on the puke machine that is youtube? no trolls post links to their pages, their videos, porn sights offer no opinion just spout rancid filth to see themselves type
@Frogshiem i am in no state of denial i know exactly what im talking about, you obviously are one of those athiest morons those people are in denial, when i say harmonic i dont mean music jackass i mean perfectly in sync with all aspects of the universe things are the way they were meant to be, the change will occur as it always has before, i can only guess the way you say even my ignorance evolves you think i dont believe in it, when in fact i do so we will be a part of nature not apart from
@chatanwarrior I'm sure you do believe your own non-sense. I was merely implying that whatever adjective you use to modify your ridiculous theories: inteligent design, harmonic design, imaginary intangible parent figure design....there is really only one word for it, ignorant. Go ahead and look that one up. And since you're the one who resorted to name calling I'm just going to go ahead and give you a spoiler alert, when you die...nothing happens.
@chatanwarrior And a banana keeps in your mouth, thats the proof!!!, wait, it fits in your ass too, so do you get bananas in yout butt? (From the atheist experience), serious, only fools say intelligent design, only idiots say harmonic design
@rekiem870711 you are both, a fool and an idiot (from the atheist experience) nothing he said has anymore validity than what i said, its his stupid ass opinion on the universe, he gets alot of it WRONG and misses the point entirely like most atheists will
i beleive in evolution, a design in our programming to make us adapt to and fix our own errors,
i deffinetly agreeee with the last part because scientist shouldnt judge without evidence one way or another yet atheists have the same way they claim beleivers have, so because they have a lack of faith in anything more important than themselves that makes them right?
main thing all the religions has taught me is, there is something more for you to find, go find it
@guidi2005 good, and science is very beautiful, physics makes me crazy excited about the same thing. i learn so much shit from it i never knew about physics of fighting, cars, guns flight and pretty much everything else in the whole universe and the shear facts that you can not possibly deny because its shit you can actually prove most of it without help from anyone even
@buffboynick@buffboynick That is without question the dumbest remark i've ever read. Make sure you keep that chin strap tight on your helmet when you ride the little bus to the third grade.
Intelligent Design is a cop out, always has been. Just because you can't explain something because of your own human ignorance, you blame it on God?
This is the best counter argument EVER!! 100 years ago, he'd have been killed by the religious establishment for this speach. When the muslims take over, genius like him will be killed, period.
I love the look on Richard Dawkins' face out there, he's like "Yes, I am well aware of how stupid it really is, but I am enjoying your method of highlighting that, do go on"
Having a blowhole would be totally rad.
McKOdo 1 week ago
aborted faeces
Winstonz0r 4 weeks ago 4
@Winstonz0r Omg i laughed so hard.
Joecat5252 1 week ago
So...the glass is half empty? But awesome video!
stewarthjohnson 1 month ago
one problem (other than crocodile being misspelled): 2 separate holes for breathing and eating?
uh, it's called a nose man. =)
xuvetyn13 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xuvetyn13 "2 separate holes for breathing and eating?
uh, it's called a nose man. =)"
Next time you're choking on food, try really hard to breath through your nose.
devious21 1 month ago
@xuvetyn13 so if you were eating and you started to choke would you still be able to breath?
kellyam34 1 week ago 2
@xuvetyn13 Ive never read a more retarded comment then this one. I really hope you are not this dumb.
Jumalten001 1 week ago
@xuvetyn13 Lmao! Then we have three because there's two nostrils. What a genius! But wait, they all lead to the same hole which validates his point and makes you look like an idiot.
Frutoses 1 week ago
Tyson would have been a much better God
Pizzachu1 2 months ago 14
entertainment complex in the middle of a sewage system
TheSolitaryTraveller 2 months ago 22
One thing which isn't often mentioned but it should be pointed out that it makes no sense to make things more complicated than needed, especially if started from scratch. People who have nut allergy can die simply by eating a nut. A freaking nut!
Hirnlego999 2 months ago 2
Dr. Tyson kicks morons asses. I like him and so would Saggy!
mystiraemeadows 2 months ago
This guy has a lot of weird suppositions about what ought to be. For example, why suppose we ought to see the entire light spectrum??
