I really thought this sponsor was a joke, the name alone is already a weird choice, but then this organic anti-GMO bs is making it even more out of place on a science channel, that's like the flat earth of food
I know you need that bag but this sponsor is not it and out of place on your channel. It reeks of crystal healing raw milk adjaceny and what is wrong with decaf coffee?
What’s more, they love to use Satanism as the worst example, but in their own lore, Satan is the first rebel in history, and he got cast out of Heaven for his troubles yes, but he also got kicked out of the place where all the religious idiots think they’re going. Also a lot of modern satanism is about freedom of choice and expression and putting yourself up on a pedestal and not God or Satan, because at the end of the day, you’re your only hope in the world.
Science isn't a religion because it doesn't tell you who to hate, it just says "here's our best explanation for how the world works, we'll update you when we have more data."
Devil's advocate (pun unintended), that's actually part of the purpose of religion and mythology as well, just without all the baggage of actual proof to go with it. All the hate comes along with the 'practical application' of it, and the 'us vs. them' mentality.
@@VulpisFoxfire I've never heard a religious person say "here's our best explanation for how the world works, we'll update you when we have more data." They either say "dunno, I'll leave that bit to science". or "Burn the Witch!"
Ricky Gervais said it well, “burn all the books religious and scientific, wait and the science books will come back exactly the same, the religious books will be different “
@@SpyroTek Only religions in the same region. Compare the Quran, Torah and the Bible - all from the same region - with religions in China (Buddhism, Taoism) or India's Hinduism, or the Australian Aboriginal religion and mythology (Rainbow Snakes). Completely different lore. The only thing all religions have in common is some sort of super creature, more powerful than humans, that control things.
@@earlmurrie3272 He sounded like he has more of a problem with math than science. You have a formula. You plug in the numbers you know. From there you calculate the numbers you don't know. I'm not sure why it's a problem if the answer is 9.8?
"you never question that value don't you?!" No I don't, because in school, my teacher did an experiment involving dropping stuff from tall places, and a stopwatch. It's literally grade-school knowledge that you can prove.
@@SeanCrosseryup, I remember using ticker tape attached to something thrown off the school roof - we then measured the gap between the dots and came up with a value close to 9.8m/s^2
@@SeanCrosser It was paper strips and electric timers for me: Drop a weight attached to a paper strip looped through a 50hz timer, measure the distance between the little dots, do the math... QED! 6th grade, if I remember correctly. :)
It's pure _God Of The Gaps_ territory, and poor Hans' gaps are wider than most and in some cases apparently self-amplifying. I'm reasonably sure, for instance, that he was not taught in elementary school that _all_ light is from dead stars. If he was then he should be pitied and his teacher, if not retired already, should be encouraged to do so immediately. More likely he's misremembered and that, and similar errors, have coloured his thinking and output ever since. Well, that or the pseudo-celebrity and income he no doubt generates from his content creation. Having just looked at some of his output, I'm leaning toward the latter. Nobody can possibly, truly believe _all_ that guff. Can they?
Buoyancy Theory... the weight of an object equals the weight of the fluid it displaces, because the buoyant force of a fluid equals the gravitaional force an object exerts against the fluid. You know... how for every action there is an opposite & equal reaction, & what not? Ahhh.... the 3rd Law of Motion applies, even here. Amazing how universal they are. Feel free to cut & paste this for all flerfs you encounter.
Loved this as a kid. The CBC would come on saying NORAD had spotted something in the north moving at high speed and had scrambled planes to investigate. Then they confirmed it was Santa and gave tracking information. Added so much to the magic of it.
It's always funny to me when religious people try to demean science by calling it a religion, because they're effectively saying it is undesriable for something to be a religion (otherwise it wouldn't be demeaning to science to be called a religion)
I think it comes from the their view on other religions (as in the sin of believing in the wrong religion). They need to get science on the same playing field of other religions to denounce it as a sinful belief.
