Every body deserves to know the truth... including childrens! It is there life and decision to come to the lecture. Dawkins is simply a evangelist of darwinism, in contrast to evangelist to Christianity.
@changchinhon If evolution were proved wrong Darkins et al would accept the evidence.i.e. they are prepared to change their views as new information comes to light . Fundamentalists religious people are not prepared to change their views no matter how strong the evidence for evolutionary theory. Dawkins is not an evangelist i.e.a preacher of the gospel. He is a prof. of evolutionary biology.
@DrMontague Religion and Science are actually very similar, they both have strong resemblances as they both answer very deep questions to the purpose of life. To the extent science has evidence, religion hasn't. I still believe my metaphor of describing dawkins as a evangelist is correct. It will work other way round, describing a preacher as a professor.
@changchinhon Region and science are not similar. What religious denomination you follow is by enlarge influenced by where you are born. In the West you are more likely to follow Christianity, in the East you might follow Islam. Some people even scientists can have a psychological yearning for the need to believe in gods. A scientific fact is anything that can be observed and measured. Religion is not a scientific fact , rather it is the product of a deluded minds.
@DrMontague Indeed you are right, from where i was born i was influenced by large amount of religious influences. however i believe whether it is religion or science, it all leads to one purpose, which is fundamentally purposed to improve the humanity, as we known today. Forexample religion teaches people not to do certain foul things and science invent new technologies, making our lives more enjoyable.
@changchinhon Moses was god's prophet and messenger. God's message was that gay and lesbians should be stoned to death! Religion and a belief in god has therefore taught people to do foul things and to be intolerant . Therefore theists cherry pick the bible i.e. quoting the nice bits. When I was taught about Moses at school god's evil was simply airbrushed out. All we got was the parting of the Red Sea and him going up the mountain to get the commandments.
@DrMontague Clearly you know the old testament. However in the new testament, some reformation has been done, e.g no more circumcision. This is why there are not very much Jews in the world, in comparison to the christians. from the book river out of Eden, Dawkins himself actually mentioned the similarity between science and religion, as both answer many deep questions. e.g what is the meaning of life? We biologist would say to reproduce pass on DNA, christians would say to impress god by goods.
@changchinhon Why did god spout off hated and intolerance in the place only to recant it at a later date. In other words god got it wrong the first time and then makes amends by coming down to earth in the form of Jesus! Therefore god is not perfect! Of course Dawkins acknowledges that religion has attempted to answer deep questions but they have no evidence what so ever for their conclusions. Science has! We are the product of evolution, each creature was not individually created by a god
Religion does not use the experimental method to try and find truth. They simply start from the assumption that there is a supernatural being behind the creation and try to understand this supernatural beings plan. . Science looks for natural phenomena to explain the creation and uses the experimental method . There have been many religions throughout human history. Each religion claims their one is the right one. This is not how science operates. Science and religion are not similar!
@DrMontague valid points, but remember, if there were't religion in the first place, would there still be civilisations? would darwin still be the darwin of today, if he hasn't oppose to the religious theories, and introducing the theory of evolution. Religion and science are interdependent on each other. Religion kicks off the humanity and science follows. perhaps they are not 100% similar, but they definetely has similar functions, this why they interfere with each other.
@changchinhon Religion and science do not have similar functions. Since the dawn of mankind , mankind has has tied to understand heir place in the universe. Their limited knowledge of the natural world led them to conclude that there must be gods or supernatural being that were testing them e.g. a volcano contained an angry god, then we have river gods, forest gods, mountain gods etc. The Judeo–Christian is simply another superstition or legalized insanity!
@DrMontague that is no necessarily true, because technically jesus came down from heaven and give the knowledge to people. Just like muhammad deliever the message from god to give people the quran. The religion you mentioned about the greek gods are not as well regarded as the christianity and islam. These people with faith, believe God existed from the prophets, not because of their limited knowledge, but from knowledge delivered from the prophets.
@DrMontague I am very pleased to have such intellectual debate with you. I believe we should know each other better. I am a overseas student study in UK, currently doing A-Levels including Biology. What about you?
I'm still not entirely happy with this. I was ok up to the last few mins, but then (5:05) there was a cry to acknowledge that religion is BS. If the audience had been over 16's, then fine, but I don't think people should be telling under 16's what to believe in that way. If parents wish to weigh down their children with this stupid crap, then it's up to us to demonstrate that it's wrong and harmful, but until we do, we shouldn't intefere. We need to demonstrate it's a form of child abuse first.
@BoooDave It's the creationists that you should be attacking because they are indoctrinators not educators. Dawkins has first presented the creationist argument and then pulled it apart. Creationists are nothing but lying scumbags who set out to lie and deceive. Visit a few creationist website for yourself and read what they say about evolution, then visit authoritative evolution theory websites. Compare what they say. You will find that creationists deliberately misrepresent evolution.
", but I don't think people should be telling under 16's what to believe in that way. If parents wish to weigh down their children with this stupid crap, then it's up to us to demonstrate that it's wrong and harmful, but until we do, we shouldn't intefere."
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I explained all his questions with science and the dumb ass cant argue with it because he is too stupid so instead he deletes my answer to his questions and then keeps asking lol
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Why did you ask me the question if you was just going to delete the answer? You are a lieing shit bag.. All I was saying is that there is a flood and it is possible that the world could of went on threw a flood on a boat it is possible I didn't make any statements about god just scientific facts yet you ask me then delete my post. Why? CUZ YOU CANT ARGUE WITH IT THATS WHY KEEP ASKING THE SAME STUPID QUESTION AND DELETE THE ANSWER DUMB ASS!! YOUR SHIT COMMUNIST
You are really a creationist but sort of pretending your not. I'm highly experienced when it comes to creationist deceit. You claim you are arguing scientific facts. You are not. No eminent scientist has found any evidence for a flood as described in genesis.
You claim all the animals etc were taken aboard an ark. You avoided my question that even modern wooden ships could not be built to those specifications as decribed in genesis. You are a creationist, nobody fools the Doc. Now piss off.
Biblical literalist websites seem to agree that the Ark was approximately 450 feet (137 m) long. [40] This is considerably larger than the schooner Wyoming, at 329 feet (100.28 metres) the largest timber-hulled vessel built in modern times. The Wyoming and similar ships of her class suffered chronic leaking, warping, and hull separation due to hogging and sagging, despite reinforcement with iron bracing
DrMontague, you are being too kind and conservative regarding the size of the Ark.
Here is the measurements from the Book of Genesis. Let us set this up correctly.
15 And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits.
Let's take Mt Everest - approximately 29,035 feet high. At the time of Noah we'll take off the 9,035 feet to make it fair to all those people that still think the Ark is real.
The Ark was 300 cubits long and the water rose to a level of 15 cubits. So it would suffice to say that Mt Everest was covered by 15 cubits of water. Therefore 15cubits => 20000 feet.
Length of biggest ship ever built = Knock Nevis(supertanker) 1,504 feet.
Therefore, Noah and his mates having a bbq and a few ales get a call from God to build a ship approx 266 times longer than the longest ship ever built.
Geez, that would of fucked up that party for sure.
And to all those doubters who say God was not talking about the whole world read the bloody text. God made heaven and earth didn't he? He should know what he is talking about.(Unless he really sucks at math)
The cubit is among the first recorded units of length used by an ancient people.The earliest attested standard measure is from Egypt and was called the Royal Cubit (Mahe) and was 523 to 525 mm (20.6 to 20.64 inches) in length Wikipedia et al
15.And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. Genesis
Well it might have covered Everest. but what happened to all the access water? Perhaps Noah just simply pulled out the plug and let so much of it drain away!
the Fall of Man, the early sacrificial system, the worldwide Flood, and the Tower of Babal. These are four of the outstanding events described in Genesis 3 to 11.
You may recall our earlier mention that the Chinese recorded the solar eclipse of 2250 B.C., the earliest exact historical date in history and confirmed scientifically (see chapter 4, Age of the Earth). Biblical records indicate the Flood occurred very close to that time.
(In 1997, Dr. Nelson, Dr. Ginger Tong Chock, and Richard E. Broadberry released Gods Promise to the Chinese, a book which updated the study using oracle bone characters, the most ancient Chinese writing known.) As they arrived in their new home after the scattering from the tower of Babel, and formulated their picture writing, the Chinese placed in their "picture words" recollections of those important earlier events:
You may recall our earlier mention that the Chinese recorded the solar eclipse of 2250 B.C., the earliest exact historical date in history and confirmed scientifically (see chapter 4, Age of the Earth). Biblical records indicate the Flood occurred very close to that time. Kang and Nelson revealed dozens of other Chinese words suggesting a relationship to Genesis. You will find the entire book very interesting.
(7) One example of the unusual discoveries is Garden or Field which is a square. Inside the square are four straight lines radiating outward in a "plus sign" shape. According to Genesis 2:9-14, a river flowed outward in four streams and watered the entire garden.
In the Hebrew, "karat" is the same as "Armenia." The prefix Ar means mountain, so "Armenia" probably means the mountain of Meni. According to Genesis 8:4, Noah landed somewhere in the Ararat mountains.
