I'm terribly sad the direction America is moving in. I can't say that I'm proud of my country any longer. My current biology professor doesn't even believe in evolution. She glosses over evolution whenever possible and uses the word "thousands" in place of "millions" whenever it must be referenced. Why should anybody be surprised when people don't know anything about evolution? It's not even being taught to us. I come here because I AM interested in it.
Superseries! I watched all 11 "made easy" episodes in one session, forgot I had to go to bed, and will be more than an hour short of sleep this night. But it will proof worth every second. Thanks for this superb job.
Thanks for this, it's what YouTube was made for. But it seems non-American people are far more concerned about rising US fundamentalism than Americans are, who seem to be concentrated into local atheist resistance groups. I have difficulty telling the difference between "good US fundamentalists" who bomb "evil Islamic fundamentalists", and "good Islamic fundamentalists" who get bombed by "evil US fundamentalists". Maybe I need to spend some time in a re-education facility...
If you actually bothered to read wikipedia like i just did in 30 seconds you would find that the main einstein article links to "Albert Einstein's religious views" which is an entire wiki section devoted to this subject. As for his work on the unification of theories to find perfection in the math to suit his religious beliefs, research "Unified field theory" and the reaction from the community, etc.
I dont think you understand the concept of grasping at straws, because both arguing semantics on the majority of einsteins life and going back to the literal interpretation of the word smart are concise examples of that behavior. I never 'argued' with the literal interpretation of the word smart if you actually bothered to read the posts you are so vigorously debating.
This comes back to the fact that when you get to quantum mechanics, strings theory, m theory, you reach a point where science cannot explain whether space and time are intelligent or not. This topic then becomes a matter outside science and a matter of OPINION, and THEORY... not science. And the statement made in this video that 1% or less of 'smart' physists believe in intelligent design is plainly wrong and not based on any evidence (science) at all.
Hard to fit anlaysis into a small comment. In summary, when you for instance put 99% of scientists 'with your opinion' and one in the other category. That is simply false. Many scientists have some sort of deist type opinion, what you are referring to is 99% wont believe in 6000 years creation, which is not mutually exclusive of religion. Take one of our greatest minds, einstein, although he went off the rails, he was a hybrid intelligent design. Are you saying you are smarter than him?
@itseasy2hack Can you prove einstein was a 'hybrid intelligent design' advocate?
Also yes we are smarter than einstein, because of all the discoveries that came after him we 'stand on the shoulders of giants' and therefore have a much clearer view of the world.
@antiprotonable If you know anything about einstein you will know he spent the latter part of his life searching for perfection in his equations to prove intelligent design. This is einstein 101. As for 'standing on the shoulders of giants' being a measure of intelligence, I dont necessarily agree. This is partially just my perception, but surely you must recognise that the intelligence required to innovate on science is far greater than the intelligence required to understand science.
@antiprotonable Do I need to provide evidence on the study einstein did for the majority of his life? Go wikipedia einstein... As for semantics on 'intelligent vs smart', I concede point if you interpret that literally, but as the original statement was clearly made rhetorically you are grasping at straws. The rhetorical statement was made in the context of an error in this video, a point that many popular physists advocate intelligent design but do not believe in diehard 6000 years creation.
@itseasy2hack I want a direct quote from wikipedia saying that einstein tried to prove intelligent design.
You have NOT provided that, it is up to you to get the evidence.
And I repeat, we, or I know MORE about the universe than einstein because I can read about all the scientific advancements made after einsteins death.
Doesnt make more more intelligent. Doesnt make me a better scientist. Its simply because a lot of things have been discovered since einstein died. <-- you cant argue with that
Ive been debating this issue for quite some time. One thing that annoys me is the hasty generalisation and slothful induction that somebody who is on the fence about intelligent design being linked to creationist extremists. The science you understand, from M theory to quarks, reaches a point of complexity where it cant explain the inception of space and time. Intelligent design is just as valid a 'theory' as it being a random arbitrary event, and your bias on this issue this videos intelligence
@itseasy2hack Intelligent Design is NOT a scientific theory because it can't be tested. There is no way to prove, or even provide support for, a god creating the universe. However, we can trace the universe's expansion back to a singularity, that is why it IS a scientific theory. It has been done and you can look it up. What happened before that? We don't know and no scientist claims to know. That does not provide support of a creator.