I'm American we were not taught that all the stars were long dead we were told that some of the stars in the sky we see could have already died but we haven't received the light from him yet
And the stars that we can see with the naked eye are very close, most within a few dozen light years and the farthest, V762 Cas, being 75,000 light years away. The furthest stars (plural) that can normally be seen are those of the Andromeda galaxy, 2.5 million light years away, though at that distance the human eye can't differentiate individual stars. Stellar lifetimes range from several million to several trillion years (our sun will live for about 10 billion years in total). Long story short, for all intents and purposes all stars that can be seen with the naked eye still exist.
And the stars that we can see without a telescope are very close, most within a few dozen light years and the farthest, V762 Cas, being 75,000 light years away. The furthest stars (plural) that can normally be seen are those of the Andromeda galaxy, 2.5 million light years away, though at that distance the human eye can't differentiate individual stars. Stellar lifetimes range from several million to several trillion years (our sun will live for about 10 billion years in total). Long story short, for all intents and purposes all stars that can be seen with our eyes still exist.
And the stars that we can see without a telescope are very close, most within a few dozen light years and the farthest, V762 Cas, being 75,000 light years away. The furthest stars (plural) that can normally be seen are those of the Andromeda galaxy, 2.5 million light years away, though at that distance the human eye can't differentiate individual stars. Stellar lifetimes range from several million to several trillion years (our sun will live for about 10 billion years in total). Long story short, for all intents and purposes all stars that can be seen with our eyes still exist.
And the stars that we can see without a telescope are very close, most within a few dozen light years and the farthest, V762 Cas, being 75,000 light years away. The furthest stars (plural) that can normally be seen are those of the Andromeda galaxy, 2.5 million light years away, though at that distance the human eye can't differentiate individual stars.
Stellar lifetimes range from several million to several trillion years (our sun will live for about 10 billion years in total). Long story short, for all intents and purposes all stars that can be seen with our eyes still exist.
I am sure I will get roasted. I am a Theist. I do still subscribe to the notion that a God 10 dimensions above our level of understanding COULD have created everything. I am an agnostic theist to be honest, but I will not take away intelligence until it is totally disproved.... which is also science.
"I used to follow science like a religion." Well that's weird because science doesn't follow science like a religion. It full on questions and doubts itself at all times and tries to disprove itself as that way it can become more certain of what it says, or it realises it was wrong and now seeks to correct itself.
In fact, we hope to discover new information that shows we are wrong. Something new and exciting to learn. We all know how happy religious people get when they learn something in their holy book doesn't match observation.
@@leif12345 A flat Earther told me it's cables running under the ground. He also was always spouting on about "sciencism" (unsure how to spell that) yet had treatment, and cure for a rather nasty skin complaint (either malignant or pre-malignant) prescribed by doctors (who are in effect scientists) Sorry about my overuse of brackets!
@@leif12345 balloons! its always damned balloons. Just remind them the gps data format is public and consists of _orbital_ elements which rules out balloons, drones, masts etc.
It always intrigues me when certain people (the religious) call atheists and science a religion. The religious are using the word "religion" as a pejorative without any hint of irony.
atheism is a religion - it is a set of beliefs that a person uses as the basis for their personal philosophy on life. science is a method. it is a framework a person uses to confirm basic facts about the world around them
@@kenbrown2808You fail reading at a third grade level. "Not a thing" is very much NOT identical to "a thing". Atheism is the lack of belief in any god. That's it. It contains zero beliefs. Lack of belief ≠ a set of beliefs.
@@kenbrown2808is it tho? It’s not a belief at all, atheists don’t believe in any deities whatsoever because there’s zero proof for any of them. It’s not our belief there’s no god, it’s a fact that there’s zero proof for any of them. You should google what atheism means.
Atheism is a religion? What system of faith do they prescribe? To whom do they pray? Whom do they worship? What rituals do they perform, and on which days? What are their Holy days? Etc...
