Reacting to Muslim Creationists (Subboor Ahmad and Muslim Lantern Debunked)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 кві 2024
- I've debunked so many Christian creationists, but what about Muslim creationists? What do they have to say, and is it any different? People seemed to enjoy my previous reaction video, so let's try another to tackle this important question! Beware, the sheer amount of facepalming in this video may give you second-hand brain damage.
Check out TeachTap: teachtap.onelink.me/AGu6/Prof...
Watch my other debunks/debates/discussions: bit.ly/ProfDaveDebunk
EMAIL► ProfessorDaveExplains@gmail.com
PATREON► / professordaveexplains
Check out "Is This Wi-Fi Organic?", my book on disarming pseudoscience!
Amazon: amzn.to/2HtNpVH
Bookshop: bit.ly/39cKADM
Barnes and Noble: bit.ly/3pUjmrn
Book Depository: bit.ly/3aOVDlT
Drinking alcohol before debunking muslim creationists is a power move.
That or self medicating for the coming pain.. and the stupid from the muslim video is painful
Epic power move though he did look a little tipsy at the end
islamophobic lmao
Laphroaig scotch, no less.
Next time he'll add a bacon sandwich
These guys do the same thing that every apologist does - they conflate colloquial terms with scientific ones in order to dismiss the scientific theory. It's the single most infuriating thing that creationists do.
Extremely
Creationists love doing this. I remember when Kent Hovid fans used to say Stellar formation and Biological Diversification were the same because both use the term evolution as if everything that uses that term is the same theory.
@@DavisJ-ln6fw they *still* do this, not just kent hovind but his adopted abusive gremlin matt powell does it too.
I agree. It's especially infuriating because their whole ideology is full of vague metaphors. They sit and study for hours just trying to clear word definitions in scripture, but when it comes to science, they take whatever they think is the definition of a word and run with it.
The only thing more infuriating is their moronic snickering and giggling as they prove their level of utter ignorance
Fascinated by how much time they spent calling out Cognitive Bias.
"Researchers WANT to believe this, therefore everything proves it"
Do I even need to explain what they're doing themselves...
basically, replace _researchers_ with [insert apologist religion] 🤣
"Researchers WANT to believe this! That's why every time they learn more they change their story! Because they're so devoted to believing that story despite all the evidence that they keep accounting for!"
He really gave the game away when he compared it to Pokemon. "See these two equally fake things? See how they behave in exactly opposite ways?" Pokemon doesn't need to change because it's a story they're sticking to regardless of their lack of existence in reality. So the evolutionary theory keeps shifting slightly for....what reason again?
I swear, I keep hearing people mock science for changing and then say "but the Bible never changes" as if that's a victory, and it hurts me that they don't see it. If you started out horribly incorrect, and then didn't change, you STAYED horribly incorrect!
And something tells me the Quran hasn't changed all that much over time either.
The smoke alarm in their room is conveying more accurate information than the apologist is
That's just Allah telling them to shut the fuck up because they are embarrassing even him.
The smugness in their tone while they know absolutely nothing about anything they're talking about hurts to listen to.
Ok? Ok? Ok? Ok? Yeah?
@@dieudebois296 I don't wanna go into too much detail. I don't want to pronounce that.
Yeah this is it for me as well, it's either this or the dishonesty that makes it equally grating.
Dunning Kruger effect in full display.
Hey you just described majority of muslims with that statement
Mr. Farina! DRINK, DRINK, DRINK! (Imagine it with Tour's voice in your head)
The moment I see “Mr. Farina!!!”
MR FARINA, DRAW CHEMICALS MAKING UP THAT SCOTCH ON A CHALKBOARD OR ITS NOT REAL !!!
Hahaha best comment
Lmaooo
@@floodsye "Phospholipids! clueless!"
I love how you start sounding completely wasted at about the middle point, but still way more coherent than them.
It’s like instinct for his to debunk creationism at all cause
I do like his typical debunks since he's able to completely decimate whoever he's responding to in those, he would actually have time to look through those studies and to in great detail show how they don't agree with them and that they can't read
@@random6033 fair, but it’s also the creationist responsibility to reed the articles and say how it’s supporting creationism
educated vs uneducated differential
5 minutes in - "I'll make it simple for you".
Meaning "I'll omit everything that might not align perfectly with the message I want you to believe is the perfect truth".
And the bright smile that he has in his voice shows the joy he has because he knows he will get the audience into believing whatever he says.
I'm one of those 5 that have been begging for this debunk. Thank you for destroying these creationists, Dave. Much love from Iceland! 🥳
Unrelated, but are there a lot of Muslims in Iceland?
From what I've read they're secular / Christian, but religion isn't a dominant force. @@jcnot9712
@@jcnot9712 Around 1500 (0.4%)
Everyone in Iceland loves Dave.
@@jcnot9712 not really but creationism is very popular here and they're outsourced from places like the middle east too
That guy says “okay” every three words and yet at no point did he say anything that could remotely be described as being “okay”
Right?