The legendary founder of the first Egyptian dynasty was Menes; and Minos was the man who is said to have been the first man of Crete. The nearby Greeks said that Minos was the son of their god, Zeus, and the ruler of the sea.
According to the legends of India, Ma-nu was the man who built the boat and then, with seven others, entered it and were saved. Ma is an ancient word for "water." Ma-nu could then mean "Noah of the waters." In Sanscrit, Manu later came to mean "mankind."
The most ancient man in the Germanic tribes was called Mannus. Mannus was also the name of the Lithuanian Noah.
Noahs name is found in the stories and languages of mankind. That is a striking cultural evidence of the worldwide Flood which, itself, left so many physical evidences upon our globe. Not only do the rock strata and their fossil contents vindicate the veracity of the Flood story, but the languages of man do also! Here are some interesting facts. Sanskrit (of ancient India) is a basic language, dating back nearly to the time of the Flood.
It is one of the events which seems to be familiar to the most distant nations—in Australia, in India, in China, in Scandinavia, and in the various parts of America."—Stephen D. Peet, "Story of the Deluge," American Antiquarian, Vol. 27, No. 4, July-August 1905, p. 203.
NOAHS NAME—If the story of the Ark and the Flood is to be found among 120 different tribes of earth, should we not expect that Noahs name would be remembered by some of them also?
"There are many descriptions of the remarkable event [the Genesis Flood]. Some of these have come from Greek historians, some from the Babylonian records; others from the cuneiform tablets [of Mesopotamia], and still others from the mythology and traditions of different nations, so that we may say that no event has occurred either in ancient or modern times about which there is better evidence or more numerous records, than this very one.
How can anyone but Noah and his family write about a global flood you moron. They have all perished. The only survivors are in the Ark you brainless twit.
An excellent five-page analysis of confusion-of-tongues legends will be found in James E. Strickling, "Legendary Evidence for the Confusion of Tongues, "in Creation Research Society Quarterly, September 1974, pp. 97-101. Quotations from a number of sources are given.
An even larger collection of Flood stories is to be found in *Sir James G. Frazers book, Folklore in the Old Testament (1919), Vol. 1, pp. 146-330. There are 11 Hellenic stories from ancient Greece, 6 European stories, 29 Persian and Indian stories, 31 Australian, Southeast Asia, and Pacific stories, 63 North, Central, and South American stories, and 3 African stories related in 185 pages of Frazers book; a total of 143 Flood stories. You will find them listed in Donald W. Patten (ed),
First, we will list these 41 groups, many of which were ancient races. ("A and B" indicate two different sub-groups; example: Fiji A and B.)
Assyria-Babylonia (A and B), Alaska, Andaman Island, Asia Minor, Aztecs, Brazil, Cherokee, China, Cree, Egypt, Esquimaux (Canada), Fiji (A and B), Greece, Hawaii, India (A and B), Italy, Lapland, Lenni Lenape, Lithuania, Leward Islands, Mandan, Michoacan, Nicaragua, Papagos (Mexico), Persia (A and B), Peru, Pimas,
(11) The survivors worshiped God for sparing them.
(12) A promise of divine favor was given that there would not be another worldwide flood of waters.
Another survey of ancient Flood literature and legends is discussed by B. Nelson in The Deluge Story in Stone (1968). In this tabulation, the stories and writings of 41 different tribal and national groups were given.
"It has long been known that legends of a great flood, in which almost all men perished, are widely diffused over the world."—*George Frazer, Folklore in the Old Testament, Vol. 1 (1919), p. 105.
One survey of 120 tribal groups in North, Central, and South America disclosed flood traditions among each of them (*International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, p. 822).
FLOOD STORIES—Races and tribes all over the world have, as part of their traditions, stories about a great flood of water that covered the whole earth. The event was so world-shattering and life-changing that, from parents to children, stories of that great upheaval passed down through the generations. Gradually, as mythologies developed, legends about this flood became part of them. These stories include various aspects of the Genesis account of the Flood:
The oceans of the world are so vast and deep that if Earth had an absolutely level crust, the sea would form an envelope over 8,800 feet [26,822 dm] deep.
The antediluvian world had never seen rain before. But when it came, it really came. When the Genesis Flood began, the vast water canopy collapsed and "the floodgates of the sky were opened." Torrential rains fell for six weeks.
WORLDWIDE FLOOD—Ours is the water planet. We have 330 million cubic miles [2212 million km3] of it! Water covers 72 percent of our planets surface. Every cubic mile of seawater holds over 150 million tons [136 mt] of minerals. On the average, rain pours down on our planet at the rate of 1.5 tons [1,361 kg] a day. At the present time, there is 70 billion gallons [26,822 liters] of water for every person alive.
O we can talk about the date methods no problem but one thing at a time. Also you do not know where I get answers from because I have not told you.. So throwing slander around does not make your point only shows stupidity.
If there was a flood. Your dating methods would be incorrect or crap. 2nd there is more evidence for flood geology. The difference between my geology and yours is I have historical evidence and Empirical evidence to support mine.
You are very ignorant of science and dating methods. Plus anyone can play on semantics e.g. a day means in Genesis 20 million years. Lets look at your god in a bit more detail. Many religiouis claim he amswers prayers
Earlier this week, James Howson, 25, of Nelson road, Doncaster, was found guilty of murdering his daughter Amy at Leeds Crown Court...Jobless Howson held the little girl over his knee and exerted so much pressure it broke her back in two.The court heard little Amy, who was malnourished and dehydrated, had also been slapped and punched in the months leading up to her death. When she died, she had 40 injuries, including seven bone fractures from a series of assaults'
Perhaps this poor little girl was just too young to pray! Amazing. I mean god intervenes and cures people of illness and yet he cannot hear the cries of a little girl. God does not appear to be at all consistant when it comes to answering prayers.
We are talking about the validity of major story events that would have an effect on science today. I could really care less... But I do feel bad for the girl.. But it has nothing to do with the conversation. Also to your point that your trying to make. The book it self says that god himself claims that it would be like this.. that people would suffer so that is nothing new to anyone with those beliefs.
There have been major changes in the world's climate e.g. one time the Sahara desert was under the sea. These changes took place over billions of years and do not relect biblical fairy tales. In fact the notion of a flood can be found in many mythologies and before the bible.
The story of a Great Flood (also known as the Deluge) sent by a deity or deities to destroy civilization as an act of divine retribution is a widespread theme among many cultural myths. Though it is best known in modern times through the Biblical story of Noah's Ark, it is also well known in other versions, such as stories of Matsya in the Hindu Puranas, Deucalion in Greek mythology and Utnapishtim in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Let me get to the point are you arguing that there is a god or gods behind the creation or wordly events? Or are you arguing that there are eliments of truth in the bible but the events have been exagerated over time, and that there was no supernatural agencies involved?
For 4,000 years after the Ark was constructed, ships rarely exceeded 150 to 200 feet [457-6,096 dm] in length. It was not until 1854 that a ship was built with a longer length than the Ark: the Eturia, a Cunard liner constructed in England. It was not until after World War II that ships were built which had a larger volume and cubic tonnage—the ocean-going oil supertankers.
The Ark was a barge, not a ship with sloping sides, so it had a much larger carrying capacity. It has been reckoned that, even if measured by the smaller 18.5-inch [563.88 cm] cubit of later times, the Ark would have been so huge that 522 modern railroad box cars could have fitted inside it! One each of every species of air-breathing creatures in the world today could be comfortably carried in only 150 box cars.
Do you know what a barge is? And the calculations are correct and with 522 box cars you could.. Why would you say that is incorrect can you not do math?
The fact that you just told me wrong calculations says to me that your not even checking the data or math. They could fit EASY inside 150 railroad box cars... TODAY.. lol your just talking out your arse if you want to say that the math is wrong do say so with math. You are confused on how to debate. You don't just say err ur wrong der.. Facts for Facts.. IT IS A FACT 150 box carts...
There is one rule of the marketplace of ideas: Facts cannot be discarded. You have to deal with all of the facts and come up with the most plausible explanation for them. It is that one law of scientific inquiry that keeps science moving forward. Scientists aren't afforded the luxury of simply accumulating facts that support their theories and ignoring the ones that do not.
Exactly, and that's just what creationists tend to do. An example is the recent discovery of a fish-tetrapod transitional fossil called Tiktaalik. A scientific article in Nature by Per Ahlberg detailed the similarities this fossil shared with fossil fish like Eusthenopteron and Panderichthys and fossil amphibians like Ichtyostega.
Creationist David Menton responded with an article that not only ignored Ahlberg's facts , but argues about Tiktaalik's hind quarters... which haven't been found.
Say I were to go to the market, but not allowed to sell my product. I would not have any reason or incentive to make my product better. However, if I were allowed to sell my product, I would want to make it good so it would sell. I would research and do other things. If someone had a better product than me then they would win. However, what we are doing is basically banning ID from the marketplace of ideas.
Wow, that's quite a pretzel of an argument. S you're saying I should be able to publish any dribble I can manage, and if they let me publish enough, I'll end up getting better and maybe even come up with a good theory.
hahahaha
Here's how it works, you come up with something reasonable and innovative, and they'll publish it - even if you're a creationist.
