Hey Erika, thanks very much for the kind words! I learned some new things from this autopsy of the debate, so thanks for that. I'm looking forward to seeing more of your content in the future!
You were an absolute monster in this debate. Restrained and polite but precise and sharp. Great job on what you already had prepared for his responses.
Sir, I have never seen someone intellectually eviscerate another human being since Aron Ra ripped cunt caresh a new asshole. Keep up the good work, and thank you for helping educate us !
1) You did awesome in the debate 2) Its awesome that you took the time to look over the autopsy and take in new information (something so many YECs don't do)
I like how he is offended because his views are called silly but then goes on to say the entire scientific community that contradicts his findings are frauds and only do so because they have an agenda.
I live 45 minutes from the Creation Museum. I'd go to "Sillyland" all the time. Especially if you paid your taxes and donated money back to the community of Williamstown. It's in pretty bad shape...
Why bother creating more garbage? I'd buy it and burn it to the ground. Then, I'd buy Ken Ham's ark and turn it into something useful, like a world class strip club and casino.
Creationists: If the laws of physics were even infinitesimally different, life could not exist. Therefore, the universe is fine-tuned for life. Also creationists: The laws of physics were drastically altered during the flood.
And the first part alone is something they just don’t understand. Like it doesn’t matter what the odds were that the laws of physics are what they are, because we can only exist in a universe where they are that way.
@@thepapschmearmdexactly. They propose an idea that the percentage chance of it to happen how it happened is relevant or special when it's not. There is no comparable example to look at and say "oh yeah clearly ours is intelligently created"
That doesn't make sense. They are what they are just cause it's always been that way. I just do drugs and Jake off to pron cuz I just do all thr time. Same type of reasoning in both situations. It's called denial of accountability for stupidity.
Yea, I honestly think that due to how the universe generally works, life may still find some way to arise, adapted to whatever laws of physics are there, just as it did in this universe but we can't know for sure without any other universe to compare it to. Its just speculation
That's because he's a Creationist. Put him in a church, and his long-winded "this is why I'm smart" speech constitutes evidence to his flock. That obviously doesn't hold water against a real scientist, so he's floundering and cannot comprehend that he has to actually prove his claims.
The part where McQueen claims that a whole methodology is biased because one scientist laughed at him one time is... Well it sums up the whole foundation of YEC logic.
Seriously, some peoples' world is so small that I can't comprehend how it even works. It's like those people they find on the street who think the US is basically the whole earth, other continents and countries are little islands and shit.
Mcqueen spared no expense to ad hominem attack KC, repeatedly referring to him as "lowercase k", calling him agnostic, and trying to belittle him, so I have no compassion for him or his pathetic attempt to pretend to understand mathematics, statistics, and particularly, nuclear physics. He is grossly under-prepared to discuss any of these topics.
Literally the whole idea of there being ‘kinda’ that diversify literally is evolution just started halfway down while being incorrect with certain animals. But the idea is literally evolution. Like what???
@@thescienceofscience.8556 First result from googling the definition of biological evolution “Biological evolution is the change in inherited traits over successive generations in populations of organisms.“ That is what evolution is, what you are talking about is more closely related to Abiogenesis. The theory of evolution explains why populations of organism change and diversify, abiogenesis explains how the first living organism came to be. So no, evolution does not claim that life started off as a single cell, abiogenesis does. And it is far from being “obviously not true” origin of life research has bore many fruits over the decades of it being studied that is providing evidence for all of life starting from very basic proto cells. Edit: also to clarify, abiogenesis doesnt claim that all of life literally came from ONE cell, there were literal billions of cells.
And now that I've watched it to the end, I do indeed need some aspirin to counter the alcohol. Or possibly more alcohol to deaden the effects of all the alcohol.
As a working engineer, I experienced second hand embarrassment from David's response to the data bias evidence. "There is data bias." "Here is data showing there isn't data bias." "Yea but this guy said something bad about my ingroup 20 years ago so he's biased." Graph still shows no bias.
"I choose to disagree with the data." “There is a cult of ignorance… and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'” - Isaac Asimov 1980
Being so accustomed to holding a belief in God with no evidence, seems to incline some folks to believe in (supposedly) scientific claims with no evidence. I found it hilarious how David accused others of bias, when he has not simply a bias, but a refusal to even consider the evidence.
I saw the debate from a link on KC's channel and the one thing I took away from it was how much McQueen sounded like my grandmother's even more elderly neighbour telling me about his war escapades. His rebuttals meandered around, were entirely anecdotal and more often than not missed the point.
Jacob… I realize we disagree philosophically but do you really think there is no data bias in the history of radiometric dating going back to World War II?? Also if you listen carefully to what I said in the debate I focused on labs that do uranium lead potassium argon for the purpose of the debate I had no interest in labs that date carbon-14
@@grandpageologist You're moving the goal posts. My comment was related to the fact that the response to data was "I disagree", not "I disagree because reasons". Also declaring a source to be biased because they said something you didn't like, not because data.
I wasn't sure what to make of that running gimmick. Perhaps another distraction technique. Perhaps we should chide McQueen for having the audacity to retain the name of a famous biblical hero.
Something about that "with a lower-case k?" really made me laugh. It just kinda showed that KC had no concern for McQueen's pathetic attempts to patronize him and put him down.
One could argue that McQueen should spell his name "Mcqueen", because there is only one Queen, manifesting in 4 persons: Freddy, Brian, John and Roger. Amen.
Big thanks to McQueen for a very interesting look into the failing mind of a conspiracy theorist, his barely coherent ramblings are indistinguishable from those of a flat earther.
I couldn't get over how rude McQueen was to KC. He clearly wasn't even listening to KC's statements, and his replies were essentially canned responses to various trigger words. I'm in McQueen's age bracket, but I would never treat someone I agreed to debate so discourteously.
When you losing, it tends to produce anger. Also, you may notice that angry shouting preachers are pretty common . If you shout it rudely enough, it drowns out the doubt?
@@bloodgrss While there are undoubtedly VERY angry shouty preachers (Steven Anderson, Greg Locke), most of the shoutyness is a conseuqence of them being trained in their churches (baptist derived mostly) to equate "confident" speaking with authority and saying the truth. A pastor that talks like a decent human being isn't taken serious amongst these congregations.
@Alexander Bailey It all started back in nineteen dickety-two, when Bishop Usher challenged Charles Darwin to race around the geologic column. Now this was before I went to study geology at the University of Bumblefuck under professor Roosevelt. Bumblefuck is what we called Kentucky at the time because our mascot had been stolen by the University of Tennessee, which we used to call South Kentucky at the time. Anyway where were we? Oh yeah the geologic column...
McQueen cannot grasp the true form of KC's attack! Seriously I think this is the closest I've seen to someone getting literally destroyed by facts and logic on camera.
I appreciate the Earthbound reference. Only Paula's constant prayer could defeat David McQueen's seemingly infinite stubbornness. Sadly, she's stuck in one of the greatest video games of all time. Peace.
@@skandragon586 I'm with you. Chrono Trigger is good, too, heh. May we all rekindle a healthy dose of nostalgia when we feel the desire. P.S. If you happen to like anything from Jay-Z, someone (2 Mello) mashed up Chrono Trigger's soundtrack with some of his songs in an album entitled "Chrono Jigga". Maybe you'd find some of it enjoyable. My favorite is "Say Hello to the Black Omen".
“Silly” was inaccurate. Slanderous or misleading would have been better. The idea that McQueen’s criticisms imply that actual, functioning geologists don’t know to be sure they know initial conditions, leaching and deposition, or decay rates.
I honestly wasn't expecting to hear that much disrespect from someone who at least pretends to be a scientist. Especially when KC really held back on the snark.
It's very often purposeful to elicit an emotional response. It's an effort to undermine arguments through either trying to portray the opponent as an emotional anti-theist, or to try to detail the conversation from points being made.
I like all these David's pointless passive-aggressive jabs at KC for being an atheist (lower case "k", celebrating christmas, questioning his atheism) It feels like this is the first time he talks to an atheist.
right? I was going to comment on that- it's very frustrating how a lot of christians like this seem incapable of interacting with someone they know is atheist without feeling obligated to belittle them. It's so childish
There WAS once a War on Christmas. It was waged by Puritans and Presbyterians who rightly realized that the December 25th date and many of the customs and trappings of the holiday had pagan origins. Christopaganism won and the holiday remains.