And than giggles like a child when nothing he said at any point was remotely humorous
Ya heard
Right? OK. Hahaha! Moving on.
Yeah, that bothers me too.
But not just that 😅
As a Muslim, THANK YOU.
I was so embarrassed watching this guy completely fumble and giggle his way through his "arguments" and just generally confuse terms together and not understand anything he's talking about.
I'm so grateful that you had the courtesy to say something nice about our tradition, and I just wanna say that your videos are so informative and helpful for me as someone who is actually trying to learn.
As a Muslim, you must be in 2 minds.
What a Wholesome and heartwarming comment😊
As a muslim you should be ashamed
@@cameronhesketh6814 why do you think that? I can confirm that I'm perfectly happy and confident in my choices and I don't think there are any discrepancies between my faith and my pursuit in academia. Muslims have contributed greatly in various academic fields and fostered scientific research and philosophy for centuries. Unfortunately, however, uneducated, uncultured individuals tend to make the loudest noise. But I know you wouldn't fall for that, would you?
@@emoritzi Thank you. Kind words like these are very sweet and encouraging. Trust me, we're humble and hardworking people. This little obnoxious goblin giggler doesn't represent any but himself. I appreciate all this content that is being put out by the awesome science community, and will do my best to pass it onwards.
They say, "Ignorance is bliss."
The creationist has a goofy smile through the entire video. Professor Dave is increasingly frustrated.
I guess They were right.
i literally thought of *that* phrase when i started watching this video. 😹
i thought, "ignorance is bliss? i will make sure to prove it wrong if i ever meet this dude in person" (by debating professionally, of course).
I wish I was ignorant of apologists.
@@deadytm you can join his live stream q&a on the weekends for questions
@@deadytm
you can join his live stream on Muslim lantern youtube channel
Professor dave is not even a professor
he's a high school teacher
that's how dumb you guys are for learning from a scammer Lol
Debunking what Darwin said while ignoring all research since then is like saying the first car built is the 1910s is slower than a horse, therefore all modern cars are slower than a horse
Cars are a religion you just want to worship.
It's just cherry picking and misrepresenting statements.
The whole "race" thing in Darwin's time just means different characteristics withing the same group. Darwin talks about race in relation to lettuce.
Darwin is relatively easy to read, but the later research is hard.
I just watched the Paulogia video about Creationist movie where they just flat out lie and when asked "can't quite recall" where they heard it...
Their ignorance of transitional species is equally laughable. If they stopped to think about it, they'd realise that transition is a constant process that applies to every organism, both past and present.
The dictates of their magic book precludes them doing that, unfortunately. Islam is lame.
@@skateboardingjesus4006 Religions that attempt to discredit truth through outright lies are lame. Which is many of them and their followers
@@skateboardingjesus4006 big words for someone with 0 proof; you can't explain something from nothing, you can't explain life, you can't explain consciousness, you can't explain language, you can't even begin to try, all you have is bravado
Hello, Prof. Dave, I just wanted to say that your inorganic chem videos have greatly helped me prepare for my competitive exams. Much love from India ❤
word!
Nice one! Bloody good luck with them! 👍☮️😀
Jee aspirant?
Thought you said "ignorant chem videos" 😂
@@richardfulop9044 i could never 💀
These guys tried pulling the "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" while completely forgetting this quote debunks their whole religion.
I had already sent an email to Forrest Valkai about this video so that he could debunk it. Finally it will no longer be necessary you did an excellent job professor Dave
Oh man, Forrest could probably go on about this video for 6+ hours
Dude, these guys are imagining that A SINGLE GIRAFFE evolved-that one giraffe grew a longer neck. That’s what they’re imagining.
A good tip for creationists, or for any conspiratorial thinking: if they express incredulity at something and you're baffled by it, they're probably imagining the dumbest possible way to interpret it.
they think lamarkian evolution and the actual theory are the same thing. Creationists never argue the real point.
Yup. Similarly, I think that creationists seek to discredit Darwin and pounce upon any errors in his seminal works not just because it’s an easier target but because they believe science works the same way as religion: I.e. foundational texts are gospel, and proving them erroneous makes any later research incorrect by default. By extension, any changes or disagreements within the scientific community discredits all scientific claims because this is how it works in faith. A religious passage cannot be later determined incorrect without undermining the entire belief system.
Exactly. It's almost like imagining that the ubiquitous use of candles switched to LED lighting overnight.
@@nagranoth_even lamarck said this happened over a few generations... this is adaptation
The bit about burden shifting at the start reminds me why apologists are so fond of oral debates: It’s a way of judoflipping the sophistication of the model and the abundance of evidence from asset to liability. In essence: “I missed a year of high school; teach it to me now. And calculus too while you’re at it.” It’s not a reasonable place to begin a conversation in realtime.
well said
Except this pair seem to have missed more than just a year of high school.
It's like walking up stairs essentially. You can learn bit by bit, step by step. Or you can do what creationists want you to do, and make great leaps to the top. Why would I explain atp synthesis when you don't understand punette squares?
