Added: 2 years ago
From: C0nc0rdance
Views: 23,131
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (389)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • personally, i think one's attitude towards authentic knowledge & understanding matters more than how much trivia you've got memorized, especially in an age where wikipedia is a click away. (also, if you got an answer wrong, google: khan academy)

  • The big bang theory does not say that the universe BEGAN with an explosion. The theory just says that the universe once was in an extremely dense state that expanded. How this extremely dense state got to be is unknown.

    The universe could have begun with a quantum leap to that state, and a quantum leap is not an explosion.

  • Wow! I'm much smarter than I thought. Paging Drs. Dunning and Kruger.

  • A Gallup poll in 2005 showed that 37% of Americans believe in haunted houses, while only 32% believe in ghosts.

    How does that work?

  • @wilfredthebold 5% of Americans don't believe in surveys?

  • Throughout history, most people were illiterate. Most people live w/o needing to know geography and forget it along with "who ruled England in 1776?" Sherlock Holmes does more to show deduction and analysis has importance than the average History class memorizing lists of names and dates. Science is often suborned to politics and so is distrusted. Make it meaningful, interesting and practical and people will learn it.

  • It's nice to watch your vids, Con. So many charlatans doing pseudo-science in their own office, makes for dreadful viewing here. Your stuff, is not dreadful.

    Simply asking for 3rd party verification, and double blind experimentation gets me labeled a "bigot" when I refuse to buy into a YouTuber's vids or a book of his personal telekinesis vids.

  • I'm pretty sure that europeans misundertood the word astrology as the science of the celestial objects. Maybe because astrology is most seen through horoscope and not through the actual practice of it.

    I can't relate to those numbers from my personal experience.

    Magasines tend to use horoscopes as a page filler more than a true service in my opinion. It's entertainement though it happens that some people believe really hard in it, usually afterward, which makes it somewhat laughable to others.

  • I know you have your disqualifiers, but I would have probably answered false on the explosion for the big bang. I would have thought of it as the expansion and thought it was a trick question. :-)

  • All I need to know is apples are healthy for you. Aids are not. Children can be annoying. School is boring. Can I get an A+ now =D?

  • But...the big bang WASN'T an explosion. I would have gotten that one "wrong," assuming it to be a trick question. It's merely worded improperly. The big bang was an expansion, not an explosion.

  • @TrevorBlack79

    It's mostly a matter of semantics. Explosion has a lot of connotations that expansion doesn't, but both correctly describe what we think happened:

    Explosion: A rapid or sudden increase in amount or extent

    Expansion: The action of becoming larger or more extensive

    I think the scientists involved were looking for a word that people could conceptualize better. Unfortunately, I agree that it could skew the results.

  • @TrevorBlack79 It was a extreme rapid expansion... which is the definition of an explosion.

  • 8:05

    Amiga parallel interface.

    That is cool.

  • Science should be its own religion, but then people might confuse us with scientoligists:(

  • Did they remember to reverse the questions on half of the questions to account for confirmation bias?

  • HEY! You used and AMIGA schematic! I still have mine. :)

  • I hate to say it, but this video does not show a high degree of statistical literacy. Many of the polls cited are unscientific.

    Haven't unscientific polls been repeatedly shown to be completely unreliable?

  • Mr Concordance,

    Great video, as usual :-) THX

    I noticed a glitch:

    -- at 4:20 the screen says "post-graduate degrees" while the voice says "graduate degrees"... R we talking Masters or Doctoral (and beyond)?

  • These statistics make me sad to be an American...

  • 6:18

    Mr C0nc0rdance: “...and they [ignorant people] control the media...”

    Mr. C0nc0rdance,

    as much as I enjoy your videos, I think that that is a rather stupid statement; because that is the same (pseudo-)argument that ignorant people use.

  • @LarsJanZeeuw

    Not "ignorant', but the 90% of people who rank lore as equal to science; non-skeptics. People like Oprah, Dr. Oz, and Deepak Chopra get more air time than Carl Sagan ever did. That's because most people don't differentiate between evidence based medicine and a series of anecdotes and plausible-sounding technical jargon.

