Dawkins: Lecture 3. Climbing Mount Improbable ( 2 of 8 )

[mistershithead]

So far humanity has been progressing in power/height but AWAY from the perfect being at the top of the mountain. I think we're now finally reaching the point where we're ready to turn TOWARDS the perfect being on the top in progression of the rest of our civilization's climb to the top.

[mistershithead]

walking away/towards the perfect beings is a metaphor for incorporating technology with nature itself (nano) instead of mining nature away from itself with toxic remainders. In short, time to quit being destroyers and start being healers.

[monkeywage]

It really depends on what you define as "perfect being", doesn't it?

[justforflag2]

There is NO creature at the top of the mount, that's why it's called mountain improbable.

[DrMontague]

@justforflag2 It is called mount improbable because if you were to stand facing the sheer face of the mountain (which is say a mile high) and you saw an animal standing on top of the mountain, you would think to yourself hat it couldn't have jumped up that distance in one leap, as it would be impossible for it to do so, therefore a supernatural force must have put it there. However if we see the mountain from the back we see it has climbed up gentle slopes to reach the top. Slow evolution

[justforflag2]

@DrMontague

Oh, thanks.

What I meant is that there is no way to reach the top since adaptation is always in regards to the environment, thus no absolute goal for evolution.

[DrMontague]

@justforflag2 That is correct. There are many gentle paths leading up mount improbable. One path can look as equally inviting as the other. However once you embark up a particular path you cannot go back down and choose another path. This is the reason a spider could not evolve into a human as it would have to come back down and choose another path. This is the reason we have such a diversity of life on the planet.

[justforflag2]

@DrMontague

True, true.

[Rocker921]

lol he is always dissing the audience: "so I need someone who is very good at computers and pushing a button"

[ReverendPopeFoxyFox]

Actually, this was back in '91, and it was kids. Even in church sunday schools, the same method is used.

[alliswel]

Love the demo. Interesting that Dawkins mentions the fact that evolution isn't a goal driven process... but doesn't explain it. I imagine that most of the audience just won't register that... shame really.

[ctvwr]

Does he get into it later?

I don't think many people at all understand. People seem to tend to think teleologically.

[DrMontague]

He says something like evolution has know way of knowing what lies ahead, one path looks as equally as inviting to go down as another. It has no goal it is trying to reach. In other words ancestors of the spider wouldn't consciously think I want to go down that path because I only want to have 2 arms, 2 legs, 2 eyes etc.

[Hirvassalo]

I wonder if it is possible to get (in other words, download) the computer program that Dawkins let the two "monkeys" type?

Or at least a similar program? Does it have a proper name?

I'd just love to try to type some VERY long phrases with that program.

[TheJacolyte]

You could easily program one yourself :D

I think I'll try to program one... just for shits and giggles :P

[Hirvassalo]

I have no experience of programming.

[TheJacolyte]

Well get yourself a good programming book, and gain some experience.

How do you expect to GAIN experience? By trying it!

[Hirvassalo]

To be truthfully honest, I'm not that much intrested in programming at all.

It doesn't make sense to me to start learning the whole art of programming for the sake of one program.

[TheJacolyte]

it's easy.

start off with perl or python... it's really just basic concepts. If a condition is true... do this... if not... do something else.

if (variable = true) { doThis();

} else {

 doThat();

}

[TheJacolyte]

Most of the shit is written for you in Perl

Entire programs are encompassed within a single line of code like: print("hello!"),

mail("subject", "body", "recipient")

it's painfully easy dude.

[Hirvassalo]

LOL okay dude, I think I'll give it a try.

[redasoft]

@TheJacobyte: It seems to me that you forgot the headers, but that doesn't matter, because the software you are discussing already exists. Every day my spam folder is full of unintelligible messages that appear to have been typed by monkeys. :)

[AtheistDiscGolfer]

I live in Wisconsin which is a liberal state and I didn't even hear the word evolution throughout my schooling. Its sad but ive learned more by myself in the last 5 years than any US school has to offer.

[TheJacolyte]

Yes, isn't is remarkable? People are now turning to the internet for their education.

I've learned more on the internet as well. I've picked up programming, networking, graphic design, 3D modeling, and watched many physics lectures...

Public Education is NOTHING compared to what you can find on the internet! :D

[ORACLE063]

The only problem is getting a question answered.