Well said. Oftentimes when someone ignorant tries to debate, the knowledgeable side often gets the feeling that to even begin to debunk their claims would require an overwhelmingly deep dive to the very basics. It's hard to even articulate "where should I even begin", because of the awareness of the amount of basic knowledge required to make the ignorant side understand why they're wrong.
@@Minisynapse "Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience" lmfao
These two bros need to remember the term "willful ignorance".
It's basically when you actually don't want to know or learn something.
Especially if it conflicts with your worldview.
The cognitive dissonance is strong in them 😅
Muslim apologetics today are about 40 years behind Christian apologetics.
Christian apologetics today are at least 20 years behind the high school science textbooks.
High school science textbooks tend to be at least five to 10 years behind anything becoming a consensus in the particular field of science.
So, we're looking at arguments that are around 70 years out of date.
No wonder this video is 3+ hours.
Good luck 😅
Aw come on... 70 years? That implies they were good arguments at one point(they aren't)
That, and just plain Brandolini's Law.
Responding to Muslim creationism/science denial is sorely needed, thank you.
The funniest example I saw was when Hamza Tzortis, a Muslim apologist said that embryology worked in X order. He didn't know the person he was talking to was an embryologist, who corrected him and said it worked in Y order. Hamza then, I shit you not, said, "well the word that's used in the Qur'an for describing the process could actually mean that too! So I'm still right!!" It's crazy.
Hamza logic is wild man…
Interpretation is one of religion's super powers.
Remind Hamza Tzortis that those evil heathen Greek understood embryology a few thousand years before his so called divinely inspire fanfic was written
@@solacedagony1234more like their only power
I remember that, it was with PZ Myers I believe. Just goes to show it's impossible to reason with someone who's made up their mind or whose livelihood depends on said beliefs.
So glad you didn't do the "Take a shot every time they strawman/misrepresent, lie, say something stupid/wrong" thing... you'd be dead before the first 5 minute.
*5 seconds
Right, alcohol poisoning would've been inevitable.
he would not be awake to present if he did that, and this is assuming he had like Irish level of tolerance
They think giraffes are Pokémon lol😂
Yeah! And you don’t?😂 creationist are off their rocker
@@fnaffan6999 No they are nothing like Pokemon
@@DavisJ-ln6fw yeah I’m aware of that
imagine. OH MY GOSH! that girafarig species turned into a farigiraf over the span of millions of years! ThAt'S cRaZy!!!
Water isn't wet. Water makes other things wet. He falls down on his first claim of what a fact is.
There's actually an argument on that one. I personally agree with you but I've heard tons of arguments about it so he lost about that too
@mythicalducky I believe it just stands at, it depends how you define wet
When Chuck Norris jumps into a pool,
he doesn't get wet...
The water gets Chuck Norrised.
I had this exact thought immediately as well
I was thinking that 😅
Can’t tell which is worse on their end, the microphone quality or their arguments.
Now you just need to find a Jewish Creationist to debunk and you’ll have a trinity of Abrahamic Dropouts
There is a Jewish member of the DI who once called Dave Antisemetic. That one will be really fun.
I am glad Dave decreased the video's volume.
It's 2007 youtube over in the Muslim creationist sphere
As a ex religious jew i really want to see it happening....
except islam, Judaism is one of the most toxic religions to be in, i have so many mental problems because of Judaism.
Maybe David Gottlieb. Dapper Dinosaur covered him recently. Mr. Gottlieb was on par with James Tour in terms of being a shouty-angry man who didn’t bother to learn about the things he was trying to debunk.
Simplest concept of evolution: EVERY species is a transitional species.
Species is a label of convenience. But the literal minded, can’t cope.
From what did we originally transition from? And how did it get there?(personal questions)
@@user-dx1qv4yz5i Investigate "Abiogenesis". While it is not complete, it gets us most of the way there and progressing farther every day.
@@user-dx1qv4yz5i we transitioned from previous forms, and it got there through the same mechanisms as everything else: natural selection. If you're asking how it all got started its not entirely known, but we do have several potential explanations for how inorganic chemistry leads to organic chemistry and eventually self-replicating molecules.
@@user-dx1qv4yz5i google it. We are the offspring of hominids, members of the ape family of primates. We are mammals, we are related to every living thing.
We look and act like apes and our dna matches, it’s just a fact.
24:45 I believe he is referring to Lamarckian evolution, which was the idea that organisms would pass on physical changes that occurred during their lifetime; the common example being a giraffe stretching its neck to reach higher leaves, and somehow this constant physical stretching results in the offspring having longer necks.
Wasn’t that a belief that Nazis used to justify their bigotry?
He thinks it happened in a single giraffe. Thats what he said atleast. One giraffe stretches its neck and grows 6 inches
@@phobosex7504 Well, technically he didn't say HE thinks that; he was actually mocking the idea. But he was trying to act like Lamarckian evolution was some sort of mainstream idea that represents the field of evolutionary biology, even though we've known it isn't true for over a hundred years.
Damn Dave, you really sat through all of this bull and keep it more civil than I'd expect.
I've watched it in entirety and I appreciate the hard work you put into this...