    Witness the proliferation of shows on ghost hunting, psychics, UFOs or religious miracles.

  • Got two of the questions right, but that's only because I'm an astronomy major, and not a biology one =P

  • Comment removed

  • I have a degree in biomedical science but I didn't know how long it takes the moon to orbit the sun. Im ashamed of myself.

  • @Xeonophon

    The moon doesn't orbit the sun, it orbits the Earth, and it does so about every 27.3 days. Hey, you can check out some great videos here on YouTube about basic astrophysics and correct this deficiency right now!

  • @C0nc0rdance ye I got the word mixed up.

  • what a bunch of idiots :)) its true that colleges are rapidly becoming the equivalent of high school .. a good part of grads are stupid (and i say that based on my own knowings not on the video)

  • C0nc0rdance, you made aplogies for US based origin numbers but that was all. I doubt that extra-terrestial aliens are visiting, but UFOs are "Unidentified Flying Objects". Any object in the sky that is not identified is a UFO. UFOs are real beyond a shadow of a doubt. Only their nature is in question. I would have answered "Yes, UFOs are vistiing the earth".

  • I find some questions in the telephone questionaire odd. America to me is known as a highly Christian country. And in evolution and creation of the world, you have a couple of theories. Some of them are the big bang and neo darwinism theories. The big other is intelligent design, or "this is all God's creation". So questions about evolution and the creation of the Earth may simply have been answered "incorrectly" due to people having different theories about them.

  • @Mejustdamned He brought that up in his video when he mentioned the rewording of the question. When it was reworded, people answered correctly. This implies that people knew the answer according to evolution or the big bang, but answered differently according to their beliefs.

  • A lot of it has to do with how we choose to phrase the question because the way the big bang question sounded is actually wrong there was no explosion, there was no bang, it is not considered the origin of the universe to physicists its merely showing how the universe has changed from a very dense state to a relatively sparse state.

    And people IQ tests do not test learned knowledge they test problem solving and reasoning, this is about learned knowledge so stop comparing the two.

  • Excuse me, I learned that the Big Bang was exactly NOT an explosion...What is correct now?

  • You are speaking about declarative knowledge here, not science. It reminds of an I.Q. test I once did (not in Endland) which asked how far Wolverhampton is from Oxbridge to determine spatial acuity.

    What is slightly troubling is your endorsement of the completely discredited positivist notion that science is an evidence based methodology. It is not, and it is crucial that it is not.

    THIS one thing is the single biggest problem in my estimation and you fall headlong into it.

  • the big bang was an EXPLOSION? lolwut?

  • the big bang wasn't an explosion, it was an expansion of space.

  • @blurglide lol u got anserd by elmo on barelypolitical!! ahaha

  • 5:40 FANTASTIC. 62% thought that, in according to the BIG BANG theory the universe started with a big bang - or a huge explosion - as it is phrased in the questionnaire. How stupid, or illiterate must the other 38% be?

  • That question about the big bang was poorly worded and I believe that many got it wrong because the correct answer is actually false.

  • The view on this vid proves something. It's very sad that most people to choose to dismiss things and leave it all to faith, just because it's too complicated. The pressure that everybody will call you a " nerd. " Ugh! so to conform with the norm. They just go with the flow. I myself has have a lot of trouble understanding science, especially math. But I don't let that stop me. Thanks for the vid!

  • "The universe began with a huge explosion. (True)"

    No. Big Bang wasn`t explosion but expansion of space-time.

  • @anttibra

    Was what I thought, when it was mentioned as well. But depending on the level of detail, it can be classified as an explosion "rapid increase in volume and release of energy in an extreme manner" (wiki)

  • @anttibra It's not actually just an expansion of space-time.. as space and time where created as well.. i think using the word explosion is a nice analogy for the big bang

  • This reminds me of an experiment my teacher did in high school (Bronx High School of Science.) He gave us a battery, a length of wire, and a small light bulb, in a few minutes everyone in the class was able to get their bulb to light up. He then told us that the same experiment was performed with a group of Harvard graduates and none of them were able to make it work. Most thought 2 wires were needed, or a special light bulb socket. We were all pretty shocked.