An observation from a fellow grad student, but one in science education research: I find McQueen's consistent use of personal anecdotes very interesting because it could be evidence that he has an epistemology based on personal experience, not consistency or consensus. An epistemology is what someone believes about knowledge: what are good sources of information, who do you trust for information, how do you know something is true, etc. I think he may come back to personal stories over and over again because to him, that's the main way to know things. It doesn't matter if KC has data plots and citations and appeals to scientific consensus, because he has experienced something different and that is the primary form of knowledge to him.
And almost all "flat earthers" place a huge emphasis on personal observation over using evidence from any institution or reputable person. The most common repeated phrase ive noticed personally among people like this is "I've done this research for 20/30/40 + years" as a sort of "gotcha". Not only are their entire realities based on mistrust and only "believing what they can see" but also if they admit they are wrong they admit they wasted a huge portion of their lives. I've only ever had one man admit he was wrong and I've been riding that high ever since. Unfortunately, he became incredibly depressed and a part of me feels guilty. 'Ignorance is bliss' i guess.
The discrepancy between McQueens condescending attitude and his incompentence on all sorts of things (and even when it comes to geology) was striking and embarrassing. To think that in the coming months he will be able to turn physics on its head and solve both the heat problem and the radiation problem is not merely overestimation of his own abilities. It is delusional on a pathological level. To call McQueen an old fool is a euphemism.
"He doesn't know if God could be hiding behind Jupiter where we can't see without using robots, yet he goes ahead and says there is no god like he knows for sure as a some kind of man of faith" A college degree from a bible college is just not an impressive education to put it as mild as I can.
If we could teleport to the back of Jupiter right now, and the back of every celestial object simultaneously, and go “look, there’s no god here,” McQueen would just say “well obviously God doesn’t have a physical body! You have to have FAITH” etc. It’s a very disingenuous argument.
There are many worse "debates" by creationists/YECs/flat earthers/conservatives which make this debate look like high society. For example the one between Professor Dave and Jesse Peterson or Professor Dave and David Weiss or any "debate" with Kent Hovind and someone who knew what Kent was about at the time (like Aron Ra).
King Croc is honestly one of the most articulate geniuses I have ever heard in this field. He is not working by emotional or spiritual means but by thousands of hours of work and applications. The fact that he handles the "architecture" of the debate as well, is whipped cream on my Ben & Jerry fudge brownie pint. I don't know the guy but I do appreciate great research and application when I see it and if I can understand the crux of his teaching then anyone can. Aloha.
Uggh- watched this debate a few weeks ago and to call it painful is a criminal understatement. All I learned from McQueen was all the people worked with/read a book by/ had a dream about.
It works for the intended audience: brainless church-goers who have no idea what intellectual _anything_ looks like and who can easily be fooled into thinking "debates" like it are high-IQ research. And who will then be encouraged to shell out their hard-earned cash for VHS tapes of the debate sold with the actual intelligent bits crudely cut out, because of course none of the intended audience will trust anything so _satanic_ as a DVD player. Comes with a free Chick tract and a ticket for the gun raffle! which, Hallelujahglorytogawd the pastor's friend is gonna win the raffle isn't that just amazing?
I learned that he doesn't agree with the facts - that makes him untrustworthy and as a human and it automatically makes him more harmful than beneficial to people he has an effect on directly and indirectly, i.e. every person alive now or in the future. You cannot ever trust him to try and use or find data to inform him in an attempt to make the best possible decision. Instead he would make a decision on gut feelings and ignore and deny data that proves him wrong. That unnecessarily increases harm to everyone by the harmful example he sets example and by his decisions. He could just use the data available to him to change his decision to have a greater chance of increasing well being and he chooses not to. He is free to choose to turn his back on humanity and I am free to suspend my trust in him as a human and a part of society. I could never respect anything he says or does until he follows the evidence to try and make informed decisions instead of straight up denying it. That includes falling to the ground and needing my help. I would purposefully leave him there to discourage denial of reality and to sarcastically encourage him to disagree with the reality he is in so he can try and force reality to accommodate him in his wishes because I will not.
I'm not an academic by any means and know only the basics of statistics, so it's sad that I followed KC's funnel plot just fine and shook my head at McQueen's "explain it to me like I'm 5" and childish, anecdotal routines. Actually KC's whole presentation was quite straightforward and understandable. Great job!
I actually have no problem with the explain it to me like I'm 5 thing that David did here. I think it's important to admit when you don't understand something, and this is the correct way to approach something that's outside of your area of study. HOWEVER what he did after that was just baffling. The fact that he completely disregards what KC was able to show (which was absolutely brilliant btw) was infuriating. You can't just say that you don't agree with something like that lol. And that's especially true when you are trying to make the case that David was trying to make and claiming that you are trying to approach things from a scientific angle. The whole thing was embarrassing for David. Kudos to KC. This was excellent.
I have to say...I am somewhat sorry for McQueen. I imagine he pumped his entire life into this idea. I understood he did some kind of degree and worked for quite a while in a sector, but he always had to selectively see the world. Whenever reality came knocking, he had to look away. When you do this for a long long time, it begins to show. Another thing that is quite obvious is, that he puts A LOT of value on what he does, what he achieved and what he represents. He leads up with this serveral times. He is also used to talk down to everybody and teadching / preaching. Whatever communication takes place, it is somewhat vertical. Title means more than facts, status is most important. So when someone says something that contradicts what he says, it is an attack(!!). He actually calls King "opponent", which is, if you think about it, a little over the top. It also explains why extremely religious people, like young earth creationists, see science like radiometric dating as an opponent. They feel it questions their belief. So if they crush their enemy, they can finally be free of those hurtful words that they get to hear all the time. And I believe that they hurt in a weird way. My assuption is, that the pain won't even go away when nobody is talking to them, as they constantly have to "fix" reality in their mind. Maybe this is the reason why an external, crushable enemy is required. Not sure about that one. Fact is: They almost always see an attack, when there is no attack there, just facts. Because it cannot be what cannot be. So they must be mean or something. But whenever they get forced to stay on the subject and to REALLY look at what they just said, they shy away..because if they ever stop to REALLY think about that, they would see the truth...and that is to be averted with all possible means. In my experience you don't just get this with very relivious people. It is, sadly, pretty common. Facts do not help. The conversation is in emotion land, long before the part with the facts has realized this. Been there...burnt myself there. EDIT: you phrased it way better than me..that's what I get for commenting before watching the whole video... :D
Or, alternatively, he stopped actually believing some time ago and by now it's just a job to him. He isn't allowed to say some stuff, has to say other stuff, but that's fairly standard and it's a good reliable income as long as there are religious fanatics. Well, it was a reliable income up to this point, he may not get that promotion after all...
McQueens response to KCs thorough statistical analysis are a piece of gold! My statistics semester would have been so much easier if I could just say ‘i disagree with the data’ and still be taken serious.
Well he is at the poiint where old believers double down as they start to feel their death is coming soon. They have the choice to either give up on the idea or to use lost cost thinking to double down on belief to "earn" the promised undemonstrable reward after death... Seems David's choise is obvious.
Very enjoyable! I am a casual science fan and occasionally I am reminded of the gulf between a hobbyist and an actual trained and educated person in the sciences. This is one of those times. This is video is very much worth the listen.
I'll put it this way if you decide to dive into it oh man it is wormhole you'll just wake up 10 years later and then realize that you really don't know anything still cuz you never learned the mathematics
@@borttorbbq2556 - In studying architecture, I had the same problem. I understood calculus well, but just didn't get the underlying algebra. Those ancient Indian and Arabian mathematicians were waaay too smart for me.
I had no idea KC was such a good debater. He's not particularly charismatic, but his methodical and precise approach, and his unwillingness to allow himself to be distracted more than makes up for it.
I watched this live and I was surprised to see so many people making fun of McQueen for being old, when throughout the whole debate, he acted like a child. That being said, this was a very good dissection. I was calling out a lot of things live, but you blew me way out of the water.
I wanna see you and Forrest on that talk show again where you nerd out on science for an hour before suddenly remembering there are callers on hold. Listening to the two of you is as informative as it is entertaining and honestly I can’t get enough!!
This is probably one of your best videos, Erika. It's well-edited and extremely easy to consume without getting too tedious, add onto that the fact that KC is an incredibly straightforward debater with no small amount of finesse in these topics, and your commentary was both funny and engaging. Good performance from you and from KC. David tried and I can appreciate that but I don't think the facts are on his side, and it showed... badly. This was probably a pain to edit, as you said, so again, thank you for taking the time to do so. It's legitimately one of your best videos and I'm sure I'll listen to it many more times to come.