Not good or bad in the moral sense - good as in "I won't be eaten" and bad as in "I will be eaten". There is no ORIGINAL "pre-programming" to stimuli so, I have a hard time buying that argument. If a small creature scatters because of some external stimuli it is just as likely to scatter into a small cave or another larger creature's mouth. I think he's missing pivotal points of logic here. Maybe you should make a small flow chart to help you to see my point. Let me know how you do!
You clearly don't understand evolution theory. I suspect that you are a time wasting creationist. Go and do your own research. I am not going to be your free on;ine teacher.
There are plenty of websites and books out are there.
I think his concepts are well thought out and persuasive but, I see problems with some of the logic. For example, how would the creature with the first primitive eye, that could only see light or darkness, how to respond to the stimuli. For example is light good and darkness bad or is the opposite true? I think he assumes a lot. Another example, why would simply warming the face of the predator with the weak solution enable the beetle to escape? Seems improbable.
We are not talking about light or darkness being good or bad. Rather how each living creature has evolved to the stimulation or environment of light and darkness. Some living things have evolved eyes others haven't. Simply google i.e. do a bit of your own research into these subjest or aquire some authoriative books on the subject. Remember these xmas lectures are an indroduction to to evolutionary theory. Do some research then come back and let us know what you found out.
The concept of the necessity of a 'smooth slope' applies neatly to most aspects of life when decisions have to be made. It is the perfect adjunct to the concept of there not being black and white but only grades of grey.
Thanks DrM - great series of lectures. And thanks Richard Dawkins - hero.
I don't understand this part of the video. In the video, Dawkins said: "...these two chemicals, when mixed together, explode...". Wouldn't the beetle need to keep the two chemicals separated? Isn't that the complexity that the is hard to explain or am I missing something?
The two chemicals when mixed together will not explode. Dawkins is being slightly sarcastic when he says these are the two chemicals that are going to explode when mixed. He mixes them and they do not explode thus refuting the creationist claim that they would explode. He then explains that the beetle does indeed mix these two chemical in a special chamber. The beetle then adds another substance called a catalyst that produces a chemical reaction. This squirts into the face of it's enemy.
Go and fuck yourself you creationist arse hole. You don't fool the Doc. No more explanation from me. Do your own fuckin research you brainless bastard!
He's a creationist who has the sole intention of messing peeople about. I could give him a 10000 word detailed explanation and he would still just keep on saying that he doesn't understand. It's an old creationist time wasting tactic. If he cannot understand this video which explins evolution in very simple terms then he is either a time waster or a retard.
Ok, I get your point. But assuming that they're really retards, still, you shouldn't be so mean to retards, it's not their fault that they're retards right?
I no longer sit back like a wise monkey and allow creationist retards to have a public platform. If they want to comment then they should first do a bit of research and then comment. If they are psychologically fucked up then that is their problem. The brainless fuckers would be incapable of studying biology at elementary level yet they want their views to be respected. They have one aim in mind when they comment and that is to fuck people about.I've seen through their dirty tricks. Fuck them.
If only all Creationists were retards, unfortunatly some are actually intelligent and were simply too willing to believe what is more comforting than what is true. They try to deny reality to believe something that is more comforting to them, instead of just accepting reality and being happy with what they are.
There are many things that need to be answered, both by IDist and evolutionist. I am a math person, and evolution is statistically very impossible. However, you are confusing science with the philosophy of science. The argument that IDist make is that they should be allowed in to the debate. After they are allowed in, then we can start debating their facts.
No one is banning ID from the scientific discussion. As soon as they come with actual arguments based on facts that they haven't made up, and try to explain something instead of saying "we can't see how it happened, so it's impossible" there will be a discussion.
Thanks for this programme. I wish Dawkins had been my science teacher at school! I barely remember learning about evolution at school, and it wasn't that long ago.
same... i had no interest in science....he's gotten me so interested in this stuff now...it's a little late for me to change my major now...maybe in the future...
like bill gates said it's very important to have inspiring teachers
A blast from the good old days of the Christmas Lectures and the BBC before it too got stuck somewhere on Mount Improbable, presumably on a peak called BBC3.
Apparently there is an old saying that kids who grow up watching the Christmas Lectures become more intelligent (I just made it up actually, but I'll put a wager on it). :P
What really really really gets on my nerves about some versions of creationism, is this:
In the cases where evolutionary evidence is difficult to interpret or rationalize, WHY does this then validate creationism, which has no evidence to speak of? Even if you don't feel evolution can be proved, this doesn't then 'prove' another theory.
In fact, setting up a binary debate that has creationism at one pole, and evolution at another, accords creationism a theoretical status it doesn't have.
Cause creationists are just a category of people, that give up on thinking and rely on others authority. Weak cattle.
Don't worry. There are not only scientists that since a very long time have been aware of stupidity of such discussion. It is clear that creationism has nothing to offer in means of science; therefore they just didn't mind the barking dogs and went on with the caravan.
DrM, Creationists do(should) believe in micro-evolution. Those are the small changes that ARE observed and seen today. As Moderatethis said, MACRO_EVOLUTION is something completely different. That is the changing of complete animal forms into completely different ones. Of which there are no fossil records or proven facts and occurrences.
There are hundreds of doctors and professors of evolutionary theory at top universities throughout the world. Yet you want to believe they have all been duped into believing evolutionary theory because they don't have the intellect to question it! Yet your main advocate for creationism is the lying scumbag and jail bird Kunt Hovind. Get back to your tribe. I don't argue with ignorance.
What surprises me is how awfully bored some of these children look! Why on earth did they go if they had no interest in the subject? I would have loved to have been present in the audience at these. Utterly fascinating.
The Christmas lectures for many years were a very middle class affair . We should take on board that not everyone has a fascination with science. I surmise that many middle class parents wanted their children to be there for reasons of status . In recent years the lectures have become shorter and and in my opinion dumbed down.
This is just fantastic. I have seen alot of the lectures now, and even though they doesn´t shake my world view, they sure detail it. They expand my understanding on subjects such as evolution. How some can find it hard to grasp is a mysterie to me. It must be because of lag of basic knowledge.
Lots of thanks pouring out and I'll add to that indeed. I'll have to watch some of the other lectures when I get a chance to later, but for now... thanks so much for posting these DrMontague!
You're kidding; that's it? When will this debate leave behind the childish back and forth of "You're wrong"..."No I'm not, you're wrong!"..."Well you're stupid!" It always turns into fact-less name calling. I don't believe any intelligent debate is possible until both sides acknowledge that this is a philosophical debate about epistemology. Both evolution and creationism are faith systems that cannot be proven. Both philosophies are slaves to their assumptions.
Then you haven't understood evolutionary theory!There is overwhelming evidence for evolution. You cannot have an intelligent debate with creationist as they lie. E.g. they claim the earth is 6000 yrs old because the bibles says so. Radio active decay in some rocks shows that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. All eminent scientists agree. Creationist in ignorance argue huh well the measuring of radio active decay must be wrong.
Evolutionary theory is not a faith system it is based on empirical evidence. Click on my user name, then play lists . and look for a vid called creation. If you claim after watching there is no evidence for the big bang theory then you wont be worth debating with. And yes I will class you as a half wit.
So, I have not understood evolution-as you know what I understand. You also know that all creationists lie. That's a pretty broad statement. Are you saying that the lie is that the Bible says the earth is 6,000 years old or that they say the Bible says that when it doesn't? If we were to debate, then we'd first need to establish some basic rules of logic.
I assure you that "all eminent scientists" DO NOT agree. You also said, "Radio active decay in some rocks shows that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old." Please cite one such study and indicate how it supports your statement. Why would I attempt to refute an unsupported claim? This debate is in the details and the details will reveal both my assumptions and yours.
OK. click on my user name and then look for a video named 'how scientist can calculate the age of the earth' and also click my user name and then play lists, and see a vid called Earth Story. If these vids don't open your eyes then so be it.
I watched the video titled "Earth: How scientists can calculate the age of the earth" as you suggested. About 4 mins. in, we are told that "the decay rate is completely invariable." That's a pretty big assumption. Over the course 4.5 billion yrs, he knows with a certainty that this rate has never changed. I'm tempted to categorize that as a statement of religious faith but will be content to point out that there is no way to prove that presupposition.
are you arguing he's wrong? And that all the other eminent scientists are completely wrong? This is a typical creationist stance i.e. just keep arguing that science might have it all wrong. Lets take it one step further, scientists might be wrong that the earth goes around the sun, the sun goes around the earth. You remind me of Groucho Marx when he stated 'who you going to believe your own eyes or me'
I'm not arguing he's wrong. I just asked you to cite one study so I can have a claim to interact with. You are the one making a claim and apparently not willing to back it up. I am not willing to believe you over my own eyes. I want evidence from which to draw a conclusion not you quoting scripture ("eminent scientists"). Now you go look something up. Driscoll in Science News, vol. 101 (January 1, 1972), pp 12-14. Let's use evidence not names & claims-Agreed?
Wait one minute. I'm not going to be your unpaid online teacher! However I recommend you buy some books on the subject, visit a good library and borrow some books. or Visit wikipedia a free online encyclopedia. I know your a creationist this is why I am not going to waste my valuable time on you.