[hackenbollox]

You can always get a question answered if you ask it in the right place. What is your question? If I can't answer it myself I'll be happy to point you in the right direction.

[Clausfarre]

Thanks doc.

[JayArsey]

Thanks for the up, got this on DVD.

J Religious-debate com

[DrMontague]

To be honest I can no longer be arsed with religious ignorance.

[Sum1n0tu]

Adult creationists descend from child creationists, who are largely brainwashed by people they love in their youth. Love creates a strong emotional bond--to say that a loved one has lied to you creates anger, especially when that loved one believes they are telling the truth. A sense of camaraderie and family can be threatened by disagreeing with strongly held values, and many if not most are loathe to do so.

[DrMontague]

I would imagine that a high percentage do come from such backgrounds, however the creationists I've met in the UK are psychologically fucked up. e.g. one week they're Satanists, then they are born again Christians, then there off to a fortune teller, then they are suicidal, then they are ZEN Buddhist, then they are Jesus Army, then they are...

[Sum1n0tu]

Dr. Montague:

Ah, I see. I was honestly unaware that nations outside the US and conservative Islamic nations had a creationist problem. My mistake.

It is true that there is no medicine you can give the wind...

[DrMontague]

Just that every creationist who comments on my channel tend to be of the Kunt Hovind Evangelical mentality and from the States. I have very few Islamic or other religions that bother to comment. Creationists where I live tend to be the Jehovah's Witness type, Mormons, or Born again Christian.

[TheStig000]

Does anyone else think its amazing how these children can understand these concepts yet creationist adults seem not to?

[bluecobalt27]

I think its so amazingly enlightened that he was teaching these kids this in 1991. I would have loved to hear this as a kid! I bet even the younger ones took something memorable away.

[cjdaweasel]

I like the mountain. Great visual device.

[BayerLexan]

Trying to get hard core creationist to understand the concept of Evolution is a futile effort for this simple reason, Creationist don't seem to be able to understand things in a wholistic manner and tend to pick and choose parts that agree with their predetermined view. Like someone stated before, science is dynamic in it's view, as long as it is credible. Creationist will ignore what they want, so that their predetermined view won't be changed.

[tacopylas]

I wouldn't give up on creationists. Although I wasn't raised as one and I did it to my own underaged, naive self, I became a creationist for several months, before going back to evolution and then on to atheism, so at least I know what is convincing to me (empiracal evidence). So if you get at the heart of how people understand things, you'll eventually get them to see the truth.

[DrMontague]

Which is another away of saying that you are so fcukin screwed up in the head that you don't know whether you want a fuckin shit, shave or a shampoo.

[Sum1n0tu]

Dr. Montague:

Isn't that a little harsh? I think tacopylas is on the side of truth. T. is only trying to present a method of teaching creationists that has been effective for him.

[Duckhugger]

My mother and the church I went to as a child did indeed try to tie my mind down to creationist principles. It infuriates me now that I know better, looking back on how they tried to poke holes in evolution through mis-information. We were constantly barraged with gaps in the evolution and cleverly kept from seeing all the comprehensive information that evolutionary biologists had to offer us. Even in the school system, education on evolution was misinformed and incomplete.

[Duckhugger]

Finally getting to read books by the likes of Dawkins, I find it astounding that so many still act as if evolution isn't true. Most creationist children were like myself as a child... shielded from proper information and taught to distrust and despise the scientists who presented the information. Not all of us will listen to that coddling forever though. I can only hope that other kids (or childlike creationist adults) grow up and finally give evolution a proper review.

[everyspecies]

a few comments to those left by b4hecomes. 1) A planet that spins backwards? well from its point of view its spins 'forwards' and what has that to do with evolution? 2) Evolution is against every law of nature: explain what you mean by that as it really is a contradiction in terms. 3) Dawkins doest use the computer programme to PROVE evo just to help explain it.

[zvesko]

Darwin never said that his theory can not explain the emergence of eye. Not only it can explain it, but the various stages of evolution of eye, transitional forms, from photo sensitive skin cells to eyes much more advanced than ours, are present in current species. The alleged quote is a creationists' lie.

[zvesko]

You seem to have a big problem with the idea of science in general. I'm sure you understand that the theory of evolution has nothing to do with the theory of the big-bang. Evolution doesn't deal with the origin of life either, the science field that is trying to explain that is called abiogenesis and it hasn't developed a working theory in the way ToE has. There is nothing in the ToE that disputes existence of god.