8:20 - "If a Darwinist cones up to me..."
If a Darwinist comes up to you, I'd be shocked. For the most part, there aren't any Darwinists walking around today. Science has moved on from mere Darwinism. Nobody who engages seriously in that discipline would call themselves that anymore. Welcome to the 21st century, we'd love to have you, but you can't seem to get through the door.
What they don't get is, while Darwin (and the oft unmentioned Wallace) were instrumental in establishing the theory of evolution, we have since moved away from what he thought at the time.
@@berniethekiwidragon4382 It didn't have a clear explanation to trait inheritance until genetics so it's not like we moved away but rather improved its foundations.
Even then, early on there were scientists (Thanks Lysenko, who wasn't even one) who vehemently opposed genetics which made Neo-darwinism a necessary designation of synthesis of natural selection with genetics.
Drunk Dave is still reassuringly smart
He's still orders of magnitude smarter while drunk than these guys.. or likely most of us! 😁
He knows a lot about the science stufffff, Drunkard Dave Explains!
@@Psi34ax😂you made me laugh like a toddler!
I Love how dave just casually debunked everything so rapidly like he don't even need to look up the literature! Love from paksitan ❤
Admittedly, I don't spend as much time looking at Muslim apologetics as I do for Christians, but they just seem... much less sophisticated in their argumentation?
Yeh much lower levels of intelligence
Muslim apologists tend to have the religious arrogance cranked up to 11 in my experience
Either way, both groups are less than human
@@godofmath1039 ew
@@user-cz1mz3pp9n I know, right? They are indeed very sickening
Pseudoscience methodology
1. Set up strawman of science
2.. Have no testable model and claims of your own
3. Move goal posts
4. Deliberately misunderstand evidence
5. Personal incredulity
And repeat
And most importantly, project all that onto science and scientists
@@am45_001 Also "AlLaÄä"heave sound"aeäh"
@@mursuhillo242lol wut?
The sheer fact that this man can drink hard alcohol and still take down apologetics is amazing, what a legend
just goes to show, that even a man slurring his words can prove evolution!
Hard alcohol? Just scotch. What we in England call "just a drink". But more to the point a brain damaged chimpanzee could debunk muslim apologetics. Honestly, as a whole they seem so much more stupid than the christian nuts. I suspect that deep down the average christian creotard knows he is spouting shite, but needs to keep the grift gong, but the average muslim version actually believes it.
@@shreyvaradFacts
Greetings Helldiver
Yea he can handle his alcohol 😂
Thoroughly enjoying drunk Dave debunk. Maybe this should be your title for these, D3.
Them claiming echolocation in bats and whales is the same shows how clueless they are.
This is my favorite episode of Drunk History ever.
1:03:00 😂😂
As a former member of this cult I appreciate you doing this Professor Dave
i realise these lads were tossers, but i dont think using their idiocy to suggest 'islam is bad' is fair. scientology is a cult, the moonies were a cult, i dont think the main religions are. i think they are all incomprehensibly odd, but not cults.
Glad you’re doing better
I have to ask… are you the Gman who argues (argued?) for creationism in UA-cam??
@@alexanderingraham8255 na that's not me.
@@Irosicndosjnf thanks I appreciate it
The DNA insertion and deletion section blew my mind, you can really tell they took a 1 minute cursory glance at the wikipedia article and completely misunderstood what those words mean
that kent hooving impersonation was so good lmao.
I think you should take a break from debunking videos though, you seem to not be very happy while doing them. But if I am wrong and you do enjoy making these videos then you should keep making them
2:25:00 I checked the last 2 papers for funzies. The 77% one says "For about 23% of our genome, we share no IMMEDIATE genetic ancestry with our closest living relative, the chimpanzee. This encompasses genes and exons to the same extent as intergenic regions. We conclude that about 1/3 of our genes started to evolve as human-specific lineages before the differentiation of human, chimps, and gorillas took place." It does not say that our genome has a 23% difference in the genome but that those 23% started to evolve alongside chimps but before we split from them...
The last one is from "Institute for Creation Research" so it's to be disregarded.
I didn't click on the last link, but I'm sure that the 70% are from creationist Jeffrey Tomkins, who posted this result originally on Answers in Genesis. Later, people tried to reproduce his result and realized that his comparison has a lot of flaws and a buggy BLAST version. Tomkins himself even admitted this after much hesitation.
Dave. I am a molecular evolutionary biologist and phylogenetic systematist and you are spot on. They are just so ignorant. I would be happy to look into any of their specific claims if you want a more precise debunk.
@@HeathOgdenyou should man, would be interesting to hear, or see a video on. I'd watch it
1:47:50 This is what is written in the article he shows:
"The new finding does not disprove or discredit the theory of evolution, and the researchers said randomness still plays a big role in mutations. But the study does show that these genetic alterations are more complex than scientists previously believed."
Either this guy hasn't read the full article or has deliberately chosen not to show this.
Or he's stupid and doesn't understand words good.
Probably the ladder. They admitted to deliberately trying to influence people to believe in their magic sky daddy.