Yeah, it's really not painful watching this loon's garbage mind unravel, it's a joy for me! This is exactly the kind of thing I've been wanting to see more of, for about half a century now. I'd love to see some undercover footage of just how weird working in one of these labs with all these theists around actually is, all their little broken thoughts and venting about nonsense and random exuberant exclamations that exhort the glory of God's mysteries at being so illogical and TRICKY to understand. My girlfriend worked in one for a while and the stories routinely spun my head looking for some way to exorcise the stupidity of the cognitive dissonance.
Every time KC makes a point, McQueen either has to say he "disagrees" and can't elaborate because there's nothing to elaborate on that wouldn't make him seem even more wrong, or he has to tell some story about his coworker in 1995 seeing someone laughing at a creationist and circle back to some different point
Thanks for the blog shoutout A few corrections: Daughter elements can be introduced initially under SOME conditions (usually K/Ar dating). But systems like Ar40/Ar39 dating and isochrons correct it. Also sometimes diagenetic alteration isn’t visible by eye . Sometimes it’s only noticeable by trace element checks. But often those are done before the radiometric dating is done. So it really didn’t matter much. Geologists check for that sort of thing.
“If you can’t beat them with brilliance, baffle their brains with BS.” - BS artists/christian apologists/fear mongers/sociopathic trolls/brexiters/trump magats/poutine apologists all over the world
I grew up in Papua New Guinea and Indonesia as a child and had many an opportunity to explore much of the Islands. It is amazing to find ancient coral reefs that are now limestone outcrops with ancient sea fossils miles high in the mountains. Mere observations of such structures so high and inland highlighted that this world is very old, much older than the 6000 yrs stated by so many charlatans.
It was a struggle in popular science education. You've always been admirably respectful (as much as possible) towards even the promoters of the most absurd child-like fantasies build out of falshoods. Though many of them dont deserve that good faith treatment, but you non the less inspire your viewers with your maturity. Love the diagetic music:)
You’re probably not going to see this Erika, but this video here is one that I regularly watch and will continue to do so. Much with most of your content honestly. You’ve brought a lot to the table these past few years and you are one of a few creators who have inspired me. Inspired me to become a content creator myself and debunk pseudoscience.
KC predicting the conspiracy angle and running the tests beforehand to prove it wrong is the most gigachad "pushes up anime galsses/you activated my trap card" moment I've ever seen. What a King (capital K)
Wow, he actually admits that he essentially ignores hard data and just sticks to his premature conclusion. I can't help but it always reminds me of this quote from Tim Minchin's beat poem Storm: "Science adjusts its view based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved.". David is an excelent example that proves this statement.
"As a professional scientist for 30 years, I don't appreciate my ideas being called silly" One of the most important parts about being a professional scientist is to be extremely self-critical, and to be encouraged by criticism of your ideas and your work. No scientist is above having their work and their ideas criticised. The critical nature of science is precisely why it's been so successful. If I propose an idea that a colleague calls 'silly', I will devote time to understanding why they've said that, and be very open to the prospect that my ideas really are silly and that I've been wrong this whole time. I have all sorts of ideas about my own research in Astrophysics, but I'm confident that nearly all of them are silly. There are details I miss, things I forget to consider, and bits of information or consequences of Physics that I just don't know. Collaboration and peer review is the process of being told "your ideas are silly", and changing or refining those ideas until nobody can immediately point out why they're silly. Peer-reviewed research isn't necessarily correct, it's just research that is no longer obviously bad/wrong/silly. David's reaction to this simple comment from KC speaks volumes about his unusual attitude and lack of experience as a scientist.
I pursued a minor in geology in college. We used phase diagrams all the time. They were introduced to us in 100 level mineralogy and petrology. I've pulled some up and explained them to my kids when they were in elementary school. His side tangent about how hard his chemistry course was is so utterly disconnected from phase diagrams as to be, dare I say it, silly. Silly is actually one of the kinder words I have for it. Intentionally deceptive is probably more accurate.
I mean to be generous to some think Eric hovind with kunt as his father he never had a chance. but then now he has no excuse just like his father he's payed to lie
It is a common trap to think that we have to accept Genesis as a literal event in order for the whole Bible to be correct but that isn't true at all. A lot of people think that if the earth ain't 6k+ years old, the Bible can't be true but that's a false assumption. This mistake causes a lot of people to leave the faith as a result. This is why we should read for ourselves though I know our attention spans aren't the best and we easily feel threatened by new information when that threatened feeling by itself due to that is the result of being out of line with who God really is. The whole Bible focuses on a main theme and that theme is not dependent on a young earth or a merely literal interpretation. Sections of the Bible contain an intro that usually states the purpose of that book/text, mostly I'm referring to the letters of the NT but it isn't purely limited to that but holds the easiest demo for my example here. It is super important to read things completely to the end because the Bible sums up the main meaning in the end. It's one thing to come to a correct interpretation but is another to actually put it to use in real time but better yet is to see the bigger picture that is being demonstrated. The Bible should not be treated like a theological rule book as it never really was or the parables (like a fable but with people) and symbolism would be rather out of place and confusing/absurd if we just need to do certain things assuming a works based salvation that the Bible heavily warns against consistently. I just really hope one day we realize that debating rarely does anyone any good and no one really listens because we are preoccupied with sounding right or having the correct answers. Both sides are hostile to each other and breeds rivalry, the opposite of what God is saying is the most important thing to take away. Having knowledge is good but without love, we have nothing. Charity is the best gift man can offer to another.
McQueen continually feeling assaulted while his opponent casually lists errors in their thought fills me with such joy. Can he really not answer back? I’m also shocked to see how McQueen was still given a platform after he literally acknowledged bias as the root/premise to his denial of evidence. How could you expect to have a reasonable conversation with someone if they refuse any data proving them wrong? Okay, seeing McQueen’s continued insults directed towards KC makes me upset. Not because the words were insulting but to the conversation. It really was just him lashing out with frustration.
I'm confused every time one of these YEC dudes blames Darwin for eugenics being a thing. Do Christians REALY want to play the "Whose world view caused the most damage" game?
Brilliant video. Thoroughly enjoyed from the opening sequence until the end. Had to replay that, ‘Hall of the Mountain King’ part several times I was laughing so hard, just perfectly timed. Bravo!
Drat! I do the trivia game with fellow blind people and it seems to always coincide with your premiers. I’ll be watching it right now. Thank you very much you’re awesome.
This video is a very effective breakdown of this debate and I just want to say how much I love and appreciate these debate breakdowns because I think they're a great platform for both entertainment and also learning about these concepts being argued about, while simultaneously calling out misconceptions. On an unrelated note, and I mean this in the best way possible, KC's voice reminds me of Herbert West from Reanimator and the mental image of Herbert West, resident god-complex having mad scientist, debunking young earth creationism is highly amusing.
Came in a few minutes late but still had to rewind and play the intro- Just love the conspiracy angle-my answer is the same one I use with the moon landing conspiracy there are x number people involved & they ALL kept the secret, people have a really had time keeping secrets, at some point the truth would leak out😂😂😂 Watching this is sooooooooooo painful. Good on Gutsick for bringing this to us, yay I guess?
It is not just the people directly involved in the moon landing. The US was in direct competition with Russia who was in terms of firsts into space far ahead of the US, like launching first satellite, first life form in geo orbit, first person i geo orbit, etc. The US is also in competition with China in general. Do these people truly believe that China and Russia would not have found out if the US would have faked the moon landing? What an asinine idea that is actually.
Just a general shout out. Has anyone on here, ever come across a young Earther that is NOT extremely religious and therefore totally biased? Just wondering? I’m guessing that it just doesn’t happen but I suppose it could, possibly happen.
Not really, but I would wager that there are a few out there. How many there are depends on how you define “religious” and whether or not you’re willing to include people with mental illness/disorders. For example, someone could feasibly be an atheist but believe in simulation theory. That would mean the earth doesn’t technically exist in the physical sense and is only as old as the simulation. However, since their beliefs are still based on feelings and a higher power (creator of the simulation) rather than anything provable, I would still call that an appeal to magic and categorize it under a religious belief. Also, far off the deep end conspiracy theorists can have some pretty bizarre (often contradictory) theories. Some believe that ancient cultures were more advanced and knowledgeable than modern cultures and may subscribe to young earth just because some ancient culture thought the earth was young. I don’t know if you could call that “religious,” but they would still be taking claims at face value without evidence. Never underestimate the power of cognitive dissonance and mental illness.