If the apple falls because of bouancy, why doesn't it fall upwards or sideways? Why does the Apple always fall towards the (center of the) Earth? Even if you go by density, the air gets less dense the higher it is. So.. the Apple should then ALWAYS fall up. But it never does.
Yeah or like when the say "It goes to to the ground because it's the closest dense object"... if you are standing inside & hold your arm up then drop an object it should go to the ceiling because it is closer than the floor
He definitely wasn't taught that in elementary school he wasn't paying attention when they said SOME of the stars are burned out already and it takes that long for the light to get here
How would you know? In a physics lecture in university, they said, that scuba divers don´t use pure oxigen, because they are afraid to burn. Diving wasn´t their field and they just said nonsense, which they either made up themselfes to make sense of it or they repeated something they heard somewhere. I could add more examples. So, why would you assume, that such mistakes don´t happen in elementary school?
@@martinhuhn7813Well if you “believed” that you failed. You should not have accepted a call to authority as your evidence for the scuba example. Upon hearing something that does not make sense ask for the proofs. This is science.
@@martinhuhn7813 Your example is pretty bad considering the teacher should teach in their respective fields. Even if they didn't you shouldn't take it at face value if you are taught something outside their expertise. Even kids knows to be skeptical of what a teacher says if they don't teach the subject. I know, I am a teacher myself and my pupils are hesitant to ask me geography questions even if I teach them biology, physics and chemistry. It is only when I tell them that I also teach geography that they value my insights on the field. That being said. Your professors were stupid. Even if it wasn't their field, that conclusion is not something one should arrive at.
@@VulpisFoxfire Yes, Scientology stole the word science to try and lend themselves credibility, as they manipulated their cult victims, stole all their savings and made them slaves.
@@irrelevant_noob I think you're correct. I've watched videos on airships, such as R-101, and believe "loss of buoyancy" is the term used when the gas bag tears and starts leaking hydrogen. As long as the object weighs less than the mount of fluid/gas it displaces it is considered buoyant?
There's his problem right there. You don't experiment to prove yourself right, you do it to test your hypothesis, if the results agree you have a theory.
If you are being serious they would be right. A star that is visible could have indeed died long ago due to the speed of information being limited. Betelgeuse for example could have already gone supernova and we don't see it yet because the light has yet to reach us.
@@do_research to add to the above. He likely wasn't paying attention in class. By the evidence of the video he posted, he was likely praying during the lecture, instead of paying attention.
some people hear things very differently, i was taught about how "some" stars could be long dead, hans's problem is he hears almost everything differently, i would bet he gets stories from the bible wrong.
You can literally find the explanation of why G = 9.8m/s by typing it on google. Religion is like a blindfold to these people: if it isn't in their bible, it isn't true, and they won't believe it no matter how many times we explain it to them or PROVE it to them.
'if it isn't in their bible, it isn't true' oh boy, this brought back a memory of an old girlfriend who was a religious nutter. I was watching some TV show about UFOs, Bigfoot and other strange phenomena. She happened to be passing through the room just as they said that Bigfoot could be a link to man a million years ago (or something like that) and she stopped and said, that that couldn't be true, the earth wasn't here a million years ago since the Bible says it is only 6000 years old. Later, she walked through as they were talking about aliens and she said that they couldn't be real because 'she would have read about them in the Bible.' I'm so glad I got out of that relationship.
And thanks to the vagaries of language, in English some 'why' questions are really 'how' questions. Think of the classic small child's question. "Why is the sky blue, Daddy?" "Because of Rayleigh scattering, which I'll explain properly to you when you're older. For now, though, you can just think of the sky being blue because of sunlight."
If you adhere to a religion you take it on faith that you're on the correct path. So for the lay-person who can't / doesn't understand a scientific concept would they not have to have faith that scientistic weren't leading them astray?
"because god made the world in a way that makes sense" It makes sense because he was born in it and learnt how the world works living in the environment...