Watching you get drunk in real time is the best science experiment I've seen in a long time.
The fact the Muslim keeps laughing while he's talking is a psychotic display of nervousness probably due to the fact he doesn't know what he's talking about. 👌
Dave debunking liars already was gold, but drunk Dave debunking liars is diamond
Gold is rarer than diamonds
@@feniorBut not as beautiful
time will tell who"s liar
@@balkhss no, evidence will/has.
no they are ugly but make better tools and are closer to bedrock @@Solelegendary
Speaking of the Giraffe neck it was absolutely not a perfect evolution, and a good example of random beneficial mutation. If I remember correctly there is a nerve in their neck that loops down their neck and back up to their skull making a massive detour, that is not a perfect adaptation. Thats an example of a random mutation of an existing system where the neck grew longer and the other biology just adapted to it and did not redesign itself into a perfect system.
The recurrent laryngeal nerve. Worked fine in our distant fishy ancestors but once we developed necks in the Devonian and Carboniferous not so much. Also the valves in the blood vessels in their necks are easily explained by similar valves in their (and our) legs. Evolution found a way to adapt like it always does.
@@enlacostaizquierda yes thank you for that I couldn't think of the name.
Correct.
It's the "Vagus" nerve.
Giraffes btw have the exact same number of neck vertebrae as all other mammals, with 2 exceptions.
There's always exceptions 😅
I just got to this point. This is too painful to go on. I have to stop. Fly free professor Dave, and kudos for being able to sit through this bunkum.
The irony of them claiming biologists manipulate facts to confirm their "beliefs" is girthy
oh religion, simultaneously provides emotional solace for those that need it and hinders progress & knowledge.
Man, I love when creationists reference Pokemon when it comes to evolution, because Pokemon evolution is so clearly how they think actual evolution works.
I never thought about that, but it's absolutely true for many of them. In their minds, chimps leveled up one day and evolved instantaneously to a human. Many don't even acknowledge that there's a common ancestor, and we didn't evolve from modern apes.
Funnily enough, in recent years Pokemon introduced realistic examples of "actually evolved" Pokemons: the Alola variants.
Someone did the math on pokemon evolution - it's basically a biological WMD.
@@fostenaThey also introduced the split evolution lines. Where exposing a pokemon to two different sets of conditions yields a different evolution. Eevee is the premier example. But things like Poliwhirl or Kirlia can evolve into Poliwrath or Politoad or Gardevoir or Gallade.
@McCarthyJohn100 I dunno what you're talking about. My parents threw a moonstone at a bird and it turned into me.
8:21 "Darwinist" holy shit, I know what's about to happen here
Because to them, science is like their religion so if someone were to disprove the existence of Mohamed the prophet, it would destroy Islam. Hence, if you disprove what Darwin said, you can ignore 160 years of science since then.
I'm relatively new to this channel, ive seen a few videos here and there and i was just watching your video on Hubble expanding universe, doppler effect, the redshift and something prompted me to check out more of your stuff and im glad i did- I thoroughly enjoyed this video, had a really fun time. Thank you for making your content. You're amazing
P.S. Can't wait to check out the James Tour videos!
Dude, the James Tour Videos are an experience in-and-of-themselves…it’s both very entertaining and educational!
Enjoy the trip. 😆
The giraffe bit, around 26 minutes, sounded like they were confusing Lamarck's theory of the transmutation of species where a giraffe would stretch and it's offspring would have longer necks as a result as having anything to do with darwin's theory or current theory.
There is no stronger confidence than confidence of a fool.
The fact that they need to attack works from over a century ago is VERY telling of where they're operating from.
Typical apologist tactics.
I agree.
They're just recycling trash arguments and outdated bullshit from Christian Creationists that have been exhaustively debunked.
It's honestly more telling of you that you think an idea loses value just because time has passed.
@@SimpleReally No one implied that.
as a student finishing his graduate studies in evolutionary genomics I had a good laugh with this one... especially the section on genomics (around 2hr mark) thanks for sharing this Dave!
buddy doesnt know what DNA is, what genes are and pretends to know what Junk DNA is... Junk DNA, such as satellite DNA are important sequences for the structural part of the DNA without being transcribed into genes... For examples, Telomeres, Centromeres
I'm Italian and I have had a lot of fun with this and your other video. Thank you professor Dave (I'm studying chemistry at the University to become a little bit as intelligent as you)
My girlfriend and I bonded through your videos. Thanks man.
Unexpected wholesomeness in the comments. Thanks! 😁
Congrats, man!
did you guys get it on with professor Dave playing in the background?
@@silvaskiproductions3937 Obviously? Nothing to set the mood better than Professor Dave grilling the ever-loving hell out of pseudoscience.
His silky smooth voice as he debunks creationists just turns on both of us. Nothing like a collage lecture while you are doing it to set the mood.😂
Sees video.. 3+ hours.. hmm.. clears schedule.. grabs coffee.. "Press play"
Just over a hundred minutes in and I need another coffee.. might need an Irish coffee at this point.