  • To be fair, the Big Bang theory doesn't say that the universe started with an explosion, but an expansion. This confusion is exploited by creationists who say things like, "explosions cause disorder, not order." Even Barenaked Ladies get it right in the theme song to the TV show: "The whole universe was in a dark dense state, then nearly 14 billion years ago, expansion started."

  • wow great subject !! i had no idea how stupid some people are .

    where does gary null fit into this .

    lmao reversing the aging process.

    lmao

  • I disagree about there being two camps, those who value scientific knowledge and those who don't, there are also us who value science in general, but just don't understand most of it, sort of like cheerleaders for sciene, we don't play ball, but we do root for "our" team (the scientists).

  • I believe you just politely called me a dumbass C0nc0rdance!

    Can't believe I failed such basic questions.

  • What you have is the thoughts of a group of people who are willing to answer telephone surveys. That only proves that people who are willng to answer telephone surveys are likely to be ignorant on scientific issues. I always put the phone down at the mention of a survey. I don't have the time nor the inclination to answer questions for free when i'm busy.

  • This information on graduate level intellegence is tragic.

  • couldn't you also include propaganda in lore? e.g. the resulting prohibition of cannabis due to propaganda that an entire generation of people now believe/enforce without question, despite a lack of evidence, and evidence that shows the contrary.

  • I suspect that people would have done better on the survey if the questions had been on which theory was predominately accepted in science. Science does not make absolute claims. The center of the Earth is unobserved, thus we say that all observable evidence points to it being very hot. There is a big difference between something being the accepted theory and something being true. I think the survey failed to recognize that fact.

  • When I was talking to my friend about religion and such, she kept asking me "why does eveything have to be about evidence for you?". Some people just don't get the fact that everything is about evidence for them too, except when it comes to lore, religion and things they WANT to believe. Science is just common sense. In any oher, mundane aspect of our lives do we believe anything without evidence? What reason is there to belive wihout evidence? Unless the belief is forced upon you

  • I would love to know what a 'reputable' witness is with regard to alien abduction. Reports of UFO's often state that they were seen by, wait for it, POLICEMEN. That's it then. Do you really think that the brains, minds and imaginations of POLICEMEN are less subject to error than anyone else's? The same goes for other 'reputable' witnesses. The least reliable evidence in every court case comes from...? Yes, witnesses.

  • *Pats self on back*

  • At approximately 7:28 you use the phrase "that included paranormal phenomenon such as ghosts and ESP". The plural of "phenomenon" is "phenomena".

    I love your videos! It's nice to know that I'm not the only one frightened by the pull towards ignorance in the world...

  • Aren't there more than 2 groups to this issue though, like me, who only knows the basics of science but still actually thinks that science is the way to go instead of supernatural mumbojumbo?

    Or as Penn & Teller put it; I'm not a scientist but I belong to the cheering squad.

  • Here in England we have The Sun newspaper, the most widely circulated paper here owned by Rupert Murdoch. There is always a page every other day about UFO's. Pattern emerging?

  • lol. You did not just cite the daily mail! Isn't that the tabloid? Maybe another newpaper, right? Obviously no THE daily mail! Right?

  • No wonder so many people believe in god.

  • Re: your poll. Most people could care less if it's Adam and Eve or Lucy or "who knows". Or how the universe started. It doesn't affect their everyday lives even one tiny bit. Few are interested in science like you and I. So don't get too upset about your poll. It not a crisis.

  • Intimating that good science and evolution are one and the same is bad science. But you use it as a good indoctrination ploy in this silly vid. You are doing the same thing that your instructors did to you. Indoctrinating. You don't go for critical thinking unless the "solution" is evolution. That is the diff between you and me. Critical thinking. You accept without skepticism. Only you don't know it. You have been indoctrinated. I am the skeptical/critical thinker you say you espouse.

  • I have two problems with the assertion at 5:47 - "According to the Big Bang Theory, The universe bagan with a huge explotion."

    1) It was an expansion, not an explosion.

    2) If you talk about a "Big Bang" you're practically telling them the answer.