To larrycastle. Uranium will always decay to lead at a constant rate. Therefore it is an atomic clock. Experiments have shown that no known force can alter the decay rate. The earth is therefor 4.5 billion years old. The people in video are eminent scientists that is my evidence. I have presented you with evidence and then you turn around and argue that I haven't presented any evidence. Piss off.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Now see, you are the typical evolutionist in my experience. You spout about creationists just making statements without proof but them refuse to talk about peer reviewed studies. You're a propagandist. I was going to offer to save you the time of looking up the quotes by citing them here when I discovered you blocked me. Censorship is often substituted for argument when there is no case. Here is what you censored:
To commentnaz. I no longer allow lying creationists to comment youtube has shown that creationists do not allow or want freedom of speech, they simply want to indoctrinate, censor comments i.e. they only allow creationists to comment. So go and fuck yourself!
Again, you confuse types of evolution. I am a Creationist, and I specifically beleive in evolution -- any christian who knows their facts will agree with me. MacroEvolution, on the other hand, does not -- and will not -- ever exist.
Well, you have to ask: What is the point of evolution? What is the point of continuing the species? Why do we have instincts to survive? Why do we have anything? Why evolve at all? Why does anything need to evolve? How does evolution belifit the grand scheme of things?
Life or evolution in the universe does not have a point it just is. Only with the evolution of the human brain and consciousness did mankind begin to ask why are we here?, therefore the earliest conscious thinking beings began to come up with the notion of gods etc to explain what they couldn't understand.Now (some of us) have evolved to a higher state and the collection of scientific evidence shows all the past notions of gods to be wrong.
You need to watch all Dawkins Xmas lectures.Click my user name and then play lists. If after watching them you can't grasp it then I certainly can't help you. You can not go into the full detail of evolution in comment boxes. You have to do your own research. I'm not a free on line teacher. Watch the videos and read some decent books on evolution.
maybe we will know these things one day. but if humans kept believing gods controlled everything they didn't understand, where would the human race be.
Thanks for uploading these lectures. I've been looking into Dawkins' work lately and I don't see where the controversy is coming from; he's right, reasonable, polite, and he explains his points well. The only way in which he is controversial is that he has the "wrong" answer, the unpopular answer, that evolution is a fact, creation and design is a myth, and there is no god. I really wish people thought about these things and didn't cut themselves off at a point. Again, thank you so much.
Thanx tacopylas. Creationists are really nothing. They're handy to have because the propaganda media can use them to fuel fear. We all lie awake at night shitting ourselves that the Muslims are going to take over the world! and Kent Hovind is going to lead a new Spanish inquisition to close down biology departments, arrest lectures for teaching evolutionary theory, and have them burnt at the stake. Fuck sake Dawkins et al are you really so taken in by the media?!
This series of lectures could not be shown on TV in the US today. Such science programs were common in the 1950s and they were contributors to the surge in interest in science and engineering that was seen in young people during the 50s and 60s. Now, such a program would cause protests and threats of violence, and politicians competing with ever more strident condemnation of such anti-biblical utterances. The few who dare mention interest in rational thought do so at their own peril.
So where do the Ivy League universities get their students from? The world cannot turn its back on science. I cannot see such things as the space shuttle ending because of brain dead creationists. I cannot see biology departments teaching creationism.
Actually, the number of foreign students from developing countries have dominated upper division courses and grad ranks but due to the greater difficulty in getting visas and the high costs, many of those students who kept the US in the forefront of many fields are staying home or going to other quality schools in Europe and Eastern Europe.
The world has not turned its back on science, only the USA has. Notice where the big increases in papers and patients are coming from? There is no replacement for the space shuttle to roll out when the operational life limits of the shuttle program grounds the remaining craft. It is getting scary what is happening to the US. I moved to St Petersburg Russia several years ago but keep close contact with back home.
dear religious folks shoot your self in the head, a better life is waiting for you on the other side!
maximilianitoaguirre 7 months ago
@maximilianitoaguirre
You're not an atheist. You're a theist(probably a christian) who wants to make atheists look bad, by spewing hatred in our name.
Either that or you really are retarded.
33dgtp 1 week ago
@33dgtp you are totally wrong...
I said that because I'm tired of reading troll comments from uneducated people.
i don´t know why you call me retarded you are the one witn JUSTIN BIEBER VIDEOS IN YOUR CHANNEL...
have an great and long life!
maximilianitoaguirre 1 week ago
@maximilianitoaguirre The fuq?
justin bieber?? HOW???????
Sorry, our dispute is petty compared to the disaster that ensued.
33dgtp 1 day ago
I'm a university graduate in sociology. this means I can empty pubs in 10 minutes.
DrMontague 1 year ago
Every body deserves to know the truth... including childrens! It is there life and decision to come to the lecture. Dawkins is simply a evangelist of darwinism, in contrast to evangelist to Christianity.
changchinhon 1 year ago
@changchinhon If evolution were proved wrong Darkins et al would accept the evidence.i.e. they are prepared to change their views as new information comes to light . Fundamentalists religious people are not prepared to change their views no matter how strong the evidence for evolutionary theory. Dawkins is not an evangelist i.e.a preacher of the gospel. He is a prof. of evolutionary biology.
DrMontague 1 year ago
@DrMontague Religion and Science are actually very similar, they both have strong resemblances as they both answer very deep questions to the purpose of life. To the extent science has evidence, religion hasn't. I still believe my metaphor of describing dawkins as a evangelist is correct. It will work other way round, describing a preacher as a professor.
changchinhon 1 year ago
@changchinhon Region and science are not similar. What religious denomination you follow is by enlarge influenced by where you are born. In the West you are more likely to follow Christianity, in the East you might follow Islam. Some people even scientists can have a psychological yearning for the need to believe in gods. A scientific fact is anything that can be observed and measured. Religion is not a scientific fact , rather it is the product of a deluded minds.
DrMontague 1 year ago
@DrMontague Indeed you are right, from where i was born i was influenced by large amount of religious influences. however i believe whether it is religion or science, it all leads to one purpose, which is fundamentally purposed to improve the humanity, as we known today. Forexample religion teaches people not to do certain foul things and science invent new technologies, making our lives more enjoyable.
changchinhon 1 year ago
@changchinhon Moses was god's prophet and messenger. God's message was that gay and lesbians should be stoned to death! Religion and a belief in god has therefore taught people to do foul things and to be intolerant . Therefore theists cherry pick the bible i.e. quoting the nice bits. When I was taught about Moses at school god's evil was simply airbrushed out. All we got was the parting of the Red Sea and him going up the mountain to get the commandments.
DrMontague 1 year ago
@DrMontague Clearly you know the old testament. However in the new testament, some reformation has been done, e.g no more circumcision. This is why there are not very much Jews in the world, in comparison to the christians. from the book river out of Eden, Dawkins himself actually mentioned the similarity between science and religion, as both answer many deep questions. e.g what is the meaning of life? We biologist would say to reproduce pass on DNA, christians would say to impress god by goods.
changchinhon 1 year ago
@changchinhon Why did god spout off hated and intolerance in the place only to recant it at a later date. In other words god got it wrong the first time and then makes amends by coming down to earth in the form of Jesus! Therefore god is not perfect! Of course Dawkins acknowledges that religion has attempted to answer deep questions but they have no evidence what so ever for their conclusions. Science has! We are the product of evolution, each creature was not individually created by a god
DrMontague 1 year ago
Religion does not use the experimental method to try and find truth. They simply start from the assumption that there is a supernatural being behind the creation and try to understand this supernatural beings plan. . Science looks for natural phenomena to explain the creation and uses the experimental method . There have been many religions throughout human history. Each religion claims their one is the right one. This is not how science operates. Science and religion are not similar!
DrMontague 1 year ago
@DrMontague valid points, but remember, if there were't religion in the first place, would there still be civilisations? would darwin still be the darwin of today, if he hasn't oppose to the religious theories, and introducing the theory of evolution. Religion and science are interdependent on each other. Religion kicks off the humanity and science follows. perhaps they are not 100% similar, but they definetely has similar functions, this why they interfere with each other.
changchinhon 1 year ago
@changchinhon Religion and science do not have similar functions. Since the dawn of mankind , mankind has has tied to understand heir place in the universe. Their limited knowledge of the natural world led them to conclude that there must be gods or supernatural being that were testing them e.g. a volcano contained an angry god, then we have river gods, forest gods, mountain gods etc. The Judeo–Christian is simply another superstition or legalized insanity!
DrMontague 1 year ago
Comment removed
changchinhon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DrMontague that is no necessarily true, because technically jesus came down from heaven and give the knowledge to people. Just like muhammad deliever the message from god to give people the quran. The religion you mentioned about the greek gods are not as well regarded as the christianity and islam. These people with faith, believe God existed from the prophets, not because of their limited knowledge, but from knowledge delivered from the prophets.
changchinhon 1 year ago
@DrMontague I am very pleased to have such intellectual debate with you. I believe we should know each other better. I am a overseas student study in UK, currently doing A-Levels including Biology. What about you?
changchinhon 1 year ago
I'm still not entirely happy with this. I was ok up to the last few mins, but then (5:05) there was a cry to acknowledge that religion is BS. If the audience had been over 16's, then fine, but I don't think people should be telling under 16's what to believe in that way. If parents wish to weigh down their children with this stupid crap, then it's up to us to demonstrate that it's wrong and harmful, but until we do, we shouldn't intefere. We need to demonstrate it's a form of child abuse first.