At 2h 24m.. "and their father's father's father" and he stopped.. apparently he could go no father.
Soda and popcorn for me, please...
Tbh I thought I'd watch ten minutes, I can't stop listening to these clowns. I wish they would have a debate.
@@zeendaniels5809 Where I live it was about 8 AM when I started watching.. if you do go for the soda make it caffeinated.. you're going to need it. And maybe some "liquid courage" as well.
I am reminded of a quote by Dawkins (if I recall correctly):
It’s like if playing chess against a pigeon and the pigeon knocks over the pieces, craps on the board, and declares to the other pigeons that it won
This is highly entertaining, but I'm glad you don't do these drunk debunks very often. We need you around.
3+ hours? I have assignments due this weekend damnit!!
not anymore!! :D
I'm a uni teacher marking a pile of essays - this is just what I need to get me through it!
Maybe do what I am doing and open Word and randomly add/remove punctuation while you have this video on. I also made my bibliography and title page 😆
Prepare for the assignment youll watch the video later lol.
You realise there is a pause button, yes?
vestigial ≠ useless
When will creationists finally understand this?
Vestigial means altered function or reduced function
As someone else mentioned elsewhere the problem is they confuse and conflate colloquial meanings with scientific terms. It's the "evolution is just a theory" problem all over again.
They won't.....they can't accept anything, because accepting 1 thing unravels the whole ball of twine.
When pigs fly.
@@rembrandt972ifyYeah, and God knows that would take *-at least-* an additional few millions years of evolution... :')
Thank you for bringing up these evidence(s) :p
Awesome video!
Giraffe necks gradually getting longer over long periods of time? *Impossible!* An invisible man who spoke everything into existence? *Makes perfect sense.*
It's so strange, every time a creationist talks about the absence of transitional fossils I immediately hear yodeling.
SciManDan style yodeling by chance? lol
@@ijustwanttolikecomments4677 More like Dapper Dinosaur style yodeling
Whenever i hear that i think about the Futurama scene where the Ape prof doesnt believe in evolution because of a "missing link".
And my reaction is always the same Prof Farnsworth has: "I dont want to live on this planet anymore." lol
I'm seriously starting to have a love/hate relationship with Dapper Dinosaur, the bastard plays the entire thing every time.
ok then, where are the transitional fossils?
My favorite part is that they first claim evolutionary theory is false because it's unfalsifiable, but also claim that it's falsified by gradualism being untrue. It can't be both. Then their explanation is: God did it. The most unfalsifiable claim you can possibly have.
Or "scientists are making stuff up.."
Then using other scientific papers to "prove" it.
@Cheepchipsable careful, that sounds like circular reasoning! 😮😂
@@Cheepchipsable the amount of bs they create to prove human evolution is crazy, its like flat earthers all over
Hi there Dave, i really like to see growth of your channel up to about 3 milion subscribers and i want to say that you deserve much more, you are doing an amazing job and i wish you the best my dude....And a loooot of patience with debunking idiocy
I am a muslim, and i have been so for my entire life.
And as a practicing muslim, i would like to state that the sheer stupidity from this blatant reality denial made me seriously consider grabbing a few shots myself. Thank you for dispelling this anti-science garbage
A Muslim named Connor grant! Not something you see every day 😂
Conner how many rakaat in wudu?
Recently a lot of Christians pretending to be Muslims do not know why
Funny how u r thanking ur "apeking" for mocking ur god
how many sholat in a ayat per day?
At about 1 hour. The arguments from the creationists sounds to me arguing that since we found out that PI isn't 3.1415926535897932384626434, it's actually 3.14159265358979323846264338, then PI doesn't exist.
It's incredibly painful to witness such overconfident ignorance. He also arrogantly laughs all the time like an idiot. I couldn't bear to watch it to the end.
It's a religious things
You’re looking at it wrong. I seen them laugh at science, I laugh at them not having a single clue what they are even talking about. Their confidence is just the cherry on top 🤦♂️😄
Hey Dave, quick correction, small point: marsupials do have placentas, and some actually have just as complex placentas as eutherians (which is why a lot of marsupial researchers prefer the term eutherian rather than placental). The difference is in the time course of gestation and lactation, not in the presence/absence of a placenta (along with a bunch of other differences that are more obscure and less well known).
Actually there's evidence for placentation in other viviparous squamates as well, so it's not even a uniquely mammalian trait. Kathleen K Smith has a great book chapter on the evolution of placentation in mammals that goes over the evidence in marsupials that will come up if you google her name and placentation.
You were right, they're playing all the hits in this one. Can't they come up with any new arguments?
Nop, why would they? They can repeat to their hearts content and no one’s listening except for themselves
The baboon bone in Lucy's neck was quite literally already hypothesized in the original paper as it didn't seem to fit 100%.