He's "fine with" saying god did it. Meaning, he doesn't know how god did it because there is no factual evidence on how. Yet, he's not fine with the factually based scientific reasoning. He says science is a "lie", and not the bible, which still as yet is not proven to be factually correct at all.
Perefect logic: "The universe cannot have always existed it must have had a creator" "And where did this Creator come from?" "Oh, he has always existed!"
Religeon is belief; Science is skeptisism. Religeon says, "Trust the word of God". Science says, "I won't believe it until its proven under scientific methods. . . then I still won't believe it until the majority of my peers agree with it. . . even then it will still be considered just a theory so that future generations have a chance to disprove it with future scentific methods.
...you do realize that a scientific theory and the colloquial usage of the word theory are not synonymous, right? To say a scientific theory is "just a theory" is rather dim, as a scientific theory is pretty much a proven fact, whereas when a person uses the word theory in common parlance what they mean is "hypothesis", or "guess". A scientific theory started out as a hypothesis then was tested again and again in a number of ways by many scientists in laboratory conditions who all came to the same conclusion through experimentation. A scientific theory is basically fact. A colloquial theory is basically a guess.
@@FilipCordas Replace "proven" in the above with either or both of "confirmed" or "demonstrated". And science absolutely can and does falsify things. For example, the discovery in 1697 of black swans on the Swan River in Australia falsified forever the then prevailing hypothesis that all swans were white. Similarly, the discovery of Neptune confirmed Newton's theory of gravity but its failure to explain the observed precession of the perihelion of Mercury falsified it near a sufficiently large mass (in this case, the Sun). Whereas Einstein's theory of General Relativity is confirmed by the the fact that it does explain the same observations, as well as by the observation of the bending of light around the sun (first seen during the total eclipse of 1919) and the phenomenon of gravitational redshift. If you use a sat nav you are also confirming GR (or at least Special Relativity) because GPS corrects for time dilation (the effect that moving clocks - in this case, on the satellites - run slow) by an accumulating 7 miles per day.
I always wonder how they cross a busy road? A short prayer, close their eyes and walk (belief) or look both directions and cross if there is no traffic (science)?
@@Pete_R63 You can cast most reasoning problems in terms of practical issues such as crossing the road or putting food in your mouth. It can be an effective way of getting people to think about errors in logic, or in procedure or assumption, especially if you follow a failure up with a question on how that would translate into them teaching a child.
Yup. Religion denies being proven wrong. The core of science is *challenging* people to prove you wrong, so you can figure out where the error is, and fix it.
I used to be a Christian, but I encountered too many fundamentalists like Wormhat on the Internet. I had to bail: no way was i going to allow liars and lunatics to define my reality.
The vast, VAST majority of Christianity (including the Vatican) is perfectly fine with science, including the earth being what it is, a globe. It's fringe parts of mainly American fundemantlist spewing this creationist nonsense
I really thought this sponsor was a joke, the name alone is already a weird choice, but then this organic anti-GMO bs is making it even more out of place on a science channel, that's like the flat earth of food
I was thinking the same thing. I bet there isn't a ton of evidence to back up the claims regarding those mushrooms. These kinds of products are just overpriced BS. If a caffeine crash is a problem for you, you could just drink less caffeine. Tea has less caffeine. It certainly wouldn't be out of place for a Brit to drink tea. I have Finnish ancestry. So I have no intention of giving up my coffee. I just switch to a dark roast later in the day since it has less caffeine.
It is pretty disappointing to see a science channel push absolute wankery. But then I try and remember what BoyBoy said. Which was something along the lines of, no matter what we tell you to buy, just ignore it because it's all crap and we have to have sponsors. That was heavily paraphrased.
Brushing off all of science as "just a religion" is legit so degrading and disrespectful to actual religions that it boarders on parody. What a complete joke. I'm saying this as an atheist btw.
If all records and memory of religion and science were erased, given enough time, all science would be recreated just as it is, but none of the religions would, it would be all new religions
The irony of it all is that Hans directly defies the Creator he loves. Psalms 147.4 "He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names."