The existence of accidents does not imply lack of intention.
Of course, there is equally little evidence for the claim that "the universe is here for us."
arbadacarbada 2 months ago
@arbadacarbada A good shepherd should take of his flock no? God does seem to make it more difficult than it has to be, by creating problems for us in the first place which we do not need to have.
Hirnlego999 1 month ago
Feces...
oraqol 2 months ago
You can cut the awkwardness from "aborted feces" with a knife.
xcdemon05 3 months ago 2
@xcdemon05 Indeed, you can.
SaudiPseudonym 1 month ago
Actually, a perfect design wouldn't be one that last forever. Even in business, you never want your product to last "forever." The designer could have created these "flaws" or "cons" in order to prevent problems such as "over-population." In which case, that would make the design SMART AS HELL rather then stupid.
Everything needs a counterpart, so with STRENGTH we also need WEAKNESS to balance things. So we may have purposely been created with weaknesses, again, making this a SMART design.
kekapena 3 months ago
@kekapena Reproducing too much is another design flaw. You are therefore saying the design flaws that allow us to die accidentally and unnecessarily, help counter-act the flaw that's responsible for over reproducing.
devious21 3 months ago
@kekapena
We are already over-populating the Earth. A study said that this planet could sustain 10 million people until the sun expanded and destroyed it, but with human breeding rates and pollution, we'll likely all choke to death long before the planet bakes.
And a perfect product would be one that never needed to be replaced, so it would last forvever.
The universe is so far from perfect for HUMAN life is is laughable, but who are we to say the universe was made for us?
eragonsaphira777 2 months ago
What if we are just a VERSION - a MODEL as you will. What if there is 100's or 1,000's of "Earth's" that were created by a higher power (whether that be God, aliens, whatever) & we are an early VERSION made. Think of cars, were the 1950's MODEL. They then re-designed the model, version 2, Earth 2, whatever... & they are better designed then the last design.
Or, we could be the most advanced design to date? Either way, this theory suggest something DID design us. Were always looking to improve.
hog255 3 months ago
@hog255
We humans have car models, with imporved performance ,cause we learn how to built a car. So we know more things now that back in the 1950s. So our new model has all this new knowledge.
But god already has all the knowledge...
So why would he need to make different versions of each model??
toulcas 2 months ago
@toulcas - That's basing God from the Bible. I'm not talking about God from the Bible, God for all I know or WE know is some alien on another planet in another galaxy, who created us. Now, who is there God? Who knows... just like you can ask who created GOD from the Bible? The God I am referring does not have to be perfect him/herself, therefore could be trying to perfect a model of US. You have to think outyside the box, or in other words, outside of the religion most commonly followed.
hog255 2 months ago
@hog255
The dictionary definiton of God is a perfect being, a deity of supreme powers. god/gods/godesses are the un-perfect deities. Capital G is only used for the monotheistic, perfect God of, for example, Judaism, Chrisianity and Islam faiths. The old Roman gods, conversly, were gods, not Gods.
Just wanted to point that out. Other than that minor philosophical point, completely agree with you. We have no idea whatsoever how we were created, and we KNOW nothing about anything, really.
eragonsaphira777 2 months ago
@eragonsaphira777
I meant imperfect, sorry.
eragonsaphira777 2 months ago
he totally ridiculed creationists
MrSpadeofAce 3 months ago
nice
AtheismArab 4 months ago
Stupid design? So Mr. Tyson, you would not have placed the penis/vagina/anus so close together? That is according to you, the entertainment system and the sewage disposable system should not be close to each other. Mr. Smart-pants / with all due respect to you, WHERE would you have placed the penis and vagina? Under the armpit? Perhaps one ear could have been used for breathing and the other for hearing and the mouth just for eating. Stupid design, he? do you know what humble means?
bohinj53 5 months ago
@bohinj53 He is right and I am going to take the word of a world famous astrophysicist who has devoted his life to the study of science over the angry, incoherent ramblings of a youtube troll (you). You talk humble? Show your credentials in the field of science to discount his. Oh wait...