[2Dlion]

thanks :)

[DrMontague]

welcome aboard MrX420. It's good to have u here.

[MrX420]

Did you read my whole post??? I was thanking you.

A little quick off the draw there.

[DrMontague]

sorry MrX420 I'v learnt a lesson there I came back rather drunk on a saturday night and read your message too fast-thought to myself the cretin's got his bible bashing mates involved. When u have his type around u have to get drunk now and again because living under the confines absolute reality would finish u off.

sober now. again my appologies.

[MrX420]

B4Hecomes has presented the best evidence against evolution....himself. How could genes that make someone so stupid survive the pressures of natural selection.

(I lie there is an evolutionary explanation for why many people blindly follow what they are told by religious leaders and other authorities)

Anyway, thanks for the uploads Doc. As well as the entertaining creationist they have attracted.

[DrMontague]

the church now agrees that all life is a product of evolution but argue that god gave mankind a soul in the process. They agree with the big bag but argue god made it all happen. U still get some die hards but they make themselves look like cretins (u know who). Most religious scientists and theologians would think the same about these die hards.

[theinquisitor]

Be civil yeah, because the bible is really civil. Rape and child killing, but no swearing.

[theinquisitor]

Peace?

Isaiah 13:15-18 (KJV)

15 Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword.

16 Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.

18 Their bows also shall dash the young men to pieces; and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children.

[theinquisitor]

There was a great series of lectures on google video called Beyond Belief, which had many speakers including Dawkins, Sam Harris, Steven Weinburg, Ramachandran, many others, and some agenda pushing psuedoscientists to make it interesting. I highly recommened these to those who have the time.

[theinquisitor]

It's about morality, science, god, religion, neurology and social behaviour and all kinds of stuff. I found it very enlightening.

[theinquisitor]

Thanks, I've been through many emotional stages during arguments with creationists and anger is usually one of the most common responses. However, I suspect it's possible that some people can be reached,

[theinquisitor]

Ok let's say for argument something cannot come from nothing. Even if that was true, it doesn't prove the authenticity of any particular holy text. It doesn't prove that whatever created the universe is a personal god that cares about us. The biggest problem is that if something cant come from nothing, then how can god come from nothing? What created god?

[b4Hecomes]

By definition, God cannot have a beginning. He is eternal. If there is no God, nothing can exist. There, by nessecity, must be an "uncaused cause." When I say that "something cannot come from nothing", it excludes God, because He Is! Inanimant objects do not think and create.

[theinquisitor]

Why is it easier to beleive that a highly complex, powerful thinking entity could come out of nothing than it is to believe simple unorganised matter and energy coming from nothing? As bizzare as energy from nothing seems, it seems far more unlikely that god should come from nothing spontaneously. Why is the more likely thing unbelievable but the less likely thing believable.

[theinquisitor]

Evolutionary science didn't end with Darwin, it began. Darwin didn't know about genetics and DNA. The fossil record alone is enough to show human-like ancestors all the way back to a common ancestor between us and the other apes. You can see the progression of the skull sizes in the different species as the brain slowly evolves to be larger.

[luigiv39]

i agree. suppose a person finds fossils of ape-like/human-like creatures of varying characteristics buried in the ground. the question he asks is: "what are these things? why are they here?" which therefore would ultimately be a more plausible explanation for this: evolution, or creationism?

[ccchevin]

A couple reasons I have to argue against this stuff is my own observations. Science claims and does know a great deal about life on our planet and how it works. that would even be an understatement. They can map entire strands of DNA these days. But with all this knowledge, science can't even create even the simplest self-sustaining lifeform from scratch in an exteremly controlled environment. Which should be overly simple enough in a world that sustains the most complex forms of life easy.

[ccchevin]

the other reason is that in all the years science has studied natural selection, it has not ever seen even a single celled oraganism evolve into a multi-celled organism. Consider how short generations are for single-celled organisms. Its only a matter of seconds. Do the math. count how many generations happen in only 50 years. Then apply that to the length in years to human generations. Is 4.7 billion years long enough still?

[theinquisitor]

I think the thing we are lacking is time. It takes a very long time for live to develop. There is even an idea called panspermia that suggests that organic molecules arrived from space, delivered by a comet. There are definitely unanswered questions about the origins of things like DNA, but evolution is really about how life got from DNA to complex lifeforms, it's not really about the origin of life itself. But it is clear that life evolved from simple beginnings.