BoooDave 1 year ago
@BoooDave It's the creationists that you should be attacking because they are indoctrinators not educators. Dawkins has first presented the creationist argument and then pulled it apart. Creationists are nothing but lying scumbags who set out to lie and deceive. Visit a few creationist website for yourself and read what they say about evolution, then visit authoritative evolution theory websites. Compare what they say. You will find that creationists deliberately misrepresent evolution.
DrMontague 1 year ago
@BoooDave
", but I don't think people should be telling under 16's what to believe in that way. If parents wish to weigh down their children with this stupid crap, then it's up to us to demonstrate that it's wrong and harmful, but until we do, we shouldn't intefere."
It's he telling them what it's wrong?
SiriusMined 1 year ago
Dawkins sometimes make me laught
TheVatiell 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"The God Debate" is on my channel.
atheistfriends 2 years ago
Nice ending music, wonder what it is.
Mahewston 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I explained all his questions with science and the dumb ass cant argue with it because he is too stupid so instead he deletes my answer to his questions and then keeps asking lol
fgdfgdtgf 3 years ago
cheers man!ppl have been brainwashed!!!
gordonculp 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I'm going to post all of it everyday so keep deleteing it you cant be on 24/7
fgdfgdtgf 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why did you ask me the question if you was just going to delete the answer? You are a lieing shit bag.. All I was saying is that there is a flood and it is possible that the world could of went on threw a flood on a boat it is possible I didn't make any statements about god just scientific facts yet you ask me then delete my post. Why? CUZ YOU CANT ARGUE WITH IT THATS WHY KEEP ASKING THE SAME STUPID QUESTION AND DELETE THE ANSWER DUMB ASS!! YOUR SHIT COMMUNIST
fgdfgdtgf 3 years ago
You are really a creationist but sort of pretending your not. I'm highly experienced when it comes to creationist deceit. You claim you are arguing scientific facts. You are not. No eminent scientist has found any evidence for a flood as described in genesis.
You claim all the animals etc were taken aboard an ark. You avoided my question that even modern wooden ships could not be built to those specifications as decribed in genesis. You are a creationist, nobody fools the Doc. Now piss off.
DrMontague 3 years ago
haha *high fives*
firkinfedup 3 years ago 2
And the practicallities
Biblical literalist websites seem to agree that the Ark was approximately 450 feet (137 m) long. [40] This is considerably larger than the schooner Wyoming, at 329 feet (100.28 metres) the largest timber-hulled vessel built in modern times. The Wyoming and similar ships of her class suffered chronic leaking, warping, and hull separation due to hogging and sagging, despite reinforcement with iron bracing
DrMontague 3 years ago
And how did the insects and animals that were hibernating get to the ark?! People who take the story of Noah's Ark literally are screwed up.
DrMontague 3 years ago
DrMontague, you are being too kind and conservative regarding the size of the Ark.
Here is the measurements from the Book of Genesis. Let us set this up correctly.
15 And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits.
Please take note of the length of 300 cubits.
yowie333 2 years ago
19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
Notice that God says all the mountains on all the earth are covered.
yowie333 2 years ago
Let's take Mt Everest - approximately 29,035 feet high. At the time of Noah we'll take off the 9,035 feet to make it fair to all those people that still think the Ark is real.
The Ark was 300 cubits long and the water rose to a level of 15 cubits. So it would suffice to say that Mt Everest was covered by 15 cubits of water. Therefore 15cubits => 20000 feet.
yowie333 2 years ago 2
In conclusion
15 cubits => 20000 feet
300 cubits(length of Ark) => 400,000 feet
Length of biggest ship ever built = Knock Nevis(supertanker) 1,504 feet.
Therefore, Noah and his mates having a bbq and a few ales get a call from God to build a ship approx 266 times longer than the longest ship ever built.
Geez, that would of fucked up that party for sure.
yowie333 2 years ago
And to all those doubters who say God was not talking about the whole world read the bloody text. God made heaven and earth didn't he? He should know what he is talking about.(Unless he really sucks at math)
yowie333 2 years ago
The cubit is among the first recorded units of length used by an ancient people.The earliest attested standard measure is from Egypt and was called the Royal Cubit (Mahe) and was 523 to 525 mm (20.6 to 20.64 inches) in length Wikipedia et al
So where do get the figure
15 cubits => 20000 feet ?
DrMontague 2 years ago
15.And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. Genesis
therefore the arks dimensions were appox
Length of ark 515ft
breadth 85ft
height 51ft
DrMontague 2 years ago
I explained it in my posts above. The flood covered all the earth including all mountains therefore the Ark story is a crock of shit. Simple really
yowie333 2 years ago
Well it might have covered Everest. but what happened to all the access water? Perhaps Noah just simply pulled out the plug and let so much of it drain away!
DrMontague 2 years ago
Sorry some of what I hit post on apparently didn't post but most of it is there.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
the Fall of Man, the early sacrificial system, the worldwide Flood, and the Tower of Babal. These are four of the outstanding events described in Genesis 3 to 11.
You may recall our earlier mention that the Chinese recorded the solar eclipse of 2250 B.C., the earliest exact historical date in history and confirmed scientifically (see chapter 4, Age of the Earth). Biblical records indicate the Flood occurred very close to that time.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
(In 1997, Dr. Nelson, Dr. Ginger Tong Chock, and Richard E. Broadberry released Gods Promise to the Chinese, a book which updated the study using oracle bone characters, the most ancient Chinese writing known.) As they arrived in their new home after the scattering from the tower of Babel, and formulated their picture writing, the Chinese placed in their "picture words" recollections of those important earlier events:
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
You may recall our earlier mention that the Chinese recorded the solar eclipse of 2250 B.C., the earliest exact historical date in history and confirmed scientifically (see chapter 4, Age of the Earth). Biblical records indicate the Flood occurred very close to that time. Kang and Nelson revealed dozens of other Chinese words suggesting a relationship to Genesis. You will find the entire book very interesting.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
(7) One example of the unusual discoveries is Garden or Field which is a square. Inside the square are four straight lines radiating outward in a "plus sign" shape. According to Genesis 2:9-14, a river flowed outward in four streams and watered the entire garden.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
(3) Righteousness combines sheep, I or me, and hand (Genesis 4:2-5).
(4) The Chinese word for total is a uniting of eight people who join hands over the earth (Genesis 7:7,13; 8:13-16).
(5) Boat, in Chinese, brings together three words into one. The three words are vessel, mouth, and eight (Genesis 7:7, 13; 8:13).
(6) Rebellion and Confusion have the same script: a linking together of the words for tongue and walking (Genesis 11:4-9).
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
In the Hebrew, "karat" is the same as "Armenia." The prefix Ar means mountain, so "Armenia" probably means the mountain of Meni. According to Genesis 8:4, Noah landed somewhere in the Ararat mountains.
The legendary founder of the first Egyptian dynasty was Menes; and Minos was the man who is said to have been the first man of Crete. The nearby Greeks said that Minos was the son of their god, Zeus, and the ruler of the sea.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
According to the legends of India, Ma-nu was the man who built the boat and then, with seven others, entered it and were saved. Ma is an ancient word for "water." Ma-nu could then mean "Noah of the waters." In Sanscrit, Manu later came to mean "mankind."
The most ancient man in the Germanic tribes was called Mannus. Mannus was also the name of the Lithuanian Noah.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
Noahs name is found in the stories and languages of mankind. That is a striking cultural evidence of the worldwide Flood which, itself, left so many physical evidences upon our globe. Not only do the rock strata and their fossil contents vindicate the veracity of the Flood story, but the languages of man do also! Here are some interesting facts. Sanskrit (of ancient India) is a basic language, dating back nearly to the time of the Flood.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
It is one of the events which seems to be familiar to the most distant nations—in Australia, in India, in China, in Scandinavia, and in the various parts of America."—Stephen D. Peet, "Story of the Deluge," American Antiquarian, Vol. 27, No. 4, July-August 1905, p. 203.
NOAHS NAME—If the story of the Ark and the Flood is to be found among 120 different tribes of earth, should we not expect that Noahs name would be remembered by some of them also?
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
"There are many descriptions of the remarkable event [the Genesis Flood]. Some of these have come from Greek historians, some from the Babylonian records; others from the cuneiform tablets [of Mesopotamia], and still others from the mythology and traditions of different nations, so that we may say that no event has occurred either in ancient or modern times about which there is better evidence or more numerous records, than this very one.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
How can anyone but Noah and his family write about a global flood you moron. They have all perished. The only survivors are in the Ark you brainless twit.
yowie333 2 years ago
Symposium on Creation IV (1972), pp. 36-38.