I'm sure they exist, but there's just not many non-religious reasons to reject the science in this context. It's not like climate science where people don't want to change their lives, don't want to admit that change could be coming, or more to the point don't want to pay to fix it. With a young versus old earth there's simply no secular reason to deny it, nothing follows that makes anyone other than the religious uncomfortable.
All I really care to note with regards to Donny D's 'experts' is that time he had Nephilim Free on and he interpreted a phylogenetic tree so wrong I swear I immediately had eighteen consecutive strokes. For extra context I learned how to read and interpret them in my first year of uni and I've made dozens of them as part of my honours program. The mistakes Nephi made were literally _the first thing_ I learned about because the concepts involved are that mind-numbingly fundamental. And he's their _expert._
I don't know what kind of insane asylum you have escaped from if you are the type of person who think Nephilim Free can be considered an "expert" on anything, but you really should go back there for the sake of humanity.
Whenever I see Nephi trotted out as an "expert", I think of the time he was listing Great apes, he couldn't remember the last one, and just threw in "australopithecus". That clip and Erika's reaction makes me laugh so hard it hurts. 😆 🤣 😂
Great vid, thankyou Erika! Massive fan of KC so I brought myself to catch live on that channel. Very appreciative that you could bring us this complete destruction of McQueen, with the added benefit of your insight.
I had just watched this debate when you posted this. When you described the discussion, I was thinking, wow this sounds like, oh my gosh, this has to be. Wow! Mind blown. Hilarious. david is a mess
Not sure how old McQueen is, but it is fair to note that dating back to the Gentry days of late 1960s means he's had over a half century of making no progress whatsoever convincing anyone outside the YEC box that they've got it right.
Thank you for taking the time to break this 'debate' down, and for the work you put into researching both the misrepresentations and accurate science that was presented in the original video. I love that Erika, as well as KC, both make a point to explain that the YEC position isn't tenable, at all, by way of being in demonstrable opposition to accepted and understood knowledge of reality that YEC grifters themselves accept and understand. When debunking YEC grifters misrepresention of reality and scientific findings, whenever possible it should be pointed out the ridiculous level of conspiracy their claims demand. Essentially for YEC to be correct: There must be a massive, world-wide conspiracy that has been in progress for several thousand years. Every area of scientific understanding, every method of measurement developed beyond a ruler, every single previous gap in human knowledge that is now considered closed, all lies! Lies built upon foundations of lies, perpetuated by almost everyone who has ever existed. Humanity has and continues to conspire in this way to try to discredit the stories in Genesis. -Why? Because everyone who doesn't accept that Genesis (specifically the KJV) is 100% accurate and factually correct, (including the bits that are fatally contradictory) is a Christian persecuting, immoral, God-hating sinner. They literally have to deny the reality of everything; it's the same for flat earth (flerf) conspiracies. Many YEC snark about flerfers and their nonsense, in the same way many flerfers snark about the flat earth + lizard people conspiracies. It's not the solid platform of reason they think it is. It's just one absurd conspiracy less than the one they're hubristically mocking.
"I'm surprised you'd even acknowledge Christmas as an atheist." Why would there be any difficulty in acknowledging a public holiday that takes place in a huge portion of the world? It's not even a question of whether Jesus was real or the Bible is true. Christmas is a thing that happens now, regardless of what you think of the veracity of the Bible.
Love your channel! Also, your intro song always makes me think of a Beatles song that never was - it sounds like “For the Benefit of Mr. Kite” and playful mid 60s Beatles! Yay
I am so sick of these supposed experts who just stand up in public and lie, whether it be flat earthers, young earth creationists, trumpists, or whatever. Decent people need to call them out directly. Sure, refute their "content", but make it clear that they are full of malice, and civilized people reject their paradigm.
Hey Erika, thanks very much for the kind words! I learned some new things from this autopsy of the debate, so thanks for that. I'm looking forward to seeing more of your content in the future!
You were an absolute monster in this debate. Restrained and polite but precise and sharp. Great job on what you already had prepared for his responses.
Sir, I have never seen someone intellectually eviscerate another human being since Aron Ra ripped cunt caresh a new asshole. Keep up the good work, and thank you for helping educate us !
"Intuitively no one understand relativity" favorite line in the debate and it flabbergasted Hovind
1) You did awesome in the debate
2) Its awesome that you took the time to look over the autopsy and take in new information (something so many YECs don't do)
LONG LIVE THE KIIIIIING!!! 👑🐊🦆
I like how he is offended because his views are called silly but then goes on to say the entire scientific community that contradicts his findings are frauds and only do so because they have an agenda.
If I were a billionaire, I'd create an exact copy of the Creation Museum, place it one county over, and name it "Sillyland".
give McQueen a lifetime pass
@@hairymcnipples Or host him as an exhibit.
Build an Ark and launch it. Then watch it sink in spite of all the modern pumps.
I live 45 minutes from the Creation Museum. I'd go to "Sillyland" all the time. Especially if you paid your taxes and donated money back to the community of Williamstown. It's in pretty bad shape...
Why bother creating more garbage? I'd buy it and burn it to the ground. Then, I'd buy Ken Ham's ark and turn it into something useful, like a world class strip club and casino.
Creationists: If the laws of physics were even infinitesimally different, life could not exist. Therefore, the universe is fine-tuned for life.
Also creationists: The laws of physics were drastically altered during the flood.
And the first part alone is something they just don’t understand. Like it doesn’t matter what the odds were that the laws of physics are what they are, because we can only exist in a universe where they are that way.
@@thepapschmearmdexactly. They propose an idea that the percentage chance of it to happen how it happened is relevant or special when it's not.
There is no comparable example to look at and say "oh yeah clearly ours is intelligently created"
That doesn't make sense. They are what they are just cause it's always been that way. I just do drugs and Jake off to pron cuz I just do all thr time. Same type of reasoning in both situations. It's called denial of accountability for stupidity.
Yea, I honestly think that due to how the universe generally works, life may still find some way to arise, adapted to whatever laws of physics are there, just as it did in this universe but we can't know for sure without any other universe to compare it to. Its just speculation
yeah, good point... some weopons grade cognitive dissonance there...(and a shitload of special pleading)
KC: *makes point*
McQueen: "well in 1947 when I was a paper boy..."
lmao it's like he's running for office
@@Erimgard13 Nah, just running from Truth.
Lightning McQueen: setting world record speeds for getting the fuck away from a point of discussion
@@SorenPenrose And all the Hovinds say he's pretty fly for an old guy.
That's because he's a Creationist. Put him in a church, and his long-winded "this is why I'm smart" speech constitutes evidence to his flock. That obviously doesn't hold water against a real scientist, so he's floundering and cannot comprehend that he has to actually prove his claims.
The part where McQueen claims that a whole methodology is biased because one scientist laughed at him one time is... Well it sums up the whole foundation of YEC logic.
Seriously, some peoples' world is so small that I can't comprehend how it even works. It's like those people they find on the street who think the US is basically the whole earth, other continents and countries are little islands and shit.
Mcqueen spared no expense to ad hominem attack KC, repeatedly referring to him as "lowercase k", calling him agnostic, and trying to belittle him, so I have no compassion for him or his pathetic attempt to pretend to understand mathematics, statistics, and particularly, nuclear physics. He is grossly under-prepared to discuss any of these topics.
@Veticialowercase 'j' jesus, in honor of the true King, King Jesus.
I've yet to encounter an evolution denier who actually understands the theory.
Literally the whole idea of there being ‘kinda’ that diversify literally is evolution just started halfway down while being incorrect with certain animals. But the idea is literally evolution. Like what???
Everyone understands the ridiculous idea of evolution. Everything came from a single cell life.
@@thescienceofscience.8556 You are literally what the commenter is talking about, that isn’t what evolution is.
@@CloudWind0643 So its not claimed life did not start off as a single cell? That is the claim. It's obviously not true.
@@thescienceofscience.8556 First result from googling the definition of biological evolution “Biological evolution is the change in inherited traits over successive generations in populations of organisms.“ That is what evolution is, what you are talking about is more closely related to Abiogenesis. The theory of evolution explains why populations of organism change and diversify, abiogenesis explains how the first living organism came to be. So no, evolution does not claim that life started off as a single cell, abiogenesis does. And it is far from being “obviously not true” origin of life research has bore many fruits over the decades of it being studied that is providing evidence for all of life starting from very basic proto cells. Edit: also to clarify, abiogenesis doesnt claim that all of life literally came from ONE cell, there were literal billions of cells.