To then turn around and state it as if it's this magic discovery that debunkes evilution!!!!! is hilarious
The people who examined Lucy was already like "Hmm 🤔 this bone looks odd and we're not sure it was from the same skeleton". Guess they're CLUELESS heh? The irony of creationists try to debunk scientists with science will never stop being funny. 😂
Using Lamarck's ideas on giraffes as a gotcha for biologists is just as asinine as pretending there's nothing in psychology post-Freud.
i think there's some basic shit that people like this just don't grasp and that's
1) a million years is a long time. tens or hundreds of millions of years is a _very_ long time. a billion years is a stupidly, unfathomably long amount of time. if you look at it in seconds, a million seconds is around 11 days. a billion seconds? _42 years._
2) things change as our understanding of them grows. this is a _good_ thing. as we learn new things and we revise our previous understanding of them, sometimes it will look like contradictions. it's not. it's just part of the process.
there's just something about this mindset - they prefer explanations to be simple and clear-cut, complexity and nuance sound like lies to them, they don't like imagining a long past where things were vastly different than how they are right now, they don't like imagining a long future of a world that exists regardless of whether they're there to see it or not, and above all, they are really, _really_ stubbornly resistant to change. it's like main character syndrome + conservatism.
Drunk Dave is so f*cking amazing. How is he this smart after Scotch? Dude, this is divine, no pun intended. Please do these more often.
"the theory of gravity, fact or fiction"
"the theory of germs, fact or fiction"
This is the same as questioning the theory of evolution
Um akchually 🤓 gravity is considered a Law and not a theory(sorry had to correct you)
@@user-dx1qv4yz5i Theory of gravity as per Einstein..
The law is just talking about rules and not mechanism about how gravity works...
@@user-dx1qv4yz5i Gravity is a Theory and a Law
The theory talks about the mechanisms
The law simply states the rules and their conditions
@@DavisJ-ln6fw the guy above has already corrected me, thank you tho
Germs and gravity aren’t theories because you can see germs and gravity will force you to believe in it
Evolution on the other hand is a fairytale
When creationists like these talk, I am reminded of people saying that parrots are just copying the sounds and don't really grasp the meanings. They so often misuse words and concepts in ways that make it clear they are just making mouth sounds and don't actually understand the words they are making. The creationists I mean, I actually suspect parrots to be more intelligent.
That's as profound as it is terrifying.
As a bird keeper, can confirm
they can associate some words with certain behaviors and objects and even a few somewhat abstract concepts like a proto understanding of it, but yeah they're marginally smarter than mr Snelling
😂🤣🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂 I don’t even think they could win this argument.
If a parrot can learn to open their cage, and get away from them for being stupid.
There can be no doubt that laughing too much has an effect on the Muslim’s heart and distracts him from thinking deeply and fearing Allaah.
I am experiencing so much second hand embarrassment watching this that I am ready to crawl under a rock. The deletion, substitution, insertion nonsense.... Gah.
Biologists: "Here is all the evidence for evolution: The fossil record including tons of transitional species, phylogeny & anatomy, genetics(DNA), embryology(EVO-DEVO), molecular biology, chemistry, and much much more. Not to mention, DIRECT OBSERVATION!"
Creationists: wave their hands and say, "That doesn't prove a thing!"
But don't you know, they have a book, and it proves EVERYTHING! ;-)
@@page8301when people quote scripture to me, I quote the lord of the rings to them.
@kajsorensen1207 "everyone should praise the true prophet, GANDALF!!"
@@YEY0806 Tom Bonbadil is true god
@@kajsorensen1207 As one should. It's the superior fiction.
I wonder if they giggle as much at the claim that Mohamed rode a horse to the moon.
They say that shit with a straight face, and mean it. It's absurd.
Or that he Married a 6 year old girl...however, the Prophet was a gentleman and waited until she was 9 to consummate.
Of course not
That is supernatural and therefore, science
No he (SAW) Didn't.
Al-Isrā’ wa al-Miʿrāj has been thoroughly documented, with over 20 Companions narrating this event. The reports of al-Isrā’ wa al-Miʿrāj alone outweigh the reports of the rest of the Meccan era combined. However, the researcher is tasked with differentiating fact from fiction, as grandiose stories attract storytellers, and al-Isrā’ wa al-Miʿrāj is the most magnificent story of all. As with any event, reports on the topic are assessed to distinguish the most authentic narrations. The researcher must also compare interpretations; some believe that al-Isrā’ wa al-Miʿrāj was a dream, or that the Prophet travelled in spirit, but that is not the case. As a bona fide miracle from Allah, the Prophet physically journeyed-in a state of wakefulness-from Mecca to Jerusalem, and then to the Heavens and back, within a single night.
There is a difference of opinion as to when al-Isrā’ wa al-Miʿrāj took place. However, there are some indications. ʿĀ’ishah narrated, “Khadījah died before the prayer became obligatory.”302 This is definitive proof that al-Isrā’ wa al-Miʿrāj took place within the last 18 months of the Meccan era because the prayer was made obligatory in al-Miʿrāj. The day, or even month, of the event is unknown, and any specified date is not authentically narrated. It is yet another indication that the Companions did not place great emphasis on the dates and anniversaries of major events; they focused on the substance of the events rather than commemorating its existence.