An excellent five-page analysis of confusion-of-tongues legends will be found in James E. Strickling, "Legendary Evidence for the Confusion of Tongues, "in Creation Research Society Quarterly, September 1974, pp. 97-101. Quotations from a number of sources are given.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
An even larger collection of Flood stories is to be found in *Sir James G. Frazers book, Folklore in the Old Testament (1919), Vol. 1, pp. 146-330. There are 11 Hellenic stories from ancient Greece, 6 European stories, 29 Persian and Indian stories, 31 Australian, Southeast Asia, and Pacific stories, 63 North, Central, and South American stories, and 3 African stories related in 185 pages of Frazers book; a total of 143 Flood stories. You will find them listed in Donald W. Patten (ed),
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
The flood came as a result of a divine decree—10 times.
Birds were sent out first—9 times.
Animals were saved by the boat also—8 times.
The survivors worship God after leaving the boat—7 times.
The boat landed in a high mountainous area—6 times.
After leaving the boat, God spoke favor to the saved—5 times.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
A boat saved them—36 times.
Universal destruction by the flood—24 times.
One family was especially favored for protection— 15 times.
The flood was caused by mans transgressions—14 times.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
Russia, Scandinavia (A and B), Sumatra, Syria, Takoe, Thlinkut (A and B), Toltecks, Wales.
Second, we will list twelve points in their legends, according to the number of times each is included by each of the 41 groups.
Destruction by a flood—41 times.
Some humans saved—38 times.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
First, we will list these 41 groups, many of which were ancient races. ("A and B" indicate two different sub-groups; example: Fiji A and B.)
Assyria-Babylonia (A and B), Alaska, Andaman Island, Asia Minor, Aztecs, Brazil, Cherokee, China, Cree, Egypt, Esquimaux (Canada), Fiji (A and B), Greece, Hawaii, India (A and B), Italy, Lapland, Lenni Lenape, Lithuania, Leward Islands, Mandan, Michoacan, Nicaragua, Papagos (Mexico), Persia (A and B), Peru, Pimas,
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
(11) The survivors worshiped God for sparing them.
(12) A promise of divine favor was given that there would not be another worldwide flood of waters.
Another survey of ancient Flood literature and legends is discussed by B. Nelson in The Deluge Story in Stone (1968). In this tabulation, the stories and writings of 41 different tribal and national groups were given.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
(1) There was general wickedness among men.
(2) God saw that a flood was necessary.
(3) One family with eight members was protected.
(4) A giant boat was constructed.
(5) The family, along with animals and birds, went into the boat.
(6) The flood overwhelmed all those living on the earth.
(7) The deluge covered all the earth for a time.
(8) The boat landed in a high mountainous area.
(9) Two or three birds were sent out first.
(10) The people left the boat with all the animals.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
"It has long been known that legends of a great flood, in which almost all men perished, are widely diffused over the world."—*George Frazer, Folklore in the Old Testament, Vol. 1 (1919), p. 105.
One survey of 120 tribal groups in North, Central, and South America disclosed flood traditions among each of them (*International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, p. 822).
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
FLOOD STORIES—Races and tribes all over the world have, as part of their traditions, stories about a great flood of water that covered the whole earth. The event was so world-shattering and life-changing that, from parents to children, stories of that great upheaval passed down through the generations. Gradually, as mythologies developed, legends about this flood became part of them. These stories include various aspects of the Genesis account of the Flood:
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
The oceans of the world are so vast and deep that if Earth had an absolutely level crust, the sea would form an envelope over 8,800 feet [26,822 dm] deep.
The antediluvian world had never seen rain before. But when it came, it really came. When the Genesis Flood began, the vast water canopy collapsed and "the floodgates of the sky were opened." Torrential rains fell for six weeks.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
WORLDWIDE FLOOD—Ours is the water planet. We have 330 million cubic miles [2212 million km3] of it! Water covers 72 percent of our planets surface. Every cubic mile of seawater holds over 150 million tons [136 mt] of minerals. On the average, rain pours down on our planet at the rate of 1.5 tons [1,361 kg] a day. At the present time, there is 70 billion gallons [26,822 liters] of water for every person alive.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
O we can talk about the date methods no problem but one thing at a time. Also you do not know where I get answers from because I have not told you.. So throwing slander around does not make your point only shows stupidity.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
Ok now starting the History lesson or Historical Evidence below.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
You forgot to say the earth is 6000 years old!
StupidCreationists 3 years ago
Why would I need too?
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
If there was a flood. Your dating methods would be incorrect or crap. 2nd there is more evidence for flood geology. The difference between my geology and yours is I have historical evidence and Empirical evidence to support mine.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
"Your dating methods would be incorrect or crap."
Ah no, not even carbon dating. But lets talk about the many forms of atomic dating being correct!
"evidence for flood geology"
LOL not what the geologists say! LOL
"difference between my geology and yours is "
Geologists get the answers from evidence, you get your answer from a bronze aged story book!
StupidCreationists 3 years ago 2
ok lets play
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
Sorry but you could not be more wrong and especially carbon dating...
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
You are very ignorant of science and dating methods. Plus anyone can play on semantics e.g. a day means in Genesis 20 million years. Lets look at your god in a bit more detail. Many religiouis claim he amswers prayers
DrMontague 3 years ago
Earlier this week, James Howson, 25, of Nelson road, Doncaster, was found guilty of murdering his daughter Amy at Leeds Crown Court...Jobless Howson held the little girl over his knee and exerted so much pressure it broke her back in two.The court heard little Amy, who was malnourished and dehydrated, had also been slapped and punched in the months leading up to her death. When she died, she had 40 injuries, including seven bone fractures from a series of assaults'
ITN
DrMontague 3 years ago
Perhaps this poor little girl was just too young to pray! Amazing. I mean god intervenes and cures people of illness and yet he cannot hear the cries of a little girl. God does not appear to be at all consistant when it comes to answering prayers.
DrMontague 3 years ago
We are talking about the validity of major story events that would have an effect on science today. I could really care less... But I do feel bad for the girl.. But it has nothing to do with the conversation. Also to your point that your trying to make. The book it self says that god himself claims that it would be like this.. that people would suffer so that is nothing new to anyone with those beliefs.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
There have been major changes in the world's climate e.g. one time the Sahara desert was under the sea. These changes took place over billions of years and do not relect biblical fairy tales. In fact the notion of a flood can be found in many mythologies and before the bible.
DrMontague 3 years ago
The story of a Great Flood (also known as the Deluge) sent by a deity or deities to destroy civilization as an act of divine retribution is a widespread theme among many cultural myths. Though it is best known in modern times through the Biblical story of Noah's Ark, it is also well known in other versions, such as stories of Matsya in the Hindu Puranas, Deucalion in Greek mythology and Utnapishtim in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Wikipedia
DrMontague 3 years ago
Let me get to the point are you arguing that there is a god or gods behind the creation or wordly events? Or are you arguing that there are eliments of truth in the bible but the events have been exagerated over time, and that there was no supernatural agencies involved?
DrMontague 3 years ago
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?
tulalipbingo 3 years ago
The people who wrote down about the one god were dyslexic . This supernatural being really said 'I am your Dog'.
DrMontague 3 years ago
Thank you, Epicurus.
MarshmanNo1 2 years ago
Very well put.....who said that? Did you come up with that?
Crackalick 2 years ago
And I care about this why?
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
How about we stick to the science and historical evidence of the bible?
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
"How about we stick to the science and historical evidence of the bible? "
Thats very biased one book!
How about the many many record of the egyptians which go right thru the imaginary flood of your bible!
StupidCreationists 3 years ago
You are very ignorant of the effects a catastrophic event would have on dating methods.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
Part 5
For 4,000 years after the Ark was constructed, ships rarely exceeded 150 to 200 feet [457-6,096 dm] in length. It was not until 1854 that a ship was built with a longer length than the Ark: the Eturia, a Cunard liner constructed in England. It was not until after World War II that ships were built which had a larger volume and cubic tonnage—the ocean-going oil supertankers.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
"Ark was constructed"
There was no ark!
There earlier ark stories should be believed before your latter version!
StupidCreationists 3 years ago 3
You are so confused..
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
Part 4
The Ark was a barge, not a ship with sloping sides, so it had a much larger carrying capacity. It has been reckoned that, even if measured by the smaller 18.5-inch [563.88 cm] cubit of later times, the Ark would have been so huge that 522 modern railroad box cars could have fitted inside it! One each of every species of air-breathing creatures in the world today could be comfortably carried in only 150 box cars.
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
Wrong calculations!
one layer fior the anuiimals, you would be lucky to get 6-8000 species! Or kinds what ever the hell that is LOL
StupidCreationists 3 years ago
Do you know what a barge is? And the calculations are correct and with 522 box cars you could.. Why would you say that is incorrect can you not do math?
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
The fact that you just told me wrong calculations says to me that your not even checking the data or math. They could fit EASY inside 150 railroad box cars... TODAY.. lol your just talking out your arse if you want to say that the math is wrong do say so with math. You are confused on how to debate. You don't just say err ur wrong der.. Facts for Facts.. IT IS A FACT 150 box carts...
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
There is one rule of the marketplace of ideas: Facts cannot be discarded. You have to deal with all of the facts and come up with the most plausible explanation for them. It is that one law of scientific inquiry that keeps science moving forward. Scientists aren't afforded the luxury of simply accumulating facts that support their theories and ignoring the ones that do not.