"You're gonna want to have the aspirin ready for this one."
Alcohol. I've got alcohol.
Or weed
And extra thick oven mitts... 🤦
And now that I've watched it to the end, I do indeed need some aspirin to counter the alcohol. Or possibly more alcohol to deaden the effects of all the alcohol.
"I guess I picked the wrong week to quit amphetamines." - Steve McCroskey, Airplane (1980 movie)
@@borttorbbq2556
Leave out the "OR"; it calls for the trinity of Paracetamol, Piña colada and puffing pipe!
As a working engineer, I experienced second hand embarrassment from David's response to the data bias evidence.
"There is data bias."
"Here is data showing there isn't data bias."
"Yea but this guy said something bad about my ingroup 20 years ago so he's biased."
Graph still shows no bias.
"I choose to disagree with the data."
“There is a cult of ignorance… and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
- Isaac Asimov 1980
Being so accustomed to holding a belief in God with no evidence, seems to incline some folks to believe in (supposedly) scientific claims with no evidence.
I found it hilarious how David accused others of bias, when he has not simply a bias, but a refusal to even consider the evidence.
I saw the debate from a link on KC's channel and the one thing I took away from it was how much McQueen sounded like my grandmother's even more elderly neighbour telling me about his war escapades. His rebuttals meandered around, were entirely anecdotal and more often than not missed the point.
Jacob… I realize we disagree philosophically but do you really think there is no data bias in the history of radiometric dating going back to World War II??
Also if you listen carefully to what I said in the debate I focused on labs that do uranium lead potassium argon for the purpose of the debate I had no interest in labs that date carbon-14
@@grandpageologist You're moving the goal posts. My comment was related to the fact that the response to data was "I disagree", not "I disagree because reasons". Also declaring a source to be biased because they said something you didn't like, not because data.
Did McQueen essentially accuse KC of blasphemy while deriding him for having the audacity to use a capital letter?
Yep. Only Allah can call himself capital K King Crocoduck.
I wasn't sure what to make of that running gimmick.
Perhaps another distraction technique.
Perhaps we should chide McQueen for having the audacity to retain the name of a famous biblical hero.
mcqueen was very very silly in this whole thing
I never heard a mention of the FSMonster, so all is well.
Ramen+ women.
And he has the audacity to use a capital Q in the Queen part of his name!
Love that McQueens first rebuttal didn't even address anything Crocoduck said and was just preaching.
Something about that "with a lower-case k?" really made me laugh. It just kinda showed that KC had no concern for McQueen's pathetic attempts to patronize him and put him down.
One could argue that McQueen should spell his name "Mcqueen", because there is only one Queen, manifesting in 4 persons: Freddy, Brian, John and Roger. Amen.
KC pulling that statistical bias analysis out of his back pocket was true perfection.
mi estas la hundo
Big thanks to McQueen for a very interesting look into the failing mind of a conspiracy theorist, his barely coherent ramblings are indistinguishable from those of a flat earther.
I couldn't get over how rude McQueen was to KC. He clearly wasn't even listening to KC's statements, and his replies were essentially canned responses to various trigger words.
I'm in McQueen's age bracket, but I would never treat someone I agreed to debate so discourteously.
When you losing, it tends to produce anger. Also, you may notice that angry shouting preachers are pretty common . If you shout it rudely enough, it drowns out the doubt?
@@bloodgrss While there are undoubtedly VERY angry shouty preachers (Steven Anderson, Greg Locke), most of the shoutyness is a conseuqence of them being trained in their churches (baptist derived mostly) to equate "confident" speaking with authority and saying the truth. A pastor that talks like a decent human being isn't taken serious amongst these congregations.
@@Ugly_German_Truths I think you are correct...
@@Ugly_German_Truths you mean people actually want to be preached to in a rude manner?
@@CelestialAnamoly Yes because the are "filthy, dirty sinners" from birth. They feel guilty and ashamed and feel they deserve scorn.
It's very sad.
David McQueen was 100% the Grandpa Simpson rambling story meme.
"We'd tie a Bible to our belts, as was the style at the time."
We have to stop discrimination against the rambling grandpa community!!!!
Old Man yells at rocks
@Alexander Bailey It all started back in nineteen dickety-two, when Bishop Usher challenged Charles Darwin to race around the geologic column. Now this was before I went to study geology at the University of Bumblefuck under professor Roosevelt. Bumblefuck is what we called Kentucky at the time because our mascot had been stolen by the University of Tennessee, which we used to call South Kentucky at the time. Anyway where were we? Oh yeah the geologic column...
@@k.c.r.5974 The discrimination against rambling grandpa community would stop if grandpa's stopped rambling. From the rambling Great Aunts community.
McQueen cannot grasp the true form of KC's attack! Seriously I think this is the closest I've seen to someone getting literally destroyed by facts and logic on camera.
I appreciate the Earthbound reference. Only Paula's constant prayer could defeat David McQueen's seemingly infinite stubbornness. Sadly, she's stuck in one of the greatest video games of all time.
Peace.
It hurts (to watch this debate) Ness
@@IIllytch321nonadinfinitum wow...im just basking in the memories now
@@skandragon586
I'm with you. Chrono Trigger is good, too, heh. May we all rekindle a healthy dose of nostalgia when we feel the desire.
P.S.
If you happen to like anything from Jay-Z, someone (2 Mello) mashed up Chrono Trigger's soundtrack with some of his songs in an album entitled "Chrono Jigga". Maybe you'd find some of it enjoyable. My favorite is "Say Hello to the Black Omen".
Then you should watch Professor Dave vs David Weiss (a classic).
“Silly” was inaccurate. Slanderous or misleading would have been better. The idea that McQueen’s criticisms imply that actual, functioning geologists don’t know to be sure they know initial conditions, leaching and deposition, or decay rates.
Honestly it’s so wild to me how disrespectful the creationists can be in debates
I honestly wasn't expecting to hear that much disrespect from someone who at least pretends to be a scientist. Especially when KC really held back on the snark.
The arrogance of -knowing- believing that the all-powerful creator of the universe has your back, I guess...
Creationist lol
Exactly: it’s never a debate with creationist, it’s always deflecting the tricky subjects that expose their scam.
It's very often purposeful to elicit an emotional response. It's an effort to undermine arguments through either trying to portray the opponent as an emotional anti-theist, or to try to detail the conversation from points being made.
I like all these David's pointless passive-aggressive jabs at KC for being an atheist (lower case "k", celebrating christmas, questioning his atheism)
It feels like this is the first time he talks to an atheist.
right? I was going to comment on that- it's very frustrating how a lot of christians like this seem incapable of interacting with someone they know is atheist without feeling obligated to belittle them. It's so childish
There WAS once a War on Christmas. It was waged by Puritans and Presbyterians who rightly realized that the December 25th date and many of the customs and trappings of the holiday had pagan origins. Christopaganism won and the holiday remains.
@@johnrichardson7629 common Puritan L
An observation from a fellow grad student, but one in science education research: I find McQueen's consistent use of personal anecdotes very interesting because it could be evidence that he has an epistemology based on personal experience, not consistency or consensus. An epistemology is what someone believes about knowledge: what are good sources of information, who do you trust for information, how do you know something is true, etc. I think he may come back to personal stories over and over again because to him, that's the main way to know things. It doesn't matter if KC has data plots and citations and appeals to scientific consensus, because he has experienced something different and that is the primary form of knowledge to him.
And almost all "flat earthers" place a huge emphasis on personal observation over using evidence from any institution or reputable person. The most common repeated phrase ive noticed personally among people like this is "I've done this research for 20/30/40 + years" as a sort of "gotcha". Not only are their entire realities based on mistrust and only "believing what they can see" but also if they admit they are wrong they admit they wasted a huge portion of their lives.
I've only ever had one man admit he was wrong and I've been riding that high ever since. Unfortunately, he became incredibly depressed and a part of me feels guilty. 'Ignorance is bliss' i guess.
The discrepancy between McQueens condescending attitude and his incompentence on all sorts of things (and even when it comes to geology) was striking and embarrassing. To think that in the coming months he will be able to turn physics on its head and solve both the heat problem and the radiation problem is not merely overestimation of his own abilities. It is delusional on a pathological level.