davidrzr 5 months ago 2
@davidrzr - He may be a world famous astrophysicist, but he was so petty in his presentation. It was so apparent that he wanted to entertain the superficial crowd that it seems would laugh at anything. If he is as great as you say he is, why didn't he come up with a better design? He should have given a couple of alternative solutions to his rant. How would have he improved on the eat breath problem. And how would have he designed the entertainment waste disposal set up? Puerile, frivolous!
bohinj53 4 months ago
@bohinj53 LOL it is called humor buddy. He was taking a quick jab at an utterly absurd concept (intelligent design).
davidrzr 4 months ago
@davidrzr - I get the humor part... he likes to be astrophysicist and comedian at the same time. However, his quick jabs at intelligent design are puerile, frivolous! As the saying goes it doesn't take much intelligence or effort to give destructive criticism. It does take some brain to give constructive criticism. I would love to see a drawing or description of Tyson perfect body anatomy and see how he would have he designed the entertainment waste disposal and the eating-breathing set up or.
bohinj53 4 months ago
@davidrzr - So since he was taking a jab at the supposedly utterly absurd concept (intelligent design)... since he is intelligent he ought to come up with a better plan. since eating and breathing from the same hole is a bad design... how would he have improved on the anatomy we all share? Let's see... the mouth under the left armpit..... the anus under the right armpit..... the penis.... well the index or middle finger for procreating and the penis at its' actual place for urination. how's that
bohinj53 3 months ago
@bohinj53 Took you 3 weeks to come up with that one? Here is the thing, you are nitpicking and criticizing his witty rant, but really you are doing so because you are offended since he is discounting intelligent design. I am going to stop arguing with you, because there is no point. If you cannot look at the enormous amount of evidence out there and such basic concepts touched on by Tyson, it would appear you have denounced reason.
davidrzr 3 months ago
@davidrzr - Thank you David for your reply. I appreciate your kind approach to a dialogue. Not always the case on youtube. You are missing my point my friend. We both agree that he discounts and ridicules intelligent design. I am not offended by that all. Nonetheless you and I know that intelligent design implies a creator. Now, since he criticizes the intelligent designer (whether real or imaginary)... I would have loved to see his better anatomical placement. Too much to ask? I think not!
bohinj53 3 months ago
@bohinj53 "I would have loved to see his better anatomical placement. Too much to ask? I think not!
"
The fact that you ask this question shows that your missing the point. It's not about challenging god to an "I can design it better" contest. If you really can't imagine a better design than what we have now, I don't know what to tell you. Imagine you're omnipotent - You think this is the best we can do?
If you ABSOLUTELY need someone to give you a better design is (cont).
devious21 3 months ago
@bohinj53 If you ABSOLUTELY need someone to give you a better design here it is.
Simply give the nose it's own pathway to the lungs.
This creates 2 immediate benefits. Being able to swallow without holding your breath and still being able to breath if you choke on food.
Anyone that has designed a network knows that redundancy is crucial. So when you build the nose and the mouth that utilize the same pathway, that's obviously crap design. I can see that and I'm not even omniscient.
devious21 3 months ago
@devious21 - One problem devious....When you channel something though a pipe os some sort (unless it is a closed circuit, such as an auto's cooling system) you need an air intake. Do you wonder what those pipes sticking out of the roofs are? They are air intakes, so that when you flush the toilet things will flow down the chute without any problem. Even when you pour liquid through a funnel, it flows better if you lift the funnel an inch or so from the bottle. So the design is not so crappy.
bohinj53 3 months ago
@bohinj53 " One problem devious....When you channel something though a pipe os some sort (unless it is a closed circuit, such as an auto's cooling system) you need an air intake."
I honestly have no idea what point you are trying to make or what point you are trying to refute. What comment does this pertain to and how is it relevant.
devious21 3 months ago
@bohinj53 " He should have given a couple of alternative solutions to his rant."