TheGeneralOfWar 3 years ago
Exactly, and that's just what creationists tend to do. An example is the recent discovery of a fish-tetrapod transitional fossil called Tiktaalik. A scientific article in Nature by Per Ahlberg detailed the similarities this fossil shared with fossil fish like Eusthenopteron and Panderichthys and fossil amphibians like Ichtyostega.
Creationist David Menton responded with an article that not only ignored Ahlberg's facts , but argues about Tiktaalik's hind quarters... which haven't been found.
AdenineMonkey 3 years ago
TheGeneralOfWar
Like to tell us how old the earth is?
Big animal boat ride true?
LOL
StupidCreationists 3 years ago
Ok but one question at a time. The next question is mine. Or did you think you would just call people stupid then show your ignorance?
lkdjlskfdfdff 3 years ago
"Or did you think you would just call people stupid then show your ignorance? "
Its not ignorance to know the ark story is impossible. You not knowing this and pretending your bronze aged story book version is correct is ignorant!
Thats why the experts dont agree with you!
StupidCreationists 3 years ago 2
Say I were to go to the market, but not allowed to sell my product. I would not have any reason or incentive to make my product better. However, if I were allowed to sell my product, I would want to make it good so it would sell. I would research and do other things. If someone had a better product than me then they would win. However, what we are doing is basically banning ID from the marketplace of ideas.
TheGeneralOfWar 3 years ago
Wow, that's quite a pretzel of an argument. S you're saying I should be able to publish any dribble I can manage, and if they let me publish enough, I'll end up getting better and maybe even come up with a good theory.
hahahaha
Here's how it works, you come up with something reasonable and innovative, and they'll publish it - even if you're a creationist.
ManicEightBall 3 years ago
Not good or bad in the moral sense - good as in "I won't be eaten" and bad as in "I will be eaten". There is no ORIGINAL "pre-programming" to stimuli so, I have a hard time buying that argument. If a small creature scatters because of some external stimuli it is just as likely to scatter into a small cave or another larger creature's mouth. I think he's missing pivotal points of logic here. Maybe you should make a small flow chart to help you to see my point. Let me know how you do!
ejkaull 3 years ago
You clearly don't understand evolution theory. I suspect that you are a time wasting creationist. Go and do your own research. I am not going to be your free on;ine teacher.
There are plenty of websites and books out are there.
DrMontague 3 years ago
DEE DEE DEE!!! You win the retard award!
shrikechan 3 years ago
OK, first, I love the BBC.
I think his concepts are well thought out and persuasive but, I see problems with some of the logic. For example, how would the creature with the first primitive eye, that could only see light or darkness, how to respond to the stimuli. For example is light good and darkness bad or is the opposite true? I think he assumes a lot. Another example, why would simply warming the face of the predator with the weak solution enable the beetle to escape? Seems improbable.
ejkaull 3 years ago
We are not talking about light or darkness being good or bad. Rather how each living creature has evolved to the stimulation or environment of light and darkness. Some living things have evolved eyes others haven't. Simply google i.e. do a bit of your own research into these subjest or aquire some authoriative books on the subject. Remember these xmas lectures are an indroduction to to evolutionary theory. Do some research then come back and let us know what you found out.
DrMontague 3 years ago
The concept of the necessity of a 'smooth slope' applies neatly to most aspects of life when decisions have to be made. It is the perfect adjunct to the concept of there not being black and white but only grades of grey.
Thanks DrM - great series of lectures. And thanks Richard Dawkins - hero.
victimlesscriminal 3 years ago
I don't understand this part of the video. In the video, Dawkins said: "...these two chemicals, when mixed together, explode...". Wouldn't the beetle need to keep the two chemicals separated? Isn't that the complexity that the is hard to explain or am I missing something?
LordTerror56 3 years ago
The two chemicals when mixed together will not explode. Dawkins is being slightly sarcastic when he says these are the two chemicals that are going to explode when mixed. He mixes them and they do not explode thus refuting the creationist claim that they would explode. He then explains that the beetle does indeed mix these two chemical in a special chamber. The beetle then adds another substance called a catalyst that produces a chemical reaction. This squirts into the face of it's enemy.
DrMontague 3 years ago
Wouldn't the two different substances (catalyst + mix) need to be in seperate parts of the beetle's body, though?
LordTerror56 3 years ago
Go and fuck yourself you creationist arse hole. You don't fool the Doc. No more explanation from me. Do your own fuckin research you brainless bastard!
DrMontague 3 years ago
Please, don't be offensed, he's just asking a harmless question...
renaudldw 3 years ago 4
He's a creationist who has the sole intention of messing peeople about. I could give him a 10000 word detailed explanation and he would still just keep on saying that he doesn't understand. It's an old creationist time wasting tactic. If he cannot understand this video which explins evolution in very simple terms then he is either a time waster or a retard.
DrMontague 3 years ago
Ok, I get your point. But assuming that they're really retards, still, you shouldn't be so mean to retards, it's not their fault that they're retards right?
renaudldw 3 years ago
I no longer sit back like a wise monkey and allow creationist retards to have a public platform. If they want to comment then they should first do a bit of research and then comment. If they are psychologically fucked up then that is their problem. The brainless fuckers would be incapable of studying biology at elementary level yet they want their views to be respected. They have one aim in mind when they comment and that is to fuck people about.I've seen through their dirty tricks. Fuck them.
DrMontague 3 years ago
If only all Creationists were retards, unfortunatly some are actually intelligent and were simply too willing to believe what is more comforting than what is true. They try to deny reality to believe something that is more comforting to them, instead of just accepting reality and being happy with what they are.
shrikechan 3 years ago
There are many things that need to be answered, both by IDist and evolutionist. I am a math person, and evolution is statistically very impossible. However, you are confusing science with the philosophy of science. The argument that IDist make is that they should be allowed in to the debate. After they are allowed in, then we can start debating their facts.
TheGeneralOfWar 3 years ago
You couldn't add up your fucking shopping list. So quit pretending that your a mathematician. Stick ID up your arse where it belongs.
DrMontague 3 years ago
WOW retard just radiates from you. You sure proved me wrong, I could not add up my shopping list. There is a fucking scientific statement for you.
How about I shove it up your arse?
zzzfucku 3 years ago
Go back to your brain dead crearionist web sites where you belong.
DrMontague 3 years ago
No one is banning ID from the scientific discussion. As soon as they come with actual arguments based on facts that they haven't made up, and try to explain something instead of saying "we can't see how it happened, so it's impossible" there will be a discussion.
AdenineMonkey 3 years ago
LordTerror56. You can now comment.
DrMontague 3 years ago
I wish every creationist watched this video.
FogLight2 3 years ago
Creationists are retards. You cannot educate retards.
DrMontague 3 years ago
cool shirt by the way...
gairero 3 years ago
Thanks for this programme. I wish Dawkins had been my science teacher at school! I barely remember learning about evolution at school, and it wasn't that long ago.
AcerBen2U 4 years ago 4
same... i had no interest in science....he's gotten me so interested in this stuff now...it's a little late for me to change my major now...maybe in the future...
like bill gates said it's very important to have inspiring teachers
dale22x 3 years ago 3
Great upload doc.
Clausfarre 4 years ago
aha, very nice, thanks for pointing me in the right direction, now i can really see the humorous effect of the joke you made, and a good one at that
madthem 4 years ago
Thanks for the upload Dr. M!
A blast from the good old days of the Christmas Lectures and the BBC before it too got stuck somewhere on Mount Improbable, presumably on a peak called BBC3.
Apparently there is an old saying that kids who grow up watching the Christmas Lectures become more intelligent (I just made it up actually, but I'll put a wager on it). :P
bluecobalt27 4 years ago 4
What really really really gets on my nerves about some versions of creationism, is this:
In the cases where evolutionary evidence is difficult to interpret or rationalize, WHY does this then validate creationism, which has no evidence to speak of? Even if you don't feel evolution can be proved, this doesn't then 'prove' another theory.
In fact, setting up a binary debate that has creationism at one pole, and evolution at another, accords creationism a theoretical status it doesn't have.
bluecobalt27 4 years ago 3
Cause creationists are just a category of people, that give up on thinking and rely on others authority. Weak cattle.
Don't worry. There are not only scientists that since a very long time have been aware of stupidity of such discussion. It is clear that creationism has nothing to offer in means of science; therefore they just didn't mind the barking dogs and went on with the caravan.
snylekkie 4 years ago 2
Very enlightening. Richard Dawkins is a fascinating person.
Str8eningTheCurves 4 years ago
DrM, Creationists do(should) believe in micro-evolution. Those are the small changes that ARE observed and seen today. As Moderatethis said, MACRO_EVOLUTION is something completely different. That is the changing of complete animal forms into completely different ones. Of which there are no fossil records or proven facts and occurrences.
SgtScourge 4 years ago
There are hundreds of doctors and professors of evolutionary theory at top universities throughout the world. Yet you want to believe they have all been duped into believing evolutionary theory because they don't have the intellect to question it! Yet your main advocate for creationism is the lying scumbag and jail bird Kunt Hovind. Get back to your tribe. I don't argue with ignorance.
