Lawrence Krauss Discussion (11/12) - Richard Dawkins
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- See more at RichardDawkins.net
Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss sat down for a public discussion at Stanford University on Sunday, March 9th 2008. The focus was on Science education, but the discussion also covered religion, physics, evolution and more. This video will be released on DVD soon at RichardDawkins.net , along with other unmoderated discussions with Richard Dawkins.
Produced by The Richard Dawkins Foundation and R. Elisabeth Cornwell
Filmed by Josh Timonen and Wayne Marsala
Edited by Josh Timonen - Наука та технологія
These are very entertaining to watch, real shame about the sound being out of sync.
Excellent point at the end by Dr Krauss I'll paraphrase " when the shit hits the fan they say "Save us science we believe in you ""
Talk about death bed conversions
i forgot about this, thanks that must be the one :)
Am I the only one having trouble with the synchronization of audio and video? I still enjoyed the "series" very much, but the parts that were out of synch were less satisfying than the rest.
I remember my 6th grade science teacher telling us that B cells were called B cells because they looked like little letter "B's" microscopically. I knew better, thankfully, and corrected her. She argued with me though, and stifled me. She also proclaimed that the idea that complex carbohydrates were broken down to simple sugars equivalent to glucose, etc was "debunked." I fought her again, and lost. I will make sure my nephews have the tools to fight such atrocity.
@bando8000 that's a great point to add to that it would be nice if the systematic approach would be governed by the wikipedia contribution process (obviously contributions limited to the 100 or so scientists) to managing the material.
@nybgrus How frustrating is that? When I was also in the 6th grade, I took an English teacher to task on her assertion that I should write 'should of' instead of 'should have,' and she convinced the class that I was wrong.
When I was in the third grade, I practically got into a shouting match with a teacher over my assertion that 'phone' was not spelled with an F. I kid you fucking not.
The first one wasn't from the Discovery Institute. Here's another one:
"The overriding supremacy of the myth has created a widespread illusion that the theory of evolution was all but proved one hundred years ago and that all subsequent biological research - paleontological, zoological and in the newer branches of genetics and molecular biology - has provided ever-increasing evidence for Darwinian ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth."
Michael Denton, biochemist
I think he means "educating people in falsehoods that are detrimental to education of truth."
Wow that's shocking in my country every teacher in school has to have a Bachelorhood degree in his respective field and most are Masters.
Most people's view of religion is the same as their view of science, in that their view is selective -- they take the parts that they like, can grasp in understanding or can use and accept those as part of their belief system as fact and either ignore, discount, disbelieve or rationalize the rest ... its the true scientists and the real religious extremists that accept and/or believe the lot as fact ... the primary difference between the two is the malleability of that belief system ...
I'll keep my fingers crossed while you're praying...lmao
@rrpauldoran I feel ya man. I wouldn't go as far as using the word "hate" because it gives being an athiest a bad name. These are very simpleminded people that are misguided. They need to open up a little.
no GrandGuignologist, it was RELIGION that believed we were the center of the universe, not science.
(Part 2)
D: Your choice, if you go with the Noak's Ark version, I'll give you Streptomycin.
P: Um.. What are the newer drugs like?
D: They're Intelligently designed.
Do you really believe your god made the video go out of sync? I mean doesn't that sound a bit out there even to you?
I understand it very well. I understand it well enough to realize that there is no empirical evidence in favor of the theory and much that refutes it. You may not realize that most of the evidences for evolution you have been taught have all been proved wrong.
3:09 this statistic has to be flawed O_O
90%???!!! i can't believe this till i see the stats myself
I thought Dawkins was going to shit his pants with 90% of teachers have not taken a science class above of the High School level.
Grandweirdo - how do you explain women in Nigeria who become immune to AIDS? The cells evolved. Plain and simple.
God knows! All I can do is pray to God that I remain an atheist!!
I'd suggest that it's the inconsistency between the scriptures and scientific discovery, such as "God created man in His own image" and how God is in control of everything, yet the evidence seems to point to something contrary.