An OMNIPOTENT BEING should be able to design something NOT SO FLAWED if we WERE DESIGNED.
The alternatives he's suggesting are clear:
-A system where you don't breath, eat and talk out of the same hole
-A system where you don't reproduce and excrete waste out of the same hole.
If you wanted him to actually design those features for you, there's the problem. HUMAN BEINGS AREN'T DESIGNED. That's the whole point.
devious21 3 months ago
@devious21 - you are hiding behind your finger my friend. You know and I know that Tyson is poking fun at God.
And yes I know that Tyson is saying that eat/breath hole and sex/waste evacuation holes should be different. But the point still remains. If humans were not designed.... why call it stupid design? And if it were designed.... he should come up with a better suggestion. Or at least for the sake of argument..... he should have given a couple of better ideas. would you not say?
bohinj53 3 months ago
@bohinj53 "If humans were not designed.... why call it stupid design?"
He responded to the claims of "intelligent design". He's is not himself saying that we were designed poorly. He is saying were ARE NOT DESIGNED.
devious21 3 months ago
Why do you guys think the universe has to be perfect in order for God to exist? Who says God is all powerful? Who says God didn't create a incredible, beautiful, universe to the best of his ability? Have any scientists created an entire universe? Let alone create a single grain of sand?
Think about that atheists.....
SanityIsSuchADrag 5 months ago
@SanityIsSuchADrag
*sigh*
UndefinedMadrid 5 months ago
@SanityIsSuchADrag Man was made perfect in God's image, isn't that what they say? Maybe that is your opinion, but the opinion of religious fundamentalists worldwide is that God IS all powerful and he is responsible for everything. There are no shortage of scripture/literature saying this not to mention all the fundamentalist preachers we see on TV saying all that. If you want to point the finger at someone, point it at your own religious community.
davidrzr 5 months ago
Yeah, we eat and breath through the same hole, and the nose is just there for looks...idiot.
MrExpound 6 months ago
@MrExpound Do you know how the air you breath in through your nose gets to your lungs? I somehow doubt you do, given this comment.
Jadikarr 5 months ago
@Jadikarr I was being sarcastic, apparently that didn't get across to you. I was exposing the flaw in the idea that we only eat and breath through the same hole. That's not true, we also have a nose. So that argument Mr. Tyson proposed is utterly invalid, seeing the obvious flaw. I would be a bit frustrated you didn't understand that, but ill give leeway considering sarcasm is harder to express over the internet.
MrExpound 5 months ago
@MrExpound Part:1 -The point he was trying to make though, is that it is incredibly easy for us to choke, given that the food we eat, and the air we breath are taken into the body through the same passage. The air we breath through the nose, after leaving the nasal passage will enter the throat area, where air from the mouth will enter as well. The windpipe and esophagus are too close together.The only thing stopping the food/water from entering the lungs is the epiglottis. It's poor design.
Jadikarr 5 months ago
@MrExpound Part 2: - A better design would be that of a whale or dolphin, those passages are no longer connected, so they can't actually choke on their food.
Jadikarr 5 months ago
@Jadikarr A whale with a clogged blow hole is a dead whale, same for a dolphin. If a human has a clogged nose, he still has his mouth to directly intake oxygen to the lungs. No matter the cause, whales, dolphins and humans have unique breathing systems that have both negative and positive features. However, that doesn't settle as "stupid design" only stupid people.
MrExpound 5 months ago
@MrExpound "A whale with a clogged blow hole is a dead whale"
He wasn't saying an omnipotent being should give us the breathing system of a whale. He was saying there already occurs naturally, a mammal that has a breathing system that solves the ability to breath and eat separately.
If you had unlimited power, you could design a breathing system ANY POSSIBLE WAY that's SUPERIOR. But even without an omnipotent god, we can look to whales to solve a rudimentary issue that currently exists.
devious21 4 months ago
@devious21 Our physical nature is what we call inherently "stupid design" however, if people used their teeth, and eat proper meal sizes, would we have that same issue? Also, the notion "intelligent design", is not to manufacture an idea of superior design, rather a distinction that describes that the universe was purposefully made by an intelligence, and not by the notion of misguided and wildly lucky accidents.