  • I know things... but I also forget things... thank the giant void that we have the google machine..

    I got all three right -- but I had to work to remember...

    I think it's also frustrating to me that many sciene and technically inclined people don't have a very deep critique of science and tech as practised under a regime determined by multinational capitalism...environmental scientists don't get the funding or respect they must have..

    still - great vid..

  • I took the time to read the time to read the survey at 2:09 and I think I'm going to cry.

  • @JoesephKatana I paused to read it, didn't realize you read it out. Where was this study taken? Just the united states in general?

  • I think its a bit of stretch to call social sciences as sciences.

  • BTW that women in red at the end, she's violating the book of Timothy. Religious hypocrites, follow your own book.

  • Well not everyone who goes to university takes science. These people could have been ENG lit majors. And trust me, I've talked to people in ENG lit, who think that people walked the Earth with dinosaurs.

  • LOL MALAYSIA! gahahaha... I'm from malaysia and from what I can see... Malaysia (islamic country) refused to answer questions regarding the big bang and evolution. And thats some horrible scoring... kind of embarrassed @.@"

  • Lasers focused sound waves???

  • "God: Hidden Science" - Google it!

  • Awesome and informative video, as always. One little error - I wouldn't call The Daily Mail a newspaper...

  • Love the video, but I'm skeptic to believe the statistics about the college and graduate students. If you survey only, say, art majors, you're not going to get the same results as if you survey a few students majoring in biology, chemistry, physics. It's still sad that these highly-educated adults don't know basic science, though.

  • Actually a lot of hard scientists don't understand the scientific process and peer review process. I have a BS in Microbiology and there was just too much information to get through so that section was never discussed. My GF is an archeologist and is blown away by this, however her entire field depends on being able to weigh evidence, biology and chemistry really have so much info, you can easily make it through a 4 year program and never get educated on this. I have to learn via youtube

  • I'm so happy to be 20 and actually know most of the answers to these things. It also kinda scares me.

  • Can you share a link to the informal Harvard study you mentioned?

  • 2/3 ashamed assumed moon was static whilst we rotated ,doh ; well learn something new today so that's cool

  • One thing that sort of muddies this is how real adaptive parts of culture that involve material benefits come about through superstition.

    Like for example say some pacific fishing culture says that when the village elder feels aches in his bones that means it's not a good day to go fishing.

    Now superstitious yes, but low pressure fronts cause aches in elderly people and they also cause storms that are very deadly on the high seas

  • A pain in my left nut means its going to rain.

    But that's not superstition. Superstition is all the bad luck they said I was going to have for running over all those black cats that tried to cross my path. Who knows, maybe black cats have a superstition about trying to cross my truck's path, saying that they'll have the bad luck of getting run over. But that wouldn't be superstition either. That would be black cats having observed repeated & predictable phenomena

    How would you explain my nut?

  • The definition of superstition means associating together unrelated phenomenon. or associating together related phenomenon with a supernatural currency.

    People are inherently superstitious because that's how associative learning works. I think it's easy to see why the religious impulse comes so naturally to people. When we see that two things coincide we start thinking these are related

    oh and you should get that nut looked at : )

  • *Pats self on back* =)

    I think one of the main problems is that academic scholars involve themselves in popularizing science to a much lower degree than they should. I realize that many of them focus on their research and don't have the time to do that, but they really should try to find the time. Their future funding is ultimately dependent on it.

  • I like your videos but I think you are wrong to scoff at UFO's. UFO's are unidentified flying objects. The possibility that some may be related to aliens shouldn't be ignored. Many scientists would say that there is a good chance that there is intelligent life in our galaxy and I think most of them would agree it isn't on earth.

    The Big Bang raises so many questions. Serious work should be done to look at alternate explanations. What questions? Why is the universe flat. I've run out of chracters

  • @Eugensdiet: The universe is flat? How?

    And about UFOs: to date, the amount of evidence for extraterrestrials visiting Earth, is exactly zero. While I agree the possibility shouldn't be ignored, there is no actual reason to believe it's true.