[luigiv39]

science is always changing, it relies on existent data and knowledge, and it is willing to change if evidence presents itself. however, the inability of current science to answer these (and your) questions doesn't necessarily mean that the alternative (god and religion) is therefore true. that would be a logical fallacy. i hope this helps you even a bit. =)

[luigiv39]

science is always changing, it relies on existent data and knowledge, and it is willing to change if evidence presents itself. however, the inability of current science to answer these (and your) questions doesn't necessarily mean that the alternative (god and religion) is therefore true. that would be a logical fallacy. i hope this helps you even a bit. =)

[DrMontague]

I'm not gay but I believe that gay people have the right to their own lives. So go and bow before your homophobic evil god. who needs an evil devil when u have an evil god to bow before.

[DrMontague]

hello b4Hecomes

These lectures were made for children and people wanting an understanding of complex scientific issues.I will talk in a civilized way with anyone who wants a truely intellectual debate. but not to a billy graham type bible basher who pretends to be wanting intellectual debate.

[DrMontague]

perhaps we could start a chat room to discuss these arguments. your only allowed so many comments within a ceretain period with utube. so it gets frustrating when u can't post

[everyspecies]

DM, a few years ago i naturally went on a few evolution/creation forums (god/no god i stay clear from, no evidence either way so futile) I had to step back as creationists are generally impenetrable and are happy with illogical circular argument that go nowhere.

[everyspecies]

further, most creationsist show themselves to have no undertanding on the mechanism of evolution (if they disbelieve it they should at least be able to understand it and so critically oppose it)it would be like me criticising some economic policy that i know nothing about (i know nothing about economics)but feeling that my view has weight.

[b4Hecomes]

Why no transitional fossils? Why has every supposed "missing link" found, been exposed as a fraud? Why is the oldest written record of man only about 4000 yrs. old? Why are apes still apes? Why does 1 planet spin backwards and 1 on it's side? I'll wait right here!

[theinquisitor]

No transisional fossils? There are loads of them. Some missing link claims we're frauds like piltdown man, but there are dozens of homonid intermediate stages. You can literally look through the layers of sediment and find species distrubution that agress with the idea of evolution, not creation. Also the world is billions of years old.

[b4Hecomes]

Firstly, mutations ,in nature, are not beneficial. Secondly, evolution, by nessecity, had to be random, if indeed it was not designed. You could fill a computer with all knowledge and without an OS programmed with it, it would never be of any intellectual benefit.

[theinquisitor]

Natural selection is not random. Some rabbits are faster runners, and the slowest ones are the ones to get killed. I'm sure you can agree that a slower rabbit will get killed by a fox more easily than a fast one. That's the driving force of natural selection. It's not random.

[DrMontague]

remember creationist don't mind losing arguments.They all psychologically screwed up.

[DrMontague]

obviously this person cannot follow a logical arrgument

[b4Hecomes]

If evolution is not from chance, what is it from?

[BertENashus]

It is from the selection, and subsequent propagation, of traits that benefit an individual's reproductive success.

[b4Hecomes]

If you think this is science,you are not being honest with yourself. Your pride will not let you admit what your conscience knows to be the truth. Evolution is against every Law of physics and nature. Get a grip, please.

[DrMontague]

Your response quote

'Why is this video listed under Science & Technology?'

this proves your a cretin. Not gonna waste any more time on u. Watch these lectures all of them because Mr Dawkins has answered all your question.

[DrMontague]

hi matttaylor01 don't bother to argue with b4Hecomes

u mite as well try making a gold broach out of a lump of dung to get he/she understand

[b4Hecomes]

Why is this video listed under Science & Technology?

[matttaylor01]

Because that is what it is, doh!

[b4Hecomes]

Wow! An atheist using a pre-programmed computer to prove random/chance events that in turn prove evolution! And this guy is the best atheism has to offer? I feel much better about my argument for Creation and Design! Thanks, Richy D!!!!

[matttaylor01]

The best that Creation and Design has to offer is Osama Bin Laden though, so where is the choice?

[matttaylor01]

You have clearly not understood. The whole demonstration is to show that evolution is not about pure chance i.e. the opposite of what you have taken from it.

[cloonmore]

nice shirt

[kostja1985]

Thanks for uploading! Really interesting AND entertaining. I've got to read The God Delusion.