The Prophet was sleeping at home when Jibrīl arrived and took him to the Ḥaṭīmi to pray two units (rakʿāt) of prayer. The Prophet narrated. “Jibrīl opened up my chest and brought a bowl made of gold filled with Zamzam.ii He took out my heart, washed it, and put it back.”305 This is the second time that Jibrīl washed the Prophet’s heart, however on this occasion he did not need to remove a black spot. Nevertheless, his heart needed to be washed with Zamzam to prepare it for the overwhelmingly awe-inspiring sights to come. As Allah stated, “He certainly saw some of his Lord’s greatest signs.”306 It was through Allah’s divine intervention and special facilitation that the Prophet was able to traverse into the Heavens without being subjected to any of the physical laws of this world.307
The Prophet continued, “Jibrīl then brought me a beast, smaller than a mule but bigger than a donkey, pure white, called al-Burāq. Each of its strides is as far as the eye can see.” The word “burāq” stems from the root word “barq” which means “lightning”, denoting its lightning speed. However, al-Burāq is a physical animal, created of flesh and blood, not a spiritual creature. There are no authentically narrated reports about a winged horse. Al-Burāq had a harness and saddle, and Jibrīl held the harness as the Prophet mounted. Al-Burāq neighed, and Jibrīl tugged the harness, saying, “Woe to you! Are you not shy? By Allah, no-one has ridden you that is more blessed in the eyes of Allah than your current rider!”308 The Prophet continued, “I rode al-Burāq and he took me to al-Aqsa Mosque. I tied al-Burāq to the animal posts used by the Prophets, and I entered and prayed two units of prayer.”
Source: From "The Sirah of the Prophet (pbuh): An Original and Contemporary Analysis" By Yasir Qadhi, 2023
@@ColinJarrett honestly this one of the more dubious claims of the hadith because of how much modern islamic scholars rely on them without using historical context as a muslim i moved away from alot of that narrative
Islamic apologetics are quite literally the worst ideas in the world. 😂
Just love watching you stick it to these peddlers of misinformation. Hope you get to see London mate, bring some sunny weather with you if you can. Ttfn!
Gotta love a Dave debunk Friday to listen to on the drive home from work
Damn, how long is your commute? The video is 3 hours! ROFL
@@3nd1ess77 only an hour haha, I'm still listening to it!
did you make it home safely?
@@silvaskiproductions3937 Through the laughter yes
25:22 the Kent Hovind impression was spot on
the most frustrating thing to me is that this guy has any amount of a following when he can't make his microphone stop peaking constantly, it's so unpleasant
At a minimum vestigial organs negate the "perfect" creation hypothesis. A perfect creation would have a "perfect" organ for that function rather than a half-hearted reuse of of something created for a different creature.
I respect the effort trying to debunk detailed scientific arguments when their alternative hypothesis is 'Big Daddy magicked animals into reality'.
And their "god on earth" married a child. A great role model that one. They also consider him to be utterly unquestionable.
@@John.0z try studying Islam, you'll probably shit your pants while reading their sacred literature.
@@alexeypolevoybass Thank for the suggestion, but no, I am good without torturing myself that way.
I am lucky that I worked out that religion was BS at a very early age, and I had an environment where that was OK.
In many countries that realisation would be fatal.
The fact that Dave, clearly tipsy, can elucidate these creationist ramblings debunking each and every point with incredible accuracy is just a wonderful illustration of how ludicrous these said ramblings actually are.
Always a great sign when a debate begins with defining truth/reality/fact/proof.
Can already tell we're in for a lot of great evidence.
Really good job Dave.
Btw I don't know if you ve noticed but that hist Sub oor Ahmad is on the first video of Discovery Institute in your list speaking to Luscin
My affection for Dave grew 10x when he brought that Laphroaig bottle into frame
Laphraig is indeed not for the faint of heart. I was happy to see it too.
Exactly the kind of morally bankrupt stiff I would expect an EVILutionist to drink. See him trying to drink whisky without admitting in his heart that the true God's whisky is Jack Daniel's! Foolish infidel you deny the truth in your apostasy!
/SARCASM/
I want more Drunk Debunks. 3 hours... absolutely great. Even a little tipsy, being able to pick apart con men that attempt and succeed at tricking people just shows how important, and useful, an actual good education can benefit you.
Drunk Debunk is an epic title 😅
It's kind of hilarious that he shared a link which he'd presumably clicked on before, but where he'd not even clicked on the 'Accept Cookies' button. That would suggest to me that he had simply skim read it quickly when building this presentation and thought 'ok, that'll do.' 🤦
"I don't want to bore the people." Nor provide any factual statement and only smugly laugh about things he is painfully ignorant about.
The laughing really makes him aggravating and annoying. Smugnorance personified in this hypocrite.
Drunk Dave debunk? Hell yes
3 hours??! Lets go dave, this one should last me until your next video comes out
Finally! You're responding to Suboor Ahmad. I was wondering when you'd get to him.
But Dave, ML must be super intelligent. Look at the stacks of whitepapers on his bookshelves behind him!