If you toss in the fact that there's a vast array of Gods to choose from, and that unspeakable misdeeds have been committed in the name of one God or another, then he has a general distaste for Him.
@madzangels it works perfectly for me.
I don't think facts make you ignorant, I'm pretty sure knowledge doesn't work that way...
I apologize for the "dip shit" and "dumb ass" comments. I was out of line. However, I could employ the same tactic by asking for verification of evolution from anyone who is NOT an atheist. Dawkins is automically disqualified becasue he is biased by his belief system. (That is what you are implying by claiming quotes by members of the Discovery Institute don't count.) I could give you hundreds of quotes from very reputable scientists who are not creationists and dispute evolution.
hehe believe this part of science and not that part. . . . ist that what theists do with the scripture. . . sounds weird, at least radicals truly believe in there fairy tails, and anyone who isn't a radical/fundamentalist isn't a true believer
That's a crock. You're being so vague that I can't possibly describe the pit fall you make for yourself. WHO is being fired? WHO is being denied tenure for invalid reasons? WHAT is this much worse you talk about? Better yet - what are the percentages? How many people are persecuted for teaching evolution in comparison to creationism? Then you can make a point. Otherwise, I think you're spreading the idea it's this huge event when it's more like isolated ones that happen EQUALLY.
Can't wait for Krauss' new book - "A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing."
Well actually there is an hypothesis around the idea of super gravity and multiple dimensions whereby gravity that we experience in our universe is emanating from another universe(S). But that is NOT why gravity is called a theory.
Gravity is a FACT. Newtons gravitational theory is a fact as is Einsteins theory of special relativity.
In science the word FACT does not mean "a temporary idea we are hanging on to for the moment". A scientific theory is a fact.
It's very disappointing, yushis1, but it saved me plenty of bandwidth. I stopped watching the high quality versions once the sync was lost.
Maybe it's to encourage people to buy the DVD, or perhaps something even more sinister. The Lord moves in mysterious ways, and He may have deliberately moved the soundtrack a little to the left to obfuscate the message (just as He's apparently obfuscated everything else).
Great discussion, though, and I'll actually get this DVD one day soon. Excellent!!
It's completely "out there", exacerbatedtaboo, because it was a joke. Due to the textual nature of the comments, you couldn't see my tongue firmly planted in my cheek.
I'm an atheist, so I don't have a God. I'm a product of evolution, and a very distant cousin of the tree that died to make my computer desk.
Humblest apologies if you read my words literally.
I think the cartoon Richard was trying to remember was a Doonesbury from 2005 about a doctor and a creationist patient. You'll find it if you google "doonesbury creationism".
That greater-than-90% statistic about the middle school teachers is indeed utterly terrifying. I can't even imagine what sort of public school system would allow that sort of thing. How can you be qualified to teach science with only a high-school level understanding of it?
Especially when the middle school level is usually the point where students are exposed to the experimental aspects of science and the scientific method.
how come all of your quotes come from intelligent design supporters? (which has even less evidence than evolution, as you claim) and how about you make your own "quote" and then cite multiple scientific sources (try to avoid everyone them being from heavy I.D. supporters),
That is, if you want to convince me, if not, then i will just continue to research facts before trying to argue one side or the other, however, as of now, evolution seems to have more to support it than intelligent design...
How about this one from 2007:
"Darwinism has made no valuable contributions to biology . . . the major disciplines of biology including anatomy, botany, embryology, genetics, microbiology, paleontology, physiology and zoology were founded either before Darwin or by scientists who rejected his theory. Agriculture and medicine, the two disciplines that have provided us with the most practical benefits, owe nothing to Darwinism." - Jonathan Wells
In The Begining there was nothing POOF God made the Light
POOF the Earth
POOF Vegetation!
POOF The Sun, Moon and Stars!
POOF Birds!
POOF Land animals!
...
You think the Sun and Stars were made before Plants? ,
And Birds Came before all land animals?
