Why Darwin Matters: Genie Scott at "Evolutionpalooza 2009"
Loading...
Loading...
589
views
Loading...
43:51
What would Darwin say to today's creationists?by NatCen4ScienceEd20,945 views- 13:59
Why all the fuss about Darwin and evolution? Part Vby NatCen4ScienceEd5,782 views
- 1:43:27
What's the fuss about intelligent design?by NatCen4ScienceEd1,534 views
- 30:02
Genie Scott at the Bone Room, Part I: evolution v. creationismby NatCen4ScienceEd4,920 views
- 56:04
Creationism: Still crazy after all these yearsby NatCen4ScienceEd16,952 views
- 2:57
Barack Obama On Science And Charles Darwinby FFreeThinker378,812 views
- 56:47
In the Beginning: Explanations from Science and Religionby NatCen4ScienceEd3,113 views
- 1:27:50
Why the fuss about Darwin and evolution?by NatCen4ScienceEd2,465 views
- 9:29
Why all the fuss about Darwin and evolution? Part Iby NatCen4ScienceEd3,733 views
- 41:57
Evolution vs. Creationism 101: Genie Scottby NatCen4ScienceEd2,128 views
- 26:33
Uncommon Knowledge: Genie Scott vs. Dembskiby NatCen4ScienceEd5,416 views
- 30:06
McLean vs. Arkansas 20 Years Later: Part III - Gould speaks!by NatCen4ScienceEd22,471 views
- 6:59
Charles Darwin vs. Adam & Eveby FFreeThinker88,541 views
- 51:58
Genie Scott vs. Kent Hovind--The Radio Debateby NatCen4ScienceEd15,765 views
- 15:01
Genie Scott: Ohio State commencement speechby NatCen4ScienceEd949 views
- 12:21
Genie Scott at the Bone Room, Part III: evolution v. creationismby NatCen4ScienceEd1,649 views
- 6:43
Adam Gopnik on Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwinby wnycradio1,053 views
- 3:55
A.C. Grayling: The Good Bookby carnegiecouncil1,986 views
- 1:08:14
Steven Pinker - The Genius of Charles Darwin: The Uncut Interviewsby richarddawkinsdotnet100,138 views
- 9:52
Genie on Skepchick: Part IIby NatCen4ScienceEd723 views
The paper seems available here arxiv org abs hep-th 0208013 punctuate in the appropriate places. I dont seem to be able to post a link
SqueakerAlpha 1 year ago
@CaffeinatedThinking No, you're just too fucking stupid to recognize evidence when it's staring you in the face. Learn what dark energy is. Learn what the "cosmological constant" is. Look at the theories and implications surrounding their existence. Look up what would happen if the force of gravity was greater, or less, or if the mass of the universe were decreased or increased by even the smallest measurable amount. Then maybe you'll grasp what three PhD's from Stanford and MIT are saying.
MustangsCanTurnToo 1 year ago
@CaffeinatedThinking I've presented you evidence, you've presented nothing but insults.
MustangsCanTurnToo 1 year ago
@CaffeinatedThinking Calling me stupid is not an arguement. I'm not the one who has applied the traits of intellligence will or purpose to an external agent. They are there whether you like it or not.
MustangsCanTurnToo 1 year ago
@CaffeinatedThinking Actually, it does. It means that an external agent is responsible for the universe that we know. But it's meaningless to argue. You're going to look for evidence and interpret it in a way that supports what you believe to be true. Unless you can disprove dark energy (which is the dominant presence in the universe) you have nothing to argue. And unless you have a PhD in theoretical physics, quantum physics, or cosmology, you aren't qualified to argue anyways.
MustangsCanTurnToo 1 year ago
@CaffeinatedThinking "Disturbing Implications of a Cosmological Constant" by L. Dyson, M. Kleban, L. Susskind. It's in section 6 of their paper. Their final conclusion is that because of these "Disturbing Implications" that there must not be a cosmological constant. This has been proven incorrect.
MustangsCanTurnToo 1 year ago
Three non-theirstic astro-phyicists, Dyson, Kleban, and Susskind, from Standford and MIT determined this: Arranging the universe as we think it is arranged would have required a miracle. An external agent, [external to space and time] intervened in cosmic history for reasons of its own. Science keeps pointing towards God.
MustangsCanTurnToo 1 year ago