"They don't know why." So why did god sacrifice himself to himself to serve as a loophole for a rule he himself created? "God works in mysterious ways." 🤷♂️
4:26 Science is about how something happens, science does not assume that there was a why. Why is an assumption, you are assuming there had to be a reason why?
A lot of people cannot cope if they think there is no reason for things. Think how popular fate and the 'everything happens for a reason' discourse is.
Didn't any flat earthers take science courses and do their own experiments? Did any of them go to college and take some science courses there? I had to. And we had to actually DO the stuff.
Same lack of education they show every time, they honestly believe science is just make stuff up, write it in a book then students just learn it. Like we were all just given the “Bumper Book of Science”. They just don’t get I know the laws of physics to be true because at university I did experiments and saw the results and proved them to be true myself. Higher learning isn’t just a memory test of scientific facts, you understand at a base level by experimenting and proving for yourself. They just don’t get that and it shows they are of very limited education.
3:47 "And here is where they get kinda arrogant about it, too. I have no problem admitting..." Are we about to witness a creationist admit they don't know everything? "... that god made this place the way that it works." Irony, thy name is Hans Wormhat. XD
“Why” (whatever) can not always be answered. That can be distressing for some. Where the answer to “why” ends is where “it just IS” (all we know now) begins.
If everyone was like these science denier conspiracy theorists we'd still be living in caves and running through the forest naked and foraging for food
Dude wasn't paying enough attention in elementary school to remember what they said about stars but blames modern sconce because he can't remember... I think most people do not understand evidence.
No. The Moon is in the sky. That's "up". The apple has to fall "down", so it would hurtle towards the Earth, that being the only "down" in existence. Oh, wait! . . . The Moon should fall down too. Ah, that's it - clearly the Moon does not exist!
Satanism and Hans are quite different and he wouldn't make it past the title page. Hans: I heard it somewhere, maybe, in a book, or something, and I don't believe it and it just doesn't feel right so it's all lies Satanists: whether or not you BELIEVE or FEEL something is completely irrelevant. 1) Don't be naive and manipulated - trust empirical evidence 2) Don't be a dick
All these DENSITY folks seem to not be able to explain how I can set a piece of lead on top of styrofoam and the lead doesn’t magically move under the styrofoam. 😂 I have only ever met 1 flat earther in the wild and they jumped straight to density. I asked them the above and they looked genuinely confused for a min before telling me I don’t understand what density is 😂😂😂. 🤦♂️ obviously when I asked them to explain density they diverted to the dome and I said we are done, bye… lolz
Never understood religious peoples aversion to science. Like if you believe in god, you believed god created everything. Therefore, science is us exploring what god made and how it works and naming it
So, when he gets sick, what does he do? Shaman? Magic? I’m pretty sure he goes to a doctor, takes medication and trusts the prognosis and test results….. SCIENCE!!!
Lazy Propagandist: People who believe in the science cult can’t answer why. Like why is gravity 9.8 m/s^2? They don’t have an answer for you. Newton: Am I a joke to you? Einstein: Am I a joke to you?
It's easy for him to say that science has no answers for him when he does all his research via Google Images and plugs his ears when anyone tries to answer his questions.
This is common for fundamentalists. They can't conceive of anything being driven by reason (science) so they have to twist it around to try to define it as religion so they can engage with it in a way that they understand. The only problem is it's definitionally wrong but that doesn't stop them.
** Go to mudwtr.com/scimandan to get 15% off your new morning ritual **
I really thought this sponsor was a joke, the name alone is already a weird choice, but then this organic anti-GMO bs is making it even more out of place on a science channel, that's like the flat earth of food
Merry Happy Christmas!
I know you need that bag but this sponsor is not it and out of place on your channel. It reeks of crystal healing raw milk adjaceny and what is wrong with decaf coffee?