We need scientists using the word "evolution" when it's relevant in public discussions and announcements on public health.
I fear that scientists are shying away from it.
Scientists. You need to get yourself some balls and start speaking out when you are given the opportunity to.
i looked up your quotes, and YES they were all from ID supporters, (maybe not all discovery institute, but they were ID)... and also, i recall somewhere in this public forum, dawkins and krauss both talk about two evolutionist biologists who are theistic...
"Evolution . . . has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless."
- H. S. Lipson FRS, Professor of Physics, University Manchester, UK, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin, Vol. 31, May 1980, p. 138.
That's exactly what people like Dawkins believe - that religion has done nothing but harm people. Besides, I wasn't talking about religion. I am refuting the idea that evolutionary theory has been the basis for our progress.
Speciation is MICRO-evolution. Domestic dogs and wolves are classified as different species but can interbreed. The classification system is clearly flawed. Sorry. You'll have to do better than that.
Krauss is obsequious all the way through. His 'on-the-fly' discussion method clearly does not work. What the f**k does 'de-education' mean?
Dawkins owns everyone, except Hitchens.
Holy shit, they really go at George Bush with a vengence here :-D ...and rightly so if you ask me!
Don't know if you didn't understand me or your comment was a pitiful attempt at humor but I meant that the scientific facts enlightened me to the fallacy of evolution.
Ironically, once I became scientifically literate, I stopped believing in evolution. A hard look at the facts will do that to you.
randGuignologist
Please Wiki the term "scientific theory" it will help you understand why evolution is a fact.
I was not aware of that particular statistic, and I find it terrifying to the deepest part of my being. I have had the bad habit until recent times of speaking on subject about which I had no amount of understanding. I have been humbled so greatly by those who have taken the time to truly understand what they are talking about. I wish I could confer that experience upon those many teachers who haven't the experience or knowledge necessary to properly teach.
@bando8000 I can already see two factors that would get in the way, money and influence. Not only would a large amount of money need to be raised, they would have to educate those in legislative offices and convince of the pros that would come with such a curriculum shift.
I for one, agree with you. I would love to see that happen, however if they were to pursue something along those lines, they have a lot of work ahead of them.
@bando8000
I don't think there's much discrepency in the basic aspects though: there's probably not much variation in what is sufficient for a 16 year old to know about the Kreb's cycle worldwide and what is being taught in decent schools on that matter. The real issue is when children are outright lied to, perhaps the stages in which they are taught and how often they are taught. Maybe depth comes into it, but the technical details from the top scientists may only be grasped at degree level.
They comment on politics, but are they members of political parties, do they encourage their colleagues and friends to join political parties, where is the intelligent criticism at the very base of the political process coming from? When a candidate says something stupid, are there people in his local party who can correct him with confidence, in front of the very people responsible for selecting him in the first place?
There are religions out there that are NOT creationist. Science and evolution are not incompatible with alot of religions. But rarely do scientific minds care to make any distinction between religions. They'd rather look for and focus on the weak concepts from weak religions to try to get others to share an overly-general asessment of ALL religions based on that. It's more like a form of hate than anything else.
Do they also believe all governments are flawed because one of them is/was flawed?
It wasn't a video, but a comic strip.
Doctor: Uh-oh, hope he's only a sunday creationist.
Patient: TB? My God, are you sure?
D: Afraid so, but we caught it early.
P: So my prognosis is good?
D: Depends, are you a creationist?
P: Why, yes, yes, I am. Why do you ask?
D: Because I need to know whether you want me to treat the TB bug as it was before antibiotics, or as the multiple-drug-resistant strain it has since evolved into.
P: Evolved?
At a major medical convention, a noted internist arises to announce that he has discovered a new miracle antibiotic."What's it cure?" asks a member of the audience. "Nothing we don't already have a drug for," the internist replies. "Well, what's so miraculous about it?""One of the side effects is short-term memory loss. Several of my patients have paid my bill three or four times!"