  • There have been many people, Generals, ATP's, police, ministers, doctors who have claimed to have seen them. One Colonel said he stood within feet of one. Hundreds at one time have seen huge UFO's from different positions on the ground. Do you think these people lied or imagined what they saw? The gray alien that many have said they have seen are they a common dream or a bipedal creature that does not appear harmful? Advanced aliens may present themselves in a non threatening way. Don't know

  • And people claim to have seen Bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, and mental spoon bending. It turns out unsubstantiated anecdotes are not very useful in proving the existence of things. Sometimes these things are hoaxes, or msunderstandings. Our perception is easily fooled.

    Now, a single alien artifact submitted to scrutiny by dozens of third party scientists from around the world; that I would believe. I would demand objective, reproducible tests with published, consensus results.

  • As with many things, it's not so much what you believe, but why you believe it. If you give credibility to sources because of your personal subjective desires, or if you suspend your skepticism of facts because of an ideology, you make the same mistake that creationists, AIDS denialists, and anti-vaxxers make. You filter the truth.

    As an outside observer, let me say that there may be life on other planets, they may even be visiting Earth, but there is no credible public evidence for either.

  • You choose to ignore reputable witnesses because you choose not to consider the possibility just as many deny evolution. Close your eyes tight enough and it will go away. Don't lump me in with "creationists, AIDS denialists, and anti-vaxxers" and think that is a point of argument. It is a cheap shot.

  • Nobody who's informed in biology deny's evolution. Scientists argue about the specific causes of evolution and which ones are more or less important but no credible biologists deny evolution.

  • What is your point? I haven't said anything that is contrary to your statement so why make it?

  • I must have misunderstood your comment then. I thought you were denying evolution.

    I thought you might have been a Ralien or a scientologist since you believe in alien visitation.

    I agree with concordance, yes alien life probably exists right now somewhere but it's EXTREMELY unlikely that it'll ever reach earth.

    I don't see sufficient evidence to believe alien visitations occur. Hearsay and third person stories is not credible evidence. Show me a body or an alien gadget.

  • We're almost on the same page. I didn't say I believe in alien visitation, I said I don't think you should scoff those who have sited UFO's. I'm not talking about adolescent hoaxes. I'm talking about real airline transport pilots real military Generals and Colonels. I'm talking about communities that have shared a UFO experience. My comment about the Grays was open ended . I gave two possible explanations one of which was imagination. Two eyed bipedal humanoids doesn't sound very probably to me

  • I have already stated that anecdotes are not useful sources of proof. People are easily fooled, prone to lie, and everything is colored by their perception. Not one of them has produced objective physical evidence that is publically available in scientific study.

    There is as much evidence for alien visitation as unicorns and fairies. And there are people who will swear they have seen all three.

  • @C0nc0rdance "prone to lie"--I'm leaning largely towars that one.

  • @C0nc0rdance Hey, I like this video and appreciate your thought process. I don't agree with you 100% but you are definitely part of the solution. Are you aware of Cognitive Policy Works? They're looking for people to contribute to a progressive strategy handbook.

  • @C0nc0rdance i dont believe that we have visitations by alien beings(out there somewhere maybe) , but i also know the best artifacts are in the museum basements.

  • The Universe is flat. This is the description given by astronomers. The Universe does not appear to go out the same in all directions. Flat seems to be one of the shapes that nature likes such as our solar system or the Milky Way and most other galaxies. Why not the Universe? Big Bang and a flat Universe don't seem to be compatible.

  • I think you've misunderstood the usage of the word "flat". When cosmologists talk about a flat universe they're not talking about the 3-dimensional physical shape of it. They're talking about how geometry behaves locally and globally. Flat in this sense means that Euklidean geometry applies. This is my understanding.

  • That is very interesting. I will try to do some research to satisfy my curiosity. I think you meant to say that Euclidean geometry does "not" apply. It also seems to mean that when an astronomer describes a Galaxy, for example , he is talking in terms of Euclidean space and not time/space.

    Thanks

  • No, I think I got it right. In Euclidean geometry space has no curvature, hence the usage of the word "flat".