MrExpound 4 months ago
@MrExpound "what we call inherently "stupid design" however, if people used their teeth.."
Ask any engineer and they will tell you, yes that's a stupid design. And they aren't omnipotent or omniscient. Imagine what they could do if they were an all powerful being.
For many people, the "intelligence" behind intelligent design, is an all knowing, all powerful god. People then attribute our design to that "being". That's arrogance.
If that being existed, he'd also have to be lazy or evil.
devious21 4 months ago
@MrExpound Also, the nose doesn't count as an elegantly designed solution. Anyone with a design or engineering background (or common sense) would recognize that the bottleneck is the throat. If you choke on something that entered through your mouth, it doesn't matter how many noses you have.
The nose just allows us to chew and breath at the same time. But the problem is that eating, breathing and talking - 3 completely separate functions - all have to utilize the throat.
devious21 4 months ago
@devious21 Apparently you are not reading my responses. I have pointed out that the notion "intelligent design", is not to manufacture an idea of superior design. People such as yourself, determined to argue "intelligent design" over look this concept and desperately conjure up a argument, when the foundation of your point, isn't even closely related in actual terms. 'Intelligent design' is not the foundation of 'superior design and functionality', rather a 'intended design and purpose.'
MrExpound 4 months ago
@MrExpound "Apparently you are not reading my responses. I have pointed out that the notion "intelligent design", is not to manufacture an idea of superior design."
What I'm saying is that the common argument for Intelligent Design is from a Superior all powerful, all knowing being. If that is not what you believe, then it's obviously not applicable.
But if you believe that all knowing, all powerful being designs a poor product...
devious21 4 months ago
@devious21 The downfall of the universe, and physics, is due to mans selfish desire for his own authority. Imagine what this place would be like if we chose not to go down our own path, and instead standing next to the "superior all powerful and all knowing being" you take for granted. It's mans fault for the entropy of this universe, and the decline in obedience results in death. Opps, we made a mistake...
MrExpound 4 months ago
@MrExpound
"It's mans fault for the entropy of this universe, and the decline in obedience results in death."
Now you've left the realm of bad logic and entered into the realm of no logic.
We were originally talking about the comment you made about whales not being a perfect design. I was saying, that doesn't change the point he was making.
I also refuted your point regarding the nose as being well designed. You responded with "not believing in god is the downfall of the universe."
devious21 3 months ago
@devious21 I am still adhering to the same argument we have been talking about, you cannot understand. When I mentioned the downfall of this Universe, I was not speaking of mans morality or good-evil situations. I literally mean that the universe is malfunctioning as a superior design due to mans decisions. Its not Gods fault we are not in perfect condition, that is, man chose to obey his own rules, the the words "perfection" or "superior' became meaningless then on.
MrExpound 3 months ago
@MrExpound "I literally mean that the universe is malfunctioning as a superior design due to mans decisions. Its not Gods fault we are not in perfect condition"
Haha come on now. You are implying that the mistakes of man are more powerful than the supreme design of an omnipotent and omniscient god. Really?
Also, how could "man's decisions" possibly affect man's own design? I could understand it affecting the environment. Maybe even man's future design but that would be evolution.
devious21 3 months ago
@devious21 Your last response is arrogant and narrow minded, and I am not surprised. May it be that God is omnipotent, but that does not grant man to deserve the superior work of a 'omnipotent being' after selfish desires and poor decision making. We hindered ourselves after we decided to take the reigns of authority, that was our poor decision. Paradise was lost when we pushed God away. Now we live in a incomplete, imperfect universe, and our bodies have to cope with our poor sacrificial choice
MrExpound 3 months ago
@MrExpound You can call me arrogant and narrow minded if it helps. I'm going to continue to address your points.
"May it be that God is omnipotent, but that does not grant man to deserve the superior work of a 'omnipotent being' after selfish desires and poor decision making."
So now you're implying that we were actually designed better than we are now… But because of man's poor decision making - God downgraded our design?