Honestly… I don’t think it’s fair to make fun of Hans. He’s clearly deeply mentally unwell.
You're not nearly a good enough actor to convince anybody that bullshit 'health' drink is anything other than disgusting.
"Science is a religion, as as such, it can be dimissed"
Said a religious person.
It's mind boggling
Was thinking the same thing
I think that's why they're trying to reframe religion as a "way of life" or a "relationship" nowadays. 🙄
Did they have a stutter?
What’s more, they love to use Satanism as the worst example, but in their own lore, Satan is the first rebel in history, and he got cast out of Heaven for his troubles yes, but he also got kicked out of the place where all the religious idiots think they’re going.
Also a lot of modern satanism is about freedom of choice and expression and putting yourself up on a pedestal and not God or Satan, because at the end of the day, you’re your only hope in the world.
Science isn't a religion because it doesn't tell you who to hate, it just says "here's our best explanation for how the world works, we'll update you when we have more data."
Devil's advocate (pun unintended), that's actually part of the purpose of religion and mythology as well, just without all the baggage of actual proof to go with it. All the hate comes along with the 'practical application' of it, and the 'us vs. them' mentality.
@@VulpisFoxfire You'd have a point if it weren't for the dogma of many religions precluding the "we'll update you..." part.
In 2020 and 2021, Science 100% told you who to hate!
Thanks, I really like this explanation. Cheers mate
@@VulpisFoxfire I've never heard a religious person say "here's our best explanation for how the world works, we'll update you when we have more data."
They either say "dunno, I'll leave that bit to science". or "Burn the Witch!"
Ricky Gervais said it well, “burn all the books religious and scientific, wait and the science books will come back exactly the same, the religious books will be different “
He also said that “being stupid is like being dead, you don’t know, but the people around you do”😊
To be fair the different religious books are pretty similar. Wrong, but similar.
@@SpyroTekthey are all copied from even older religions. Religions are a casserole. 😂
Although he does say that, he is incorrect because religeon is belief based and belief is nessecary to learn.
@@SpyroTek Only religions in the same region. Compare the Quran, Torah and the Bible - all from the same region - with religions in China (Buddhism, Taoism) or India's Hinduism, or the Australian Aboriginal religion and mythology (Rainbow Snakes). Completely different lore.
The only thing all religions have in common is some sort of super creature, more powerful than humans, that control things.
Nothing irritates me more than people who have no clue about science, saying that actual science isn't science.
Tell me about it, this guy irritated me so much. Talking about "they don't know why 9.8" yes "THEY" do you genius
@@earlmurrie3272 He sounded like he has more of a problem with math than science. You have a formula. You plug in the numbers you know. From there you calculate the numbers you don't know. I'm not sure why it's a problem if the answer is 9.8?
And usually also claiming supports their beliefs.
Why is “g” equal to 9.81m/s^2. ?
Because that’s what we MEASURE it to be.
What a surprise if it turned up in the next bible!!! Rgr
"you never question that value don't you?!" No I don't, because in school, my teacher did an experiment involving dropping stuff from tall places, and a stopwatch.
It's literally grade-school knowledge that you can prove.
@@SeanCrosseryup, I remember using ticker tape attached to something thrown off the school roof - we then measured the gap between the dots and came up with a value close to 9.8m/s^2
@@SeanCrosser It was paper strips and electric timers for me: Drop a weight attached to a paper strip looped through a 50hz timer, measure the distance between the little dots, do the math... QED! 6th grade, if I remember correctly. :)
@@graydanerasmussen4071 We just threw flat-earthers off the roof, the ones that floated were given 1 million dollars.
"Anything I'm too stupid to understand can't be true". That's it in a nutshell.
He's clearly pretty stupid, He sets the bar really low and he keep just limboing under that bar every day
If you're too stupid to understand a scientific concept, would you not have to take it on faith that you're being told the truth?
It is extraordinary how much Hans doesn't understand.
Well.... I'd say it's more "Anything that contradicts what I believe can't be true."