  • I understand what you have said. I just wouldn't have considered Euclidean geometry to be flat since it encompasses solid or 3 dimensional geometry. Can you recommend a book or reference for me to study? Thanks

  • Unfortunately, I can't really give you a good reference book to start with. However, Wikipedia is almost always a good place to start. Search until you find something that applies to what you're interested in, and if the article doesn't satisfy you then look for reference literature at the bottom of the article.

  • C0nc0rdance, I'm afraid your own answer to question 1 is not entirely accurate, or perhaps incomplete. It doesn't get hotter in summer simply because of an increase in the period of solar exposure. It's also important to understand that the amount of incomming light per surface area (the flux) increases during summer. So the sun doesn't only shine longer, it also shines with more intensity. Besides that, there is fewer atmosphere to penetrate during summer, so more light reaches earths surface.

  • You are correct in your facts.

    I've addressed this in comments below. The difference in seasons is caused by axial tilt. Changes in period, scatter, and flux are all the result of this tilt.

    My answer was two parts, only the first of which was the actual answer to the question. The second part addressed the reason why days are longer in summer.

  • SpacingAstronaut - your right, the more direct sun is the major factor. The equator doesn't have long days and yet they call that area the tropics (because it is hot).

  • Uhm, sorry but the universe did not begin with a giant explosion. The big bang wasn't an explosion, the name only implies it to be so it's easier to comprehend.

  • Read the sidebar info, please.

  • I have just finished reading:

    "Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens our Future"

    by Chris Mooney & Sheril Kirshenbaum

    It portrays a very worrying trend.

  • 1 - Because Apollo's chariot is extra hot in the summer

    2 - Depends on how fast Artemis drives her chariot

    3 - Proteins? Do you mean Proteus? He was made up from Poseidon duh :p

    Damn.. I failed the test ;p

  • Frightening.

  • I think this is a bit too harsh.

    There are plenty of people who know allot about science but have their own ideas about magic and religion. I personally don't see anything wrong with having your own ideas, as long as you aren't trying to turn them into a cult.

    I remember asking my biology teacher what she would do if she saw a ghost, she told me she would come up with an explanation. However I think at the back of her mind she would be enthralled with the idea of it being real.

  • I compleatly agree with your point, however in some cases I would like to point out that there may have to be a margin for ambiguaty.

    For example, if you were to ask me if I belive in ghosts, I would reply yes. But not in the same was as popular media and lore would suggest. I belive ghosts are either a real natural or psychological phanomanon that has yet to be explained. One day science may answer this question, but for now it remains quite ambiguouse. Just saying :).

  • I know this is a overview of data, but the data you provide doesn't do anyone any good unless you say that the paper found that there was are significant differences between some sort of control group or who returned the survey.There may be some bias in the studies you site. However, i like your overall message. 90% of people agree.

  • I wonder what you could do with sound waves focused like a laser?

    And set it to the resonant frequency of drywall... and fired it from SPACE!

    Wait a minute... something sounds a little off about that. It's probably nothing.

  • thank you! This is definitely a video that needed to be made. :-)

  • Splitting up in two separate nations seems like a good solution to the problem :/

  • I'm all for the intent of this video, but every time you cite an informal or unscientific poll it loses credibility. They are completely useless; no amount of good statistics can fix bad data gathering.

  • I do not think this division is just as you describe it. Just because you cannot answer specific scientific questions, even questions those with a scientific education would laugh at, does not mean that you don´t want to be bothered with it, or only care about it as abstract. I think you could paint a picture with politics: Not many would answer correctly to sample questions, yet have a passion for politics.

  • Although I agree that there is big problem here, I have some difficulties with these results. For one, I suspect that some of the wrong answers are down to mis-comprehension of the questions (a problem of basic literacy, rather than scientific literacy),and also non-cooperation. I also see the issue with 'explosion' in the big bang question as discussed by other commenters. Finally, I have some sympathy with those who feel that technology driven change is moving too fast, although I don't agree.

  • This is astonishing! I can't imagine even one adult (among the sane and those with an IQ sufficient to manage their own affairs) who does not know that it takes the earth a year to go around the sun.

  • Hey! What side of your face is black?