Come on man. Ask yourself if you honestly believe that.
devious21 3 months ago
@MrExpound
I'm going to try to break this down for you:
The problem with your argument is you are insisting that we are still designed (even though if we WERE designed, it was down very poorly)… BUT you insist that it's man's fault that his design is poor because of "man's poor decision making" AKA we upset god.
How can you blame the design on the behavior that the design produced after the fact? There is a huge circular problem with what you're proposing.
Does that make sense?
devious21 3 months ago
@devious21 Actually, the Bible says clearly that the down fall of man results in death. MEANING we are now susceptible to death. I am saying we were once genetically different, prior to our downfall there was no death. This is a hard concept for you, because you base much of your science on Uniformitarianism. Once you acknowledge this, you can see that our before our downfall, we could have been perfect. However, such concept is now meaningless hereinafter.
MrExpound 3 months ago
@MrExpound "This is a hard concept for you, because you base much of your science on Uniformitarianism. "
This is a hard concept for me because I base much of my beliefs on things that can be justified. Sounds like you base your beliefs on making shit up.
You're basing that opinion on an assumption about a speculation of someones interpretation of a third hand experience in a book of which we can't verify the authors and do not have the originals.
devious21 3 months ago
@MrExpound Also, you're refuting ID's point.
You are admitting that we're poorly designed and saying god did it on purpose to spite man...
..That is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what most Intelligent Design'ers believe. They believe the body is so amazing it HAD to be designed.
If you are saying that there's nothing divine about our design and it was designed poorly by god as opposed to developed over time through natural selection - that's not really an argument. It's just an unfounded assertion.
devious21 3 months ago
@devious21 Actually, I am not refuting ID's point. Intelligent Design has nothing to do with the superiority of the design, or how perfect it is. I am repeating myself if you haven't notice, get the hint. Intelligent Design only points out that creation was made through a being, an intelligence per se. It doesn't mean that the design itself was "superior". I myself could be a world class artist and still choose to draw stick figures if I wanted to.
MrExpound 3 months ago
@MrExpound " Actually, I am not refuting ID's point."
Yes you are.
"Intelligent Design has nothing to do with the superiority of the design, or how perfect it is."
ID's point is that the human body is so amazing it couldn't have occurred naturally. That absolutely is speaking to the superiority of the design. Otherwise, they would accept that fact that it was "designed" by natural selection.
"I am repeating myself if you haven't notice, get the hint"
Oh no, I noticed and still disagree with u.
devious21 3 months ago
@MrExpound "I myself could be a world class artist and still choose to draw stick figures if I wanted to."
Again, that's a slap in the face to intelligent design's WHOLE justification for design. That fact that it's too amazing to have occurred naturally, so therefor a god did it. At least ID has some kind of reasoning for why they think god did it. It's poor reasoning but at least it's there.
You're not even attempting that. You are just saying we are designed because the bible says.
devious21 3 months ago
@devious21 Regardless of how sophisticated the human body is, a tiny rock in this Universe is intelligent design, because in the real terminology of intelligent design, it is the fact that it was put into existence with a purpose. It says no where in the Bible that we are perfectly design, in fact, it explains how no one is. So why would I make the trouble and say we are so amazing and perfect? That is completely redundant. And yes, I am going strictly from what the Bible says, no where else.
MrExpound 3 months ago
@MrExpound "It says no where in the Bible that we are perfectly design, in fact, it explains how no one is."
This is the problem. Neil is addressing intelligent design. You obviously aren't from that camp. You are defending your own position, which he isn't addressing.
" It says no where in the Bible that we are perfectly design, why would I make the trouble and say we are so amazing and perfect?"
You are not. The intelligent design movement IS. And that's who Neil is addressing in this video.
devious21 3 months ago
His argument sound good, but if we correct the so-called design imperfections, we end up with an eternal universe that will never end, no asteroid strikes to the earth(so Dinosaurs don't go extinct and we humans don't evolve to our current state, due to being eaten), all life becomes immortal due to a lack of natural disasters and diseases, and it all becomes a Twilight Zone episode where everything is perfect and there is no struggle to survive, no thirst for life....a very boring existence.