It's pure _God Of The Gaps_ territory, and poor Hans' gaps are wider than most and in some cases apparently self-amplifying. I'm reasonably sure, for instance, that he was not taught in elementary school that _all_ light is from dead stars.
If he was then he should be pitied and his teacher, if not retired already, should be encouraged to do so immediately. More likely he's misremembered and that, and similar errors, have coloured his thinking and output ever since. Well, that or the pseudo-celebrity and income he no doubt generates from his content creation. Having just looked at some of his output, I'm leaning toward the latter. Nobody can possibly, truly believe _all_ that guff. Can they?
I love how gravity deniers just go to buoyancy as an explanation when buoyancy is literally caused by gravity. Without gravity, *there is no buoyancy*
Don't forget density too. Which breaks down when you realize that there is no direction in density.
It might be the craziest part of their perspective.
He should know better, being very dense himself...
yeah its like they never heard of a vacuum chamber.
Buoyancy Theory... the weight of an object equals the weight of the fluid it displaces, because the buoyant force of a fluid equals the gravitaional force an object exerts against the fluid.
You know... how for every action there is an opposite & equal reaction, & what not? Ahhh.... the 3rd Law of Motion applies, even here. Amazing how universal they are.
Feel free to cut & paste this for all flerfs you encounter.
The older I get the more I detest religion in any shape or form.🥺
The older I get the more I realize how many idiots there are in this world. Especially now that they can publish their stupidity over the Internet.
If there is a God, religion is the veil that blocks our interaction with it. Religion is the more anti-God than atheism.
Same. I have no patience for it any longer. It both bewilders & appalls me that so many people around the world would believe such things.
Oh! My comment got deleted. I wonder why. Oh well...
Testify!
So basically “I choose to be ignorant so science is wrong!”
Even though we don't really exist in Australia, Santa watch has begun. Everyone have a safe and happy Christmas and enjoy the holidays 🎄
He's just left my place a few minutes ago.
Coal?
Loved this as a kid.
The CBC would come on saying NORAD had spotted something in the north moving at high speed and had scrambled planes to investigate. Then they confirmed it was Santa and gave tracking information.
Added so much to the magic of it.
@@cecilbrisley5185 "Added so much to the magic of it."
Until the missiles were launched.
Merry Christmas to all of you in the mychical land down under.
Does Santa change clothes when he delivers presents there ? It’s the middle of summer ffs
It's always funny to me when religious people try to demean science by calling it a religion, because they're effectively saying it is undesriable for something to be a religion (otherwise it wouldn't be demeaning to science to be called a religion)
Ah, but _their_ religion is the 'one true religion' so it's right and everyone else is wrong!
Yup! I've long wondered why some deeply religious people use the word "religion" as an insult when talking about science.
@@BarnabyRudge-sx3pb Because they don"t like all religions. They like their religion
I think it comes from the their view on other religions (as in the sin of believing in the wrong religion). They need to get science on the same playing field of other religions to denounce it as a sinful belief.
@@ThisPyro You hit that big old nail on the head. Spot on!
I'm American we were not taught that all the stars were long dead we were told that some of the stars in the sky we see could have already died but we haven't received the light from him yet
And the stars that we can see with the naked eye are very close, most within a few dozen light years and the farthest, V762 Cas, being 75,000 light years away. The furthest stars (plural) that can normally be seen are those of the Andromeda galaxy, 2.5 million light years away, though at that distance the human eye can't differentiate individual stars. Stellar lifetimes range from several million to several trillion years (our sun will live for about 10 billion years in total). Long story short, for all intents and purposes all stars that can be seen with the naked eye still exist.
And the stars that we can see without a telescope are very close, most within a few dozen light years and the farthest, V762 Cas, being 75,000 light years away. The furthest stars (plural) that can normally be seen are those of the Andromeda galaxy, 2.5 million light years away, though at that distance the human eye can't differentiate individual stars. Stellar lifetimes range from several million to several trillion years (our sun will live for about 10 billion years in total). Long story short, for all intents and purposes all stars that can be seen with our eyes still exist.