DrMontague 4 years ago
What surprises me is how awfully bored some of these children look! Why on earth did they go if they had no interest in the subject? I would have loved to have been present in the audience at these. Utterly fascinating.
Matt7895 4 years ago
same
Erech01 4 years ago
Might have been the 7th run, you know how it goes with television. Hours of taping, twenty minutes on TV.
MrFacet 4 years ago
The Christmas lectures for many years were a very middle class affair . We should take on board that not everyone has a fascination with science. I surmise that many middle class parents wanted their children to be there for reasons of status . In recent years the lectures have become shorter and and in my opinion dumbed down.
DrMontague 4 years ago
This is just fantastic. I have seen alot of the lectures now, and even though they doesn´t shake my world view, they sure detail it. They expand my understanding on subjects such as evolution. How some can find it hard to grasp is a mysterie to me. It must be because of lag of basic knowledge.
HKragh 4 years ago 3
Lots of thanks pouring out and I'll add to that indeed. I'll have to watch some of the other lectures when I get a chance to later, but for now... thanks so much for posting these DrMontague!
Duckhugger 4 years ago
You're kidding; that's it? When will this debate leave behind the childish back and forth of "You're wrong"..."No I'm not, you're wrong!"..."Well you're stupid!" It always turns into fact-less name calling. I don't believe any intelligent debate is possible until both sides acknowledge that this is a philosophical debate about epistemology. Both evolution and creationism are faith systems that cannot be proven. Both philosophies are slaves to their assumptions.
larrycastle 4 years ago
Then you haven't understood evolutionary theory!There is overwhelming evidence for evolution. You cannot have an intelligent debate with creationist as they lie. E.g. they claim the earth is 6000 yrs old because the bibles says so. Radio active decay in some rocks shows that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. All eminent scientists agree. Creationist in ignorance argue huh well the measuring of radio active decay must be wrong.
DrMontague 4 years ago
Evolutionary theory is not a faith system it is based on empirical evidence. Click on my user name, then play lists . and look for a vid called creation. If you claim after watching there is no evidence for the big bang theory then you wont be worth debating with. And yes I will class you as a half wit.
DrMontague 4 years ago
So, I have not understood evolution-as you know what I understand. You also know that all creationists lie. That's a pretty broad statement. Are you saying that the lie is that the Bible says the earth is 6,000 years old or that they say the Bible says that when it doesn't? If we were to debate, then we'd first need to establish some basic rules of logic.
larrycastle 4 years ago
I assure you that "all eminent scientists" DO NOT agree. You also said, "Radio active decay in some rocks shows that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old." Please cite one such study and indicate how it supports your statement. Why would I attempt to refute an unsupported claim? This debate is in the details and the details will reveal both my assumptions and yours.
larrycastle 4 years ago
OK. click on my user name and then look for a video named 'how scientist can calculate the age of the earth' and also click my user name and then play lists, and see a vid called Earth Story. If these vids don't open your eyes then so be it.
DrMontague 4 years ago
I watched the video titled "Earth: How scientists can calculate the age of the earth" as you suggested. About 4 mins. in, we are told that "the decay rate is completely invariable." That's a pretty big assumption. Over the course 4.5 billion yrs, he knows with a certainty that this rate has never changed. I'm tempted to categorize that as a statement of religious faith but will be content to point out that there is no way to prove that presupposition.
larrycastle 4 years ago
are you arguing he's wrong? And that all the other eminent scientists are completely wrong? This is a typical creationist stance i.e. just keep arguing that science might have it all wrong. Lets take it one step further, scientists might be wrong that the earth goes around the sun, the sun goes around the earth. You remind me of Groucho Marx when he stated 'who you going to believe your own eyes or me'
DrMontague 4 years ago
I'm not arguing he's wrong. I just asked you to cite one study so I can have a claim to interact with. You are the one making a claim and apparently not willing to back it up. I am not willing to believe you over my own eyes. I want evidence from which to draw a conclusion not you quoting scripture ("eminent scientists"). Now you go look something up. Driscoll in Science News, vol. 101 (January 1, 1972), pp 12-14. Let's use evidence not names & claims-Agreed?
larrycastle 4 years ago
Wait one minute. I'm not going to be your unpaid online teacher! However I recommend you buy some books on the subject, visit a good library and borrow some books. or Visit wikipedia a free online encyclopedia. I know your a creationist this is why I am not going to waste my valuable time on you.
DrMontague 4 years ago
To larrycastle. Uranium will always decay to lead at a constant rate. Therefore it is an atomic clock. Experiments have shown that no known force can alter the decay rate. The earth is therefor 4.5 billion years old. The people in video are eminent scientists that is my evidence. I have presented you with evidence and then you turn around and argue that I haven't presented any evidence. Piss off.
DrMontague 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Now see, you are the typical evolutionist in my experience. You spout about creationists just making statements without proof but them refuse to talk about peer reviewed studies. You're a propagandist. I was going to offer to save you the time of looking up the quotes by citing them here when I discovered you blocked me. Censorship is often substituted for argument when there is no case. Here is what you censored:
commentnazi 4 years ago
So is this scientist not "eminent" or do you retract your statement that "all eminent scientists agree"?
commentnazi 4 years ago
To commentnaz. I no longer allow lying creationists to comment youtube has shown that creationists do not allow or want freedom of speech, they simply want to indoctrinate, censor comments i.e. they only allow creationists to comment. So go and fuck yourself!
DrMontague 4 years ago
Again, you confuse types of evolution. I am a Creationist, and I specifically beleive in evolution -- any christian who knows their facts will agree with me. MacroEvolution, on the other hand, does not -- and will not -- ever exist.
moderatethis 4 years ago
moderatethis. You cannot be a creationist and an evolutionist.. So fuck off and die you lying creationist twat.
DrMontague 4 years ago
Well, you have to ask: What is the point of evolution? What is the point of continuing the species? Why do we have instincts to survive? Why do we have anything? Why evolve at all? Why does anything need to evolve? How does evolution belifit the grand scheme of things?
JonathanClement140 4 years ago
Life or evolution in the universe does not have a point it just is. Only with the evolution of the human brain and consciousness did mankind begin to ask why are we here?, therefore the earliest conscious thinking beings began to come up with the notion of gods etc to explain what they couldn't understand.Now (some of us) have evolved to a higher state and the collection of scientific evidence shows all the past notions of gods to be wrong.
DrMontague 4 years ago
But why do we have organs? Why did we evolve instincts? Do you really think it "just is"? I don't think so.
JonathanClement140 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You need to watch all Dawkins Xmas lectures.Click my user name and then play lists. If after watching them you can't grasp it then I certainly can't help you. You can not go into the full detail of evolution in comment boxes. You have to do your own research. I'm not a free on line teacher. Watch the videos and read some decent books on evolution.
DrMontague 4 years ago
maybe we will know these things one day. but if humans kept believing gods controlled everything they didn't understand, where would the human race be.
kramerguy8 4 years ago
Thanks for uploading these lectures. I've been looking into Dawkins' work lately and I don't see where the controversy is coming from; he's right, reasonable, polite, and he explains his points well. The only way in which he is controversial is that he has the "wrong" answer, the unpopular answer, that evolution is a fact, creation and design is a myth, and there is no god. I really wish people thought about these things and didn't cut themselves off at a point. Again, thank you so much.
tacopylas 4 years ago 2
Thanx tacopylas. Creationists are really nothing. They're handy to have because the propaganda media can use them to fuel fear. We all lie awake at night shitting ourselves that the Muslims are going to take over the world! and Kent Hovind is going to lead a new Spanish inquisition to close down biology departments, arrest lectures for teaching evolutionary theory, and have them burnt at the stake. Fuck sake Dawkins et al are you really so taken in by the media?!
DrMontague 4 years ago
great Series! thank you so much for uploading it.
I'll definatly have to get my hands on the dvd series thank you a lot.
ric4567 4 years ago
This series of lectures could not be shown on TV in the US today. Such science programs were common in the 1950s and they were contributors to the surge in interest in science and engineering that was seen in young people during the 50s and 60s. Now, such a program would cause protests and threats of violence, and politicians competing with ever more strident condemnation of such anti-biblical utterances. The few who dare mention interest in rational thought do so at their own peril.
km6xz 4 years ago
So where do the Ivy League universities get their students from? The world cannot turn its back on science. I cannot see such things as the space shuttle ending because of brain dead creationists. I cannot see biology departments teaching creationism.
DrMontague 4 years ago
Actually, the number of foreign students from developing countries have dominated upper division courses and grad ranks but due to the greater difficulty in getting visas and the high costs, many of those students who kept the US in the forefront of many fields are staying home or going to other quality schools in Europe and Eastern Europe.
km6xz 4 years ago
The world has not turned its back on science, only the USA has. Notice where the big increases in papers and patients are coming from? There is no replacement for the space shuttle to roll out when the operational life limits of the shuttle program grounds the remaining craft. It is getting scary what is happening to the US. I moved to St Petersburg Russia several years ago but keep close contact with back home.
km6xz 4 years ago