To call McQueen an old fool is a euphemism.
Giving him leeway for "grandpa jokes" is heartwarming, this is why I keep coming back to your channel, GG: charitable responses.
IM A GRANDPA. HIS GRANDPA JOKES ARE NOT FUNNY.
😊😅😮😢😂😢😅😊
(too subtle?)
"Any researcher who laughs at young earth creationism is biased."
What if the honest research makes it look laughable?
"He doesn't know if God could be hiding behind Jupiter where we can't see without using robots, yet he goes ahead and says there is no god like he knows for sure as a some kind of man of faith" A college degree from a bible college is just not an impressive education to put it as mild as I can.
Well at least it is a step up from getting a degree from Patriot University.
If we could teleport to the back of Jupiter right now, and the back of every celestial object simultaneously, and go “look, there’s no god here,” McQueen would just say “well obviously God doesn’t have a physical body! You have to have FAITH” etc.
It’s a very disingenuous argument.
@@vestafreyja Or Prager "University"
I usually hate watching debates. But your breakdown makes this one watchable.
There are many worse "debates" by creationists/YECs/flat earthers/conservatives which make this debate look like high society. For example the one between Professor Dave and Jesse Peterson or Professor Dave and David Weiss or any "debate" with Kent Hovind and someone who knew what Kent was about at the time (like Aron Ra).
King Croc is honestly one of the most articulate geniuses I have ever heard in this field. He is not working by emotional or spiritual means but by thousands of hours of work and applications. The fact that he handles the "architecture" of the debate as well, is whipped cream on my Ben & Jerry fudge brownie pint. I don't know the guy but I do appreciate great research and application when I see it and if I can understand the crux of his teaching then anyone can. Aloha.
Uggh- watched this debate a few weeks ago and to call it painful is a criminal understatement.
All I learned from McQueen was all the people worked with/read a book by/ had a dream about.
It works for the intended audience: brainless church-goers who have no idea what intellectual _anything_ looks like and who can easily be fooled into thinking "debates" like it are high-IQ research.
And who will then be encouraged to shell out their hard-earned cash for VHS tapes of the debate sold with the actual intelligent bits crudely cut out, because of course none of the intended audience will trust anything so _satanic_ as a DVD player. Comes with a free Chick tract and a ticket for the gun raffle! which, Hallelujahglorytogawd the pastor's friend is gonna win the raffle isn't that just amazing?
I learned his wife has red hair
I learned that he doesn't agree with the facts - that makes him untrustworthy and as a human and it automatically makes him more harmful than beneficial to people he has an effect on directly and indirectly, i.e. every person alive now or in the future.
You cannot ever trust him to try and use or find data to inform him in an attempt to make the best possible decision. Instead he would make a decision on gut feelings and ignore and deny data that proves him wrong. That unnecessarily increases harm to everyone by the harmful example he sets example and by his decisions. He could just use the data available to him to change his decision to have a greater chance of increasing well being and he chooses not to.
He is free to choose to turn his back on humanity and I am free to suspend my trust in him as a human and a part of society. I could never respect anything he says or does until he follows the evidence to try and make informed decisions instead of straight up denying it.
That includes falling to the ground and needing my help. I would purposefully leave him there to discourage denial of reality and to sarcastically encourage him to disagree with the reality he is in so he can try and force reality to accommodate him in his wishes because I will not.
I'm not an academic by any means and know only the basics of statistics, so it's sad that I followed KC's funnel plot just fine and shook my head at McQueen's "explain it to me like I'm 5" and childish, anecdotal routines. Actually KC's whole presentation was quite straightforward and understandable. Great job!
I actually have no problem with the explain it to me like I'm 5 thing that David did here. I think it's important to admit when you don't understand something, and this is the correct way to approach something that's outside of your area of study. HOWEVER what he did after that was just baffling. The fact that he completely disregards what KC was able to show (which was absolutely brilliant btw) was infuriating. You can't just say that you don't agree with something like that lol. And that's especially true when you are trying to make the case that David was trying to make and claiming that you are trying to approach things from a scientific angle. The whole thing was embarrassing for David. Kudos to KC. This was excellent.
I have to say...I am somewhat sorry for McQueen.
I imagine he pumped his entire life into this idea. I understood he did some kind of degree and worked for quite a while in a sector, but he always had to selectively see the world. Whenever reality came knocking, he had to look away. When you do this for a long long time, it begins to show.
Another thing that is quite obvious is, that he puts A LOT of value on what he does, what he achieved and what he represents. He leads up with this serveral times. He is also used to talk down to everybody and teadching / preaching. Whatever communication takes place, it is somewhat vertical. Title means more than facts, status is most important.
So when someone says something that contradicts what he says, it is an attack(!!). He actually calls King "opponent", which is, if you think about it, a little over the top.
It also explains why extremely religious people, like young earth creationists, see science like radiometric dating as an opponent. They feel it questions their belief. So if they crush their enemy, they can finally be free of those hurtful words that they get to hear all the time. And I believe that they hurt in a weird way.
My assuption is, that the pain won't even go away when nobody is talking to them, as they constantly have to "fix" reality in their mind. Maybe this is the reason why an external, crushable enemy is required. Not sure about that one.
Fact is: They almost always see an attack, when there is no attack there, just facts. Because it cannot be what cannot be. So they must be mean or something. But whenever they get forced to stay on the subject and to REALLY look at what they just said, they shy away..because if they ever stop to REALLY think about that, they would see the truth...and that is to be averted with all possible means. In my experience you don't just get this with very relivious people. It is, sadly, pretty common. Facts do not help. The conversation is in emotion land, long before the part with the facts has realized this. Been there...burnt myself there.
EDIT: you phrased it way better than me..that's what I get for commenting before watching the whole video... :D
Or, alternatively, he stopped actually believing some time ago and by now it's just a job to him. He isn't allowed to say some stuff, has to say other stuff, but that's fairly standard and it's a good reliable income as long as there are religious fanatics. Well, it was a reliable income up to this point, he may not get that promotion after all...
McQueens response to KCs thorough statistical analysis are a piece of gold! My statistics semester would have been so much easier if I could just say ‘i disagree with the data’ and still be taken serious.
So, David is basically saying:
I am not wrong! Reality is wrong!
Well he is at the poiint where old believers double down as they start to feel their death is coming soon. They have the choice to either give up on the idea or to use lost cost thinking to double down on belief to "earn" the promised undemonstrable reward after death... Seems David's choise is obvious.
@@Ugly_German_Truths - Ditch the ageism and mind-reading; critique McQueen on the very real stuff he said.
Very enjoyable! I am a casual science fan and occasionally I am reminded of the gulf between a hobbyist and an actual trained and educated person in the sciences. This is one of those times.
This is video is very much worth the listen.
I'll put it this way if you decide to dive into it oh man it is wormhole you'll just wake up 10 years later and then realize that you really don't know anything still cuz you never learned the mathematics
I agree.
@@borttorbbq2556 - In studying architecture, I had the same problem. I understood calculus well, but just didn't get the underlying algebra. Those ancient Indian and Arabian mathematicians were waaay too smart for me.
I had no idea KC was such a good debater.
He's not particularly charismatic, but his methodical and precise approach, and his unwillingness to allow himself to be distracted more than makes up for it.
I watched this live and I was surprised to see so many people making fun of McQueen for being old, when throughout the whole debate, he acted like a child. That being said, this was a very good dissection. I was calling out a lot of things live, but you blew me way out of the water.
I wanna see you and Forrest on that talk show again where you nerd out on science for an hour before suddenly remembering there are callers on hold. Listening to the two of you is as informative as it is entertaining and honestly I can’t get enough!!
This is probably one of your best videos, Erika. It's well-edited and extremely easy to consume without getting too tedious, add onto that the fact that KC is an incredibly straightforward debater with no small amount of finesse in these topics, and your commentary was both funny and engaging. Good performance from you and from KC. David tried and I can appreciate that but I don't think the facts are on his side, and it showed... badly.
This was probably a pain to edit, as you said, so again, thank you for taking the time to do so. It's legitimately one of your best videos and I'm sure I'll listen to it many more times to come.
Yeah, it's really not painful watching this loon's garbage mind unravel, it's a joy for me! This is exactly the kind of thing I've been wanting to see more of, for about half a century now.