MrLitigator1 7 months ago
@MrLitigator1 Were you trying to make a point?
Anyways, if there is a God he favors virus life forms.
Some say bacterial life, because many can survive in a wide range of extreme conditions but my money is on viruses.
RiseofMarine 7 months ago
@MrLitigator1 That sounds like the heaven that creationists believe they will get to live in for eternity.
sockonafish 7 months ago
Comment removed
DDeCouto 6 months ago
Can he design a human himself? His intelligent.
ocalot2k5 7 months ago
look at the volumes of the universe where you can't live?
don't forget the various places on earth itself where it is rather harsh.
sailornaruto39 7 months ago
@chatanwarrior
The only "real" part of "evolution" is the part about natural variations within species due to DNA recombination in reproduction and neutral mutations
The part of evolution that talks about radical macroevolutionary transformative change and shared ancestors (which are conveniently never found is a load of bull)
If you're referring to microevolution then yes, that's real. But the speculative nonsense evolutionists throw in there is not
Abiogenesis and Macroevolution = BS
buffboynick 7 months ago
@buffboynick Source?
DanTheMan8488 6 months ago
Number of holes is irrelevant, if you eat, eventually you will choke for any number of reason. Silly boy!!
TheDano1947 8 months ago
@TheDano1947 Not if that hole is separate from the lungs. I have never heard of someone choking to death because of a blocked anus.
DeftCrowMk3 7 months ago 2
Maybe it's all purposefull. Maybe it's all for entertainment. A full spectrum of creativety would also include bad things
FukMyBuffSmellyPussy 10 months ago
>aborted feces
theprimeform 11 months ago
@theprimeform Freudian slip, Bush said it too
TheDano1947 8 months ago
Is that Richard Dawkins in the audience at 4:34?
DeathBYDesign666 11 months ago
@DeathBYDesign666 Yes :)
TheSiolith 11 months ago
@turtles12
Really? You just don't like how true what he's saying is.
Funny how some people love to ignore the 90% of the Bible that is absolutely ridiculous (read: Leviticus), and yet harp on a single mispronounced word when it's convenient to do so.
taicleis 1 year ago
3:10
"Aborted feces".
Hermetiqa 1 year ago
Ever read this guys books? Origins in particular is great.
curtisbaldy 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
but seriously this guy is dumb
turtles12 1 year ago
ABORTED FECES JUST RUINED ANY SERIOUS POINT HE WAS TRYING TO MAKE WHAT A MORON
turtles12 1 year ago
Not bad, only one person hit the wrong button.
redshift40 1 year ago
no, cause if that were the case than about 4 thousand people cant even find a button, this guy is so damn close minded on things the more he finds out about the universe and everything the more his vision narrows, only fools say its intelligent design, its harmonic design, the thing's in the universe he's worried about or bitching about or whatever we dont have to worry cause it's outside the earth and so far we're protected, and as far as genitals go where does he want one? on his head?
chatanwarrior 1 year ago
@chatanwarrior - I smell a troll.
redshift40 1 year ago
@redshift40 haha i see, so anyone with a differeing opinion on a subject is by default a troll, because "only trolls post differeing opinions" am i right? only positive feedback on the puke machine that is youtube? no trolls post links to their pages, their videos, porn sights offer no opinion just spout rancid filth to see themselves type
chatanwarrior 1 year ago
@chatanwarrior Harmonic design? Really? Even your ignorance evolves, unfortunately only to a more profound level of denial.
Frogshiem 11 months ago
@Frogshiem i am in no state of denial i know exactly what im talking about, you obviously are one of those athiest morons those people are in denial, when i say harmonic i dont mean music jackass i mean perfectly in sync with all aspects of the universe things are the way they were meant to be, the change will occur as it always has before, i can only guess the way you say even my ignorance evolves you think i dont believe in it, when in fact i do so we will be a part of nature not apart from
chatanwarrior 11 months ago
@chatanwarrior I'm sure you do believe your own non-sense. I was merely implying that whatever adjective you use to modify your ridiculous theories: inteligent design, harmonic design, imaginary intangible parent figure design....there is really only one word for it, ignorant. Go ahead and look that one up. And since you're the one who resorted to name calling I'm just going to go ahead and give you a spoiler alert, when you die...nothing happens.