Thank you. I surmise that you are right. I should mention that you made me realize I was asking something I didn't intend! However you helped answer what I wanted to ask, too, which was: "What would Dawkins say is the consequence of evolution for deism?" Again, I suspect you're right.
Deism is a different story entirely. But, I would point out that it's liable to get us confused when we ponder the existence of any deity, seeing as how theism predominates our notions about God normally.
He'd probably only go as far as saying it's incompatible with a personal god who answers prayers and created the earth 6000 years ago and all such garbage. Certainly all the creation myths are out. I'm sure you can see for yourself why that's incompatible with accepting evolution.
He probably wouldn't say it's incompatible with a deist god who sets the universe in motion and lays back, but he has other arguments why that's a silly belief.
But of course that's all just speculation.
Do you have any idea what sort of elemental pressures you need to fossilize bone? What do you need for tangible evidence anyway if you're so willing to ignore what's available and rest so assured with yourself about a being you or anyone else cannot possibly prove? Don't ask for more than you can give in turn.
NO! Don't see Expelled. The movie is terrible, and it's not only a waste of your time, effort and money, but might as well be a criminal act to put your money in hands like theirs!
That's a very naive thought. I wish that would happen, and I wish that the world would indeed accept such a curriculum, but we're living in reality. Not a day dream where everyone agrees on everything and values science as much as we do.
"Over 90% of middle school science teachers have never taken a science course outside of high school."
Sorry but even for USA, this statistic sounds unbelievable... I think(hope) Krauss is wrong about middle school science teachers...
@bando8000 Stanford has started providing online courses. MIT is following their lead. Some of my professors at UTD have started discussing doing this too. It's already becoming a reality. Thank the flying spaghetti monster.
i could watch these 2 talk forever! "purpose of purpose" and "a universe from nothing" are great lectures as well that made me love these 2 guys. i dont think ive ever even partially disagreed with anything they have said
Does anyone know what Prof. Dawkins' argument is for thinking that evolution is incompatible with theism? He mentioned that he thought that evolution was incompatible, but he didn't elaborate his argument. I'm very curious.
Unfortunately, No. He is right. ALL you have to do to prove this, is either, or both, A) Ask your local school-teachers, and/or B) Look at any college's requirements for getting a teaching certification.
You do not understand the word 'theory'. Would you say Pythagoras' theorem is still just a theory? It is a fact. No one believes gravity is emanating from another dimension. You make this stuff up.
"one of which is where the first bit of life came from".
Sure GrandGuignologist, but this isn't covered by evolution or even what evolution is about.
What you are thinking about is abiogenesis.
@madzangels yeah it's ridiculous. As if the audience mic quality isn't bad enough now the subtitles are all out of sync. It's impossible to understand the questions...
Sorry, yes I realise he meant that, its just that it is not a real word!
This is simply amazing stuff i really wish i had a better set of science teachers in school i probly would have ended up being a biologist
And who would be more enthusiastic about science than a scientist? Why not have actual scientists teaching science to children?
i am sure you still can become one... just do it!
its never too late and especially not wit 26 ;)
Richard Dawkins should be Richard Darwin, but do to evolution, Darwin evolved to adapt to NOW!!
Seriously. ~ 3:30 - 3:40 he seemed to be thinking, "oh dear, it's worse than I thought!"
Yes they screwed up the whole video after like the third segment or so
@madzangels Yeah. The audio is a good 5 seconds ahead of the video.
does anyone know where to find this cartoon he mentions?
does anyone know what video Dawkins couldn't remember?
@tupacalypse88 I don't know, but it's scary.
BAHAHAHAA i loved his last staement! So true!
@madzangels no, i'm watching in sync.
krauss is a boss
6:50 is spot on.
"it's been designed to kill us" lol
@BeekersSqueakers priceless.
@madzangels It's not for me.
@madzangels nope
90% how is that possibale?
@madzangels not i
Latvia :)
@madzangels no