I'd love to see some undercover footage of just how weird working in one of these labs with all these theists around actually is, all their little broken thoughts and venting about nonsense and random exuberant exclamations that exhort the glory of God's mysteries at being so illogical and TRICKY to understand. My girlfriend worked in one for a while and the stories routinely spun my head looking for some way to exorcise the stupidity of the cognitive dissonance.
I will duel you for her affections!...and I agree with you.
Every time KC makes a point, McQueen either has to say he "disagrees" and can't elaborate because there's nothing to elaborate on that wouldn't make him seem even more wrong, or he has to tell some story about his coworker in 1995 seeing someone laughing at a creationist and circle back to some different point
Thanks for the blog shoutout
A few corrections:
Daughter elements can be introduced initially under SOME conditions (usually K/Ar dating). But systems like Ar40/Ar39 dating and isochrons correct it.
Also sometimes diagenetic alteration isn’t visible by eye . Sometimes it’s only noticeable by trace element checks. But often those are done before the radiometric dating is done. So it really didn’t matter much. Geologists check for that sort of thing.
Have you ever looked into the eye of a duck?
Give McQueen a break, there probably were like 15 radiometric dating labs in existence when he got into geology
I wouldn't call him "into geology" tbh
In McQueen's day, there were only 15 rocks.
@@midloki5017 they're joking
As a magician, we do in fact demand to be taken seriously lol.
"Only death can fix stupid"
-Ancient Hawaiian Proverb
“If you can’t beat them with brilliance, baffle their brains with BS.”
- BS artists/christian apologists/fear mongers/sociopathic trolls/brexiters/trump magats/poutine apologists all over the world
Only if the death happens before breeding takes place.
How ancient? Proof of a young or old Earth? 😅
The only reason death exists is because a 50 year old needs to make their Mercedes Benz payments.
My daughter says I should try the carbon dating website. She thinks I'll find a match.
I don't understand that triangle in the " selective reporting " graph but I feel I have found my level with you 😉
That’s a good one
"I'm not sure if I'd call R new, but sure, go for R, it's a good one ..." That made me _wheeze_ so hard omg
I grew up in Papua New Guinea and Indonesia as a child and had many an opportunity to explore much of the Islands. It is amazing to find ancient coral reefs that are now limestone outcrops with ancient sea fossils miles high in the mountains. Mere observations of such structures so high and inland highlighted that this world is very old, much older than the 6000 yrs stated by so many charlatans.
You can't argue with creationists because miracles.
And Conspiracies...don't forget those evil scientist conspiracies.
You can't argue with creationists because lying.
atheist vs agnostic, when you know you're wrong, just try to start a definition fight. super effective.
Uh oh, I've never heard Gibbon crack her knuckles before, I'm concerned about what I have signed up for here...
I know right? I was afraid for her, loudest I've ever heard!
Pre-brachiating.😇
Oh come come......knuckle cracking...usually is accompanied by an evil grin...and thoughts about getting to the fun, DESTRUCTIVE parts
I missed that, could someone please provide a timestamp?
the patience demonstrated by KC is astounding. what a class act.
It was a struggle in popular science education. You've always been admirably respectful (as much as possible) towards even the promoters of the most absurd child-like fantasies build out of falshoods. Though many of them dont deserve that good faith treatment, but you non the less inspire your viewers with your maturity. Love the diagetic music:)
I'm so glad you did this . I watched this debate, I mean discussion too and I was so disappointed. Thanks for a professional explaining it.
I'm looking forward to this one!
Coincidentally Potholer54 is restarting his Golden Crocoduck Awards. Maybe McQueen will be a contender!
@King Crocoduck Are you going to post this debate on your channel?
Respect people, not the opinions.
Always a good baseline for civile discussion where the objective is to fall on approximation of reality
I'm sure its been said before, but it needs repeating. The best intro on UA-cam!
I never knew running commentary on a science debate could be so entertaining. 🙂
Your explanations were awesome, and I’ve learnt a lot.
Thanks.
I really appreciate the intro sequence being a minute or so in. It makes the whole video feel a bit more polished!
1:19:00 "I choose the disagree' is just a flerf's 'nuh-uh' with whistles and bells on it.
You’re probably not going to see this Erika, but this video here is one that I regularly watch and will continue to do so. Much with most of your content honestly. You’ve brought a lot to the table these past few years and you are one of a few creators who have inspired me. Inspired me to become a content creator myself and debunk pseudoscience.
KC predicting the conspiracy angle and running the tests beforehand to prove it wrong is the most gigachad "pushes up anime galsses/you activated my trap card" moment I've ever seen. What a King (capital K)
"Let me clarify..." with yet another totally different change in what I am rambling about... to avoid answering your objections. McQueen.
Wow, he actually admits that he essentially ignores hard data and just sticks to his premature conclusion. I can't help but it always reminds me of this quote from Tim Minchin's beat poem Storm: "Science adjusts its view based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved.". David is an excelent example that proves this statement.
"As a professional scientist for 30 years, I don't appreciate my ideas being called silly"
One of the most important parts about being a professional scientist is to be extremely self-critical, and to be encouraged by criticism of your ideas and your work.
No scientist is above having their work and their ideas criticised. The critical nature of science is precisely why it's been so successful.
If I propose an idea that a colleague calls 'silly', I will devote time to understanding why they've said that, and be very open to the prospect that my ideas really are silly and that I've been wrong this whole time.
I have all sorts of ideas about my own research in Astrophysics, but I'm confident that nearly all of them are silly. There are details I miss, things I forget to consider, and bits of information or consequences of Physics that I just don't know.
Collaboration and peer review is the process of being told "your ideas are silly", and changing or refining those ideas until nobody can immediately point out why they're silly.
Peer-reviewed research isn't necessarily correct, it's just research that is no longer obviously bad/wrong/silly.
David's reaction to this simple comment from KC speaks volumes about his unusual attitude and lack of experience as a scientist.
“One could call it a debate but I call it an embarrassment” 😵😵
I pursued a minor in geology in college. We used phase diagrams all the time. They were introduced to us in 100 level mineralogy and petrology. I've pulled some up and explained them to my kids when they were in elementary school. His side tangent about how hard his chemistry course was is so utterly disconnected from phase diagrams as to be, dare I say it, silly. Silly is actually one of the kinder words I have for it. Intentionally deceptive is probably more accurate.
Uh oh. You hurt his feelings. How dare you. (Sarcasm)
Also, why does a more difficult course have more credibility? The easier, the more compelling argument, in my mind.
Esperanto pfp W
Yeah "I had immense trouble understanding the info I'm trying to communicate" isn't the flex he thinks it is lol
Ah yes, fond memories of "working the banana" back in intro to petrology.
I love your intro and I will not stop commenting about it
Your suffering was not in vain. Interesting video to have on in the background as I'm making digital comics.
"I will have looked into those methods" - *_YOU WERE A F♡
So sad adults read a story about creation and consume it as fact. To be truthful when your paid to lie must be a dilemma.
I mean to be generous to some think Eric hovind with kunt as his father he never had a chance. but then now he has no excuse just like his father he's payed to lie
It is a common trap to think that we have to accept Genesis as a literal event in order for the whole Bible to be correct but that isn't true at all. A lot of people think that if the earth ain't 6k+ years old, the Bible can't be true but that's a false assumption. This mistake causes a lot of people to leave the faith as a result. This is why we should read for ourselves though I know our attention spans aren't the best and we easily feel threatened by new information when that threatened feeling by itself due to that is the result of being out of line with who God really is. The whole Bible focuses on a main theme and that theme is not dependent on a young earth or a merely literal interpretation. Sections of the Bible contain an intro that usually states the purpose of that book/text, mostly I'm referring to the letters of the NT but it isn't purely limited to that but holds the easiest demo for my example here. It is super important to read things completely to the end because the Bible sums up the main meaning in the end. It's one thing to come to a correct interpretation but is another to actually put it to use in real time but better yet is to see the bigger picture that is being demonstrated. The Bible should not be treated like a theological rule book as it never really was or the parables (like a fable but with people) and symbolism would be rather out of place and confusing/absurd if we just need to do certain things assuming a works based salvation that the Bible heavily warns against consistently.
I just really hope one day we realize that debating rarely does anyone any good and no one really listens because we are preoccupied with sounding right or having the correct answers. Both sides are hostile to each other and breeds rivalry, the opposite of what God is saying is the most important thing to take away.
Having knowledge is good but without love, we have nothing. Charity is the best gift man can offer to another.