@alund1306 I specifically made reference to string theory, m theory and quantum mechanics, so i dont see how you have introduced any new fact to the argument. My only point was a specific refuting to the authors claim that 'scientists' never believe in intelligent design, which is a different thing to 7000 years creation extremists, he also implied a statistic on this matter which was base don no scientific premise and clearly false.
Never mind children not learning theories. We have a statue of James Clerk Maxwell here in his native city of Edinburgh and most adults are completely unaware of who he was, founding of electromagnetic theory or how his groundwork on the theory of gases paved the way to the fields of special relativity and quantum mechanics.
1 Corinthians 1 : 19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. †✡☪ॐ☸⚛... Stunting the growth of the brain from day 1. ㄗ口匕卄口ㄥモ尺54 #FTW
It's strange how some use technology made by science, Internet, Book publishing, television, electricity, and so on to try to spread the idea's against science.
I'm terribly sad the direction America is moving in. I can't say that I'm proud of my country any longer. My current biology professor doesn't even believe in evolution. She glosses over evolution whenever possible and uses the word "thousands" in place of "millions" whenever it must be referenced. Why should anybody be surprised when people don't know anything about evolution? It's not even being taught to us. I come here because I AM interested in it.
Pillowpants8495 1 day ago
can anybody tell me the name of the song in this? its awesome
ikov 3 weeks ago
@ikov Gershwin. Rhapsody In Blue.
mottiain 3 weeks ago
I like how creationists will wear a "scientist costume," composed of lab coats or kaki cargo pants in order to pose as scientists.
MadHatter34784 2 months ago
@MadHatter34784 Agreed. A real scientist could wear anything and it wouldn't matter. They would still be judged on their arguments and evidence.
oaajbs 1 month ago in playlist From Big Bang to Us -- Made Easy
Superseries! I watched all 11 "made easy" episodes in one session, forgot I had to go to bed, and will be more than an hour short of sleep this night. But it will proof worth every second. Thanks for this superb job.
ILikeEpicurus 3 months ago
What's that great song at the end?
Dillrod90 4 months ago
@Dillrod90 All the music is Rhapsody in Blue
gmsimpson05 4 months ago in playlist gmsimpson05's favorites
Thanks for this, it's what YouTube was made for. But it seems non-American people are far more concerned about rising US fundamentalism than Americans are, who seem to be concentrated into local atheist resistance groups. I have difficulty telling the difference between "good US fundamentalists" who bomb "evil Islamic fundamentalists", and "good Islamic fundamentalists" who get bombed by "evil US fundamentalists". Maybe I need to spend some time in a re-education facility...
bobinhk1 5 months ago
Thank you for the wake up call.
ThorGoLucky 7 months ago
It is scary....if we choose god as the future of our country.....then we are.....excuse my language....fucked...
PeaceOfTruth 7 months ago 3
If you actually bothered to read wikipedia like i just did in 30 seconds you would find that the main einstein article links to "Albert Einstein's religious views" which is an entire wiki section devoted to this subject. As for his work on the unification of theories to find perfection in the math to suit his religious beliefs, research "Unified field theory" and the reaction from the community, etc.
itseasy2hack 7 months ago
I dont think you understand the concept of grasping at straws, because both arguing semantics on the majority of einsteins life and going back to the literal interpretation of the word smart are concise examples of that behavior. I never 'argued' with the literal interpretation of the word smart if you actually bothered to read the posts you are so vigorously debating.
itseasy2hack 7 months ago
This comes back to the fact that when you get to quantum mechanics, strings theory, m theory, you reach a point where science cannot explain whether space and time are intelligent or not. This topic then becomes a matter outside science and a matter of OPINION, and THEORY... not science. And the statement made in this video that 1% or less of 'smart' physists believe in intelligent design is plainly wrong and not based on any evidence (science) at all.
itseasy2hack 7 months ago
Hard to fit anlaysis into a small comment. In summary, when you for instance put 99% of scientists 'with your opinion' and one in the other category. That is simply false. Many scientists have some sort of deist type opinion, what you are referring to is 99% wont believe in 6000 years creation, which is not mutually exclusive of religion. Take one of our greatest minds, einstein, although he went off the rails, he was a hybrid intelligent design. Are you saying you are smarter than him?
itseasy2hack 8 months ago
@itseasy2hack Can you prove einstein was a 'hybrid intelligent design' advocate?