  • Don't worry so much about the increasing divide. Eventually we will become Morlocks, they will become Eloy and we can simply eat them.

  • It's the other way round. 60% of Japanese people agree that benefits outweigh the costs of scientific research.

  • I'm a little sceptical about the frightening character of some of these survey results. To people who aren't scientists, the nature lasers and radioactivity is trivia, and I think that scientists lose sight of that. Are we astounded and disturbed that some scientists don't know much about other fields of study?

    Although actually, for most of the other questions, I'm in agreement. I mean, geocentrism? The length of the Earth's orbit? What do you think a year is, for heaven's sake?

  • 12 pictures of sexy chicks?

  • I understand the big bang and agree that it is our best answer, but the fact that they say that it is an "explosion", I would have said no. That is a misrepresentation of it. So I would have answered no on both.

  • Absolutely right! Minus 2 for me, for the same reasons.

  • I knew the answers to the three questions, and I'm a high school drop-out. That doesn't make me smart: it just makes me well-read.

  • Well, to be fair, you also have no life. :-)

    GRAVITY!!!!!

  • I disagree. A life of reading is a life just the same.

  • A life of reading is definitely worthwhile. However, trying to impress people by using words you don't understand "outs" you as uneducated and pompous. A bad combination. Almost as bad as arrogant and ignorant.

    Reading = good. Trying to impress people with a vocabulary you haven't mastered = bad.

  • How does this make being well read and having no live mutually complementary?

  • What? That statement made no sense.

    Seriously. I don't know what your point is because your use of language did not form a coherent thought.

    I'll withdraw now so as to not get caught up in a needless argument over the choice of the right versus the almost-right word. If you think the less of me because of that, so be it.

  • You accused DP of having no life. I was disagreeing. Is this much clear?

  • I was KIDDING. I even used the little smiley face!!!!!

    :-)

    Geez. Stop now. Please.

  • "I was KIDDING."

    Well you're not very good at it.

  • I used the goddam smiley face. Only a total MORON would not GET the fact that I was KIDDING when I USED the SMILEY FACE.

    Idiot.

    Really. Why couldn't you just leave well enough alone and not be a fucking jerk?

  • Sometimes smiles can be derisive.

  • No surprises with the Daily Mail poll; it's possibly the furthest right paper in our country and always has the odd column made by a journalist reckoning they can one up science by postulating their own prejudice.

  • At 2:39, the question "Did the universe begin with a huge explosion?" is posed. According to the survey, the answer is yes/true. That is wrong!! The Big Bang was not an explosion; it was a sudden expansion.

  • @jimbrown257 Yeah, sounds a bit stupid when you just promote people to think about science. lol

  • The willful evolution of the aware into non-lemmings,

    as we watch bodies rain off of the cliff, seems very long on odds to me. But perhaps shorter than that of attempting to divert and dissipate the momentum of the mindless mass. There's only so much that yelling "Don't be stupid" will do.

  • Amiga wiring diagram at 8:15! \o/

  • A lot of these video mention that it's ridiculous to believe in witches, which I don't get. Witchcraft? That silly. But aren't those who follow the Wicca religion witches? They don't have supernatural powers, but they're still witches.

    I admit I could be wrong about the Wicca = Witches thing, but in the very least there are people who call themselves witches. There are even folks who think they are vampires.

  • Anyone make a comment about Data vs Lore yet?

    I seem to recall Data had a brother named Lore, or something. I shall ingeniously post this comment and THEN check wikipedia to see if i'm talkin out my ass. o boy o boi.

  • Did you say that common law was a form of lore?  Can you elaborate?

  • Got Q1, was out by 0.3 for Q2 and I'm kicking myself for thinking I didn't know Q3! -_-

    I'd agree about the Big Bang question being wrong too; technically an explosion is a reaction of matter, right? Whereas, the Big Bang was the expansion of space-time occuring independent of the matter therein. In that quiz, I would have answered incorrectly despite knowing what the Big Bang is.

    Ah, 8:11! That's my subject. :D

  • I got all three right.