Frogshiem 11 months ago
@chatanwarrior And a banana keeps in your mouth, thats the proof!!!, wait, it fits in your ass too, so do you get bananas in yout butt? (From the atheist experience), serious, only fools say intelligent design, only idiots say harmonic design
rekiem870711 9 months ago
@rekiem870711 you are both, a fool and an idiot (from the atheist experience) nothing he said has anymore validity than what i said, its his stupid ass opinion on the universe, he gets alot of it WRONG and misses the point entirely like most atheists will
close minded bastards go fuck yourself
chatanwarrior 9 months ago
@chatanwarrior
Most atheists are "ape-man believing" CULT members that dont understand how hypocritical and illogical they truly are.
They are the total opposite of Agnostics and a disgrace to real science.
buffboynick 7 months ago
@buffboynick ....thank you? lol
i beleive in evolution, a design in our programming to make us adapt to and fix our own errors,
i deffinetly agreeee with the last part because scientist shouldnt judge without evidence one way or another yet atheists have the same way they claim beleivers have, so because they have a lack of faith in anything more important than themselves that makes them right?
main thing all the religions has taught me is, there is something more for you to find, go find it
chatanwarrior 7 months ago
Comment removed
buffboynick 7 months ago
Comment removed
buffboynick 7 months ago
Comment removed
buffboynick 7 months ago
@chatanwarrior "main thing all the religions has taught me is, there is something more for you to find, go find it
Science did that for me.
guidi2005 7 months ago
@guidi2005 good, and science is very beautiful, physics makes me crazy excited about the same thing. i learn so much shit from it i never knew about physics of fighting, cars, guns flight and pretty much everything else in the whole universe and the shear facts that you can not possibly deny because its shit you can actually prove most of it without help from anyone even
chatanwarrior 7 months ago
@buffboynick ah i agree lol
chatanwarrior 7 months ago
@buffboynick @buffboynick That is without question the dumbest remark i've ever read. Make sure you keep that chin strap tight on your helmet when you ride the little bus to the third grade.
Anonymous1306 4 months ago
@buffboynick You're the disgrace to real science, fraud.
When are you going to answer that question I gave you, all you have to do is calculate it, retard.
Does the maths give you trouble? lol
lethalsub 2 months ago
I know I'm going to hell, But i lol'd when he said "aborted faeces."
AustralianPyro 1 year ago 17
@AustralianPyro Nah, you're not going to hell. I think you missed the point of the video :P
forgottencitizen 6 months ago
Intelligent Design is a cop out, always has been. Just because you can't explain something because of your own human ignorance, you blame it on God?
This is the best counter argument EVER!! 100 years ago, he'd have been killed by the religious establishment for this speach. When the muslims take over, genius like him will be killed, period.
guddah99 1 year ago
I love the look on Richard Dawkins' face out there, he's like "Yes, I am well aware of how stupid it really is, but I am enjoying your method of highlighting that, do go on"
Xiao6996 1 year ago 17
BrennanAndrewWittig: He also mistyped "multi cellular" on the screen, it said "milti"
taborgate 1 year ago
6******
but wow im digging those abortions
earthchild100 1 year ago
i need to see da rest of it !!
5 *****
umalim 2 years ago
What is going on right here, right now, where you are, that's the question. What are YOU going to do next.
transfixedtornado 2 years ago
Yeah, life is short.
TurpisHaereticus 2 years ago 2
Did anyone else get a cheap laugh when he said "feces" when he meant to say "fetuses"?
I noticed the audience didn't laugh...
BrennanAndrewWittig 2 years ago 2
Great, favourited, 5*****
TipoftheSlung 2 years ago
Awesome....thanks for posting.
5 *****
bodeezy 2 years ago