McQueen continually feeling assaulted while his opponent casually lists errors in their thought fills me with such joy. Can he really not answer back?
I’m also shocked to see how McQueen was still given a platform after he literally acknowledged bias as the root/premise to his denial of evidence. How could you expect to have a reasonable conversation with someone if they refuse any data proving them wrong?
Okay, seeing McQueen’s continued insults directed towards KC makes me upset. Not because the words were insulting but to the conversation. It really was just him lashing out with frustration.
On tonight’s debate we have King Crocoduck Vs. King Crock Of Shit.
I'm confused every time one of these YEC dudes blames Darwin for eugenics being a thing. Do Christians REALY want to play the "Whose world view caused the most damage" game?
Brilliant video. Thoroughly enjoyed from the opening sequence until the end. Had to replay that, ‘Hall of the Mountain King’ part several times I was laughing so hard, just perfectly timed. Bravo!
I love starting a video on your channel and letting auto-play take the wheel. This channel is amazing. Keep up the great work erika
Drat! I do the trivia game with fellow blind people and it seems to always coincide with your premiers. I’ll be watching it right now. Thank you very much you’re awesome.
This video is a very effective breakdown of this debate and I just want to say how much I love and appreciate these debate breakdowns because I think they're a great platform for both entertainment and also learning about these concepts being argued about, while simultaneously calling out misconceptions.
On an unrelated note, and I mean this in the best way possible, KC's voice reminds me of Herbert West from Reanimator and the mental image of Herbert West, resident god-complex having mad scientist, debunking young earth creationism is highly amusing.
Came in a few minutes late but still had to rewind and play the intro- Just love the conspiracy angle-my answer is the same one I use with the moon landing conspiracy there are x number people involved & they ALL kept the secret, people have a really had time keeping secrets, at some point the truth would leak out😂😂😂 Watching this is sooooooooooo painful. Good on Gutsick for bringing this to us, yay I guess?
It is not just the people directly involved in the moon landing. The US was in direct competition with Russia who was in terms of firsts into space far ahead of the US, like launching first satellite, first life form in geo orbit, first person i geo orbit, etc. The US is also in competition with China in general. Do these people truly believe that China and Russia would not have found out if the US would have faked the moon landing? What an asinine idea that is actually.
Just a general shout out. Has anyone on here, ever come across a young Earther that is NOT extremely religious and therefore totally biased? Just wondering?
I’m guessing that it just doesn’t happen but I suppose it could, possibly happen.
Not really, but I would wager that there are a few out there. How many there are depends on how you define “religious” and whether or not you’re willing to include people with mental illness/disorders. For example, someone could feasibly be an atheist but believe in simulation theory. That would mean the earth doesn’t technically exist in the physical sense and is only as old as the simulation. However, since their beliefs are still based on feelings and a higher power (creator of the simulation) rather than anything provable, I would still call that an appeal to magic and categorize it under a religious belief. Also, far off the deep end conspiracy theorists can have some pretty bizarre (often contradictory) theories. Some believe that ancient cultures were more advanced and knowledgeable than modern cultures and may subscribe to young earth just because some ancient culture thought the earth was young. I don’t know if you could call that “religious,” but they would still be taking claims at face value without evidence. Never underestimate the power of cognitive dissonance and mental illness.
@@Tomoose736
“never underestimate the power of cognitive dissonance and mental illness.” Very true 👍
I'm sure they exist, but there's just not many non-religious reasons to reject the science in this context. It's not like climate science where people don't want to change their lives, don't want to admit that change could be coming, or more to the point don't want to pay to fix it. With a young versus old earth there's simply no secular reason to deny it, nothing follows that makes anyone other than the religious uncomfortable.
All I really care to note with regards to Donny D's 'experts' is that time he had Nephilim Free on and he interpreted a phylogenetic tree so wrong I swear I immediately had eighteen consecutive strokes.
For extra context I learned how to read and interpret them in my first year of uni and I've made dozens of them as part of my honours program. The mistakes Nephi made were literally _the first thing_ I learned about because the concepts involved are that mind-numbingly fundamental. And he's their _expert._
Whenever I see Neph's name mentioned my mind flashes that famous "Gravity" yell by Desertphile.
I don't know what kind of insane asylum you have escaped from if you are the type of person who think Nephilim Free can be considered an "expert" on anything, but you really should go back there for the sake of humanity.
Whenever I see Nephi trotted out as an "expert", I think of the time he was listing Great apes, he couldn't remember the last one, and just threw in "australopithecus". That clip and Erika's reaction makes me laugh so hard it hurts. 😆 🤣 😂
Great vid, thankyou Erika! Massive fan of KC so I brought myself to catch live on that channel. Very appreciative that you could bring us this complete destruction of McQueen, with the added benefit of your insight.
I had just watched this debate when you posted this. When you described the discussion, I was thinking, wow this sounds like, oh my gosh, this has to be. Wow! Mind blown. Hilarious. david is a mess
Does this qualify as “Elder Abuse”? McQueen has fallen and he can’t get up.
Not sure how old McQueen is, but it is fair to note that dating back to the Gentry days of late 1960s means he's had over a half century of making no progress whatsoever convincing anyone outside the YEC box that they've got it right.
Kudos to those with the patience to endure this slow motion train wreck. Jeepers, it was brutal.
There's only one Pizza Hut in my county. The Order of the Pepperoni are just trying to control the paradigm!!!!
First video of yours I have watched and you certainly made what can be quite a dry debate far more entertaining. New sub now keep up the good work.
Very well done Crocoduck, and well done Gibbon. One for handling the discussion admirably and the other for a good autopsy. Thank you both.
Thank you for this, I can't sit through these sometimes and the added commentary helps me turn my brain off a little so I can listen while working
McQueen: "Have you considered... conspiracy?"
KC: "Yes."
McQueen: :o
You are continuing to be awesome and amazing, and the best gibbon ever.
Erika's channel is like listening to The Swans ... terrifying, deeply frightening, awesome, and then, finally, delightful.
That's called foreshadowing.
Thank you for taking the time to break this 'debate' down, and for the work you put into researching both the misrepresentations and accurate science that was presented in the original video.
I love that Erika, as well as KC, both make a point to explain that the YEC position isn't tenable, at all, by way of being in demonstrable opposition to accepted and understood knowledge of reality that YEC grifters themselves accept and understand.
When debunking YEC grifters misrepresention of reality and scientific findings, whenever possible it should be pointed out the ridiculous level of conspiracy their claims demand.
Essentially for YEC to be correct:
There must be a massive, world-wide conspiracy that has been in progress for several thousand years. Every area of scientific understanding, every method of measurement developed beyond a ruler, every single previous gap in human knowledge that is now considered closed, all lies! Lies built upon foundations of lies, perpetuated by almost everyone who has ever existed. Humanity has and continues to conspire in this way to try to discredit the stories in Genesis. -Why? Because everyone who doesn't accept that Genesis (specifically the KJV) is 100% accurate and factually correct, (including the bits that are fatally contradictory) is a Christian persecuting, immoral, God-hating sinner.
They literally have to deny the reality of everything; it's the same for flat earth (flerf) conspiracies. Many YEC snark about flerfers and their nonsense, in the same way many flerfers snark about the flat earth + lizard people conspiracies. It's not the solid platform of reason they think it is. It's just one absurd conspiracy less than the one they're hubristically mocking.
"Oooook!" Sound of large Simian face palm echoes around the library.
I hate these 'debates'. There's nothing to debate!
Old doesn't mean harmless grandad either. The man is a practiced liar, age is irrelevant.
I subbed for the intro “gentle and of course very modern apes” lol I love it
"I'm surprised you'd even acknowledge Christmas as an atheist."
Why would there be any difficulty in acknowledging a public holiday that takes place in a huge portion of the world?
It's not even a question of whether Jesus was real or the Bible is true. Christmas is a thing that happens now, regardless of what you think of the veracity of the Bible.
He believes there is a war on Christmas
Love your channel! Also, your intro song always makes me think of a Beatles song that never was - it sounds like “For the Benefit of Mr. Kite” and playful mid 60s Beatles! Yay
Excellent video. I enjoyed each minute of it. You are an extremely talented person. Thank you so much for your time and effort.
I am so sick of these supposed experts who just stand up in public and lie, whether it be flat earthers, young earth creationists, trumpists, or whatever.
Decent people need to call them out directly. Sure, refute their "content", but make it clear that they are full of malice, and civilized people reject their paradigm.