  • Most people think explosion=big exploding, and that an expansion doesn't fit. While it is a true question, it feels loaded. A better was to word it would be 'expansion'

  • I probably would have gotten that question "wrong" for just that reason. I'm not sure how one would go about it, but I'd be interested to know how self selecting the 2000 people called were. I know many people who would do well with these types of questions and most wouldn't bother with a phone survey.

  • Concordant, you might be forgetting that there will be people who intentionally answer wrongly.

  • Harder Questions Please

  • Since humans & rocks are comprised of the same atoms, why don't rocks have a consciousness?

    That will keep you busy till the next........???....... conversion!

  • because atoms don't produce consciousness exclusively....

    You might as well ask why atoms don't have a conscious themselves...

    or, If human beings are the only species with a soul, then why do other animals have consciousness...

    that should keep you busy til the next.......????...... crazy question you decide to ask :)

  • no no no, science doesn't work like that. It doesn't warrant asking dumb, irrelevant questions like the ones you proposed. Yet, you think the question I asked, is crazy

    I guess you haven't heard.... the question I asked, is already being asked by Physicists. They're leaving it to future Physicists and it going unanswered, deals a big blow to the materialist view

  • Chuichupachichi...

    lol... you are funny... the questions that i asked you were rhetorical. I was just using them to show how dumb your statement was...

    here are some physics fields...

    acoustics, optics, mechanics, thermodynamics, and electromagnetism, as well as in modern extensions including atomic and nuclear physics, cryogenics, solid-state physics, particle physics, and plasma physics....

    Show me which branch deals with consciousness and i will apologize ;)

  • Quantum Physics:..!!!!!

    ""One of the most exciting discoveries of quantum physics is the realization that our thoughts affect the world around us. In the quantum realm--far smaller than protons and neutrons--quantum scientists have conducted numerous experiments with the smallest particles known.

    In these quantum physics studies, it was discovered that the thoughts and expectations of the experimenter were actually causing the experiment's outcome!.""

  • VideoAudioDisco09

    I think you were fooled by the video "what the *** do we know" or some sh*t like that...

    our thoughts do nothing to do world around us but help us evaluate, interpret and communicate what's happening in the world and how we feel about it...

    and that's it...

  • I'll have to apologetically retract, I think I jumped in to quick on this one.

    The vid you mention I have not seen.

    I was referring probably incorrectly to an example of the quantum double slit experiment. I was sure I had read something very recent to add to this but can not find it so can not confirm or argue. Of course it is highly theoretical still anyway.

    My favorite physicists, Erwin Schrodinger,

    -Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them does not exist.

  • "Since humans & rocks are comprised of the same atoms, why don't rocks have a consciousness?"

    Lol, I've seen some dumb comments on YT but this has got to be on the Top5 dumbest ever.

    Would you expect a few bits of plastic and silicon smashed together into a ball to operate just like your computer?

    Dumbeness reaches whole new levels!!! lol

  • Let's try again : since a watch and a car are made of the same metal, why can't I drive a watch ? LOL

  • How do we know they don't?

    (I know physical explanations abound, but let's approach the issue philosophically).

  • the big bang question is wrong,

    itś big ¨exPANSION" not explosion.

  • well.. since an explosion is categorized as a rapid expansion of gasses.. then it is true.

  • I thought that at the initial stage of expansion there were only high energy photons, so then it wouldn't be true. :S

  • THANK YOU! that question had me hopping as soon as I saw it. I've had to explain this to enough YECs as it is.

  • one of the biggest obstacles for reason in the battle of ideas is the sentimental attachment to tradition and the emotional illusion of solace.

    the scientific method doesn't appeal to emotion (nor should it) and what better way to hurt someones feelings than to challenge their credibility?

    the answer to "how do we convince them" is "as many ways as possible" but in every one, a sensibility of emotional thinking will yield the best results.

    just keep the conversation going.

  • man i got 2/3, idk why but i thought the 3rd question was "what makes up protons" and i said quarks

    lol nice video 5/5

  • "These are people for whom science and technology are strange and frightening." and who VOTE.

    They VOTE. This is frightening to me.

    Thanks for your videos, c0nc0rdance.