Also yes we are smarter than einstein, because of all the discoveries that came after him we 'stand on the shoulders of giants' and therefore have a much clearer view of the world.
antiprotonable 8 months ago
@antiprotonable If you know anything about einstein you will know he spent the latter part of his life searching for perfection in his equations to prove intelligent design. This is einstein 101. As for 'standing on the shoulders of giants' being a measure of intelligence, I dont necessarily agree. This is partially just my perception, but surely you must recognise that the intelligence required to innovate on science is far greater than the intelligence required to understand science.
itseasy2hack 7 months ago
@itseasy2hack I didnt say we are more intelligent than einstein I said we are smarter (we know more). Which is irrefutable fact.
And once again you offer no proof, im not going to believe you unless there is some sort of proof.
antiprotonable 7 months ago
@antiprotonable Do I need to provide evidence on the study einstein did for the majority of his life? Go wikipedia einstein... As for semantics on 'intelligent vs smart', I concede point if you interpret that literally, but as the original statement was clearly made rhetorically you are grasping at straws. The rhetorical statement was made in the context of an error in this video, a point that many popular physists advocate intelligent design but do not believe in diehard 6000 years creation.
itseasy2hack 7 months ago
@itseasy2hack I want a direct quote from wikipedia saying that einstein tried to prove intelligent design.
You have NOT provided that, it is up to you to get the evidence.
And I repeat, we, or I know MORE about the universe than einstein because I can read about all the scientific advancements made after einsteins death.
Doesnt make more more intelligent. Doesnt make me a better scientist. Its simply because a lot of things have been discovered since einstein died. <-- you cant argue with that
antiprotonable 7 months ago
Ive been debating this issue for quite some time. One thing that annoys me is the hasty generalisation and slothful induction that somebody who is on the fence about intelligent design being linked to creationist extremists. The science you understand, from M theory to quarks, reaches a point of complexity where it cant explain the inception of space and time. Intelligent design is just as valid a 'theory' as it being a random arbitrary event, and your bias on this issue this videos intelligence
itseasy2hack 8 months ago
@itseasy2hack Intelligent Design is NOT a scientific theory because it can't be tested. There is no way to prove, or even provide support for, a god creating the universe. However, we can trace the universe's expansion back to a singularity, that is why it IS a scientific theory. It has been done and you can look it up. What happened before that? We don't know and no scientist claims to know. That does not provide support of a creator.
alund1306 7 months ago
@alund1306 I specifically made reference to string theory, m theory and quantum mechanics, so i dont see how you have introduced any new fact to the argument. My only point was a specific refuting to the authors claim that 'scientists' never believe in intelligent design, which is a different thing to 7000 years creation extremists, he also implied a statistic on this matter which was base don no scientific premise and clearly false.
itseasy2hack 7 months ago
Never mind children not learning theories. We have a statue of James Clerk Maxwell here in his native city of Edinburgh and most adults are completely unaware of who he was, founding of electromagnetic theory or how his groundwork on the theory of gases paved the way to the fields of special relativity and quantum mechanics.
Creation science is a contradiction in terms.
ThomasTrue 8 months ago
Even when the creationists were beaten at every reasonable debates there is, they are still very much alive.
emancoy 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1 Corinthians 1 : 19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. †✡☪ॐ☸⚛... Stunting the growth of the brain from day 1. ㄗ口匕卄口ㄥモ尺54 #FTW
HighPoweredLasers 8 months ago
It's strange how some use technology made by science, Internet, Book publishing, television, electricity, and so on to try to spread the idea's against science.
Films4You 8 months ago 11
"God of the gaps" is so annoyingly facile.
advisorC101 8 months ago
I want to go to Potholer University.
b3rtne 8 months ago 19
Who should we trust, God or the scientists??!! Er, God!!! Yes, there's a new generation of them coming. Hang on to your hats.
bobinhk1 8 months ago
he is a racist why were the kids in that photo all white wtf
ThoseGamerguyz 8 months ago
@ThoseGamerguyz That is either a joke in bad taste or simple ignorance.
Huttate1 8 months ago
wow this series is so awesome. I would paid to support this
JerezJulio 8 months ago