And the stars that we can see without a telescope are very close, most within a few dozen light years and the farthest, V762 Cas, being 75,000 light years away. The furthest stars (plural) that can normally be seen are those of the Andromeda galaxy, 2.5 million light years away, though at that distance the human eye can't differentiate individual stars.
Stellar lifetimes range from several million to several trillion years (our sun will live for about 10 billion years in total). Long story short, for all intents and purposes all stars that can be seen with our eyes still exist.
And the stars that we can see without a telescope are very close, most within a few dozen light years and the farthest, V762 Cas, being 75,000 light years away. The furthest stars (plural) that can normally be seen are those of the Andromeda galaxy, 2.5 million light years away, though at that distance the human eye can't differentiate individual stars.
Stellar lifetimes range from several million to several trillion years (our sun will live for about 10 billion years in total). Long story short, for all intents and purposes all stars that can be seen with our eyes still exist.
"Just because they have one FAIRY TALE answer thrown in..." , while invoking god as his reason is the apex of projection.
And he then talks about his FAIRY TALE story about god "creating"
@@84com83 Cue the magic man!
I am sure I will get roasted. I am a Theist. I do still subscribe to the notion that a God 10 dimensions above our level of understanding COULD have created everything. I am an agnostic theist to be honest, but I will not take away intelligence until it is totally disproved.... which is also science.
Religious fundamentalist anti-science internet trolls never make sense.
🇺🇲 is a death cult.
@@gregmason2434 the Higgs Boson says different
"I used to follow science like a religion."
Well that's weird because science doesn't follow science like a religion. It full on questions and doubts itself at all times and tries to disprove itself as that way it can become more certain of what it says, or it realises it was wrong and now seeks to correct itself.
...and that is exactly why it is not a religion. Religions are based on dogma, and brook no challenges.
In fact, we hope to discover new information that shows we are wrong. Something new and exciting to learn. We all know how happy religious people get when they learn something in their holy book doesn't match observation.
Religion is practiced by people. And people can make a religion out of anything, including science. That does not make science a religion.
The ironic thing is that this science denier regularly uses the products of science without a second thought.
And flat earthers routinely use GPS tech on their phones to navigate to Walmart while denying the existence of satellites.
I suppose he thinks that God made both the internet and youtube. Just.. magic'd them into existence one day.
@@leif12345 A flat Earther told me it's cables running under the ground. He also was always spouting on about "sciencism" (unsure how to spell that) yet had treatment, and cure for a rather nasty skin complaint (either malignant or pre-malignant) prescribed by doctors (who are in effect scientists)
Sorry about my overuse of brackets!
@ I’ve heard them claim it’s from telephone lines. When I asked how it works out on the ocean they go silent or even block me.
@@leif12345 balloons! its always damned balloons. Just remind them the gps data format is public and consists of _orbital_ elements which rules out balloons, drones, masts etc.
Well, he said he'd end the video with blatant lies, then blatantly lied. He delivered what he promised.
Okay so he was saying "I still believe in being able to have theories and test them," right? ..but then completely threw that away
He's an idiot, caught up in the modern cynicism movement.
No, to him "testing a thoery" is reading a 2000 year old book.
@@SanderEvers Misread or responded to the wrong post. Cheers.
Exactly. He clearly believes in stating stuff about god and then calling it a day.
Also he doesn't know what a theory is.
It always intrigues me when certain people (the religious) call atheists and science a religion. The religious are using the word "religion" as a pejorative without any hint of irony.
atheism is a religion - it is a set of beliefs that a person uses as the basis for their personal philosophy on life. science is a method. it is a framework a person uses to confirm basic facts about the world around them
@@kenbrown2808"A lack of belief is a set of beliefs".
@@kenbrown2808You fail reading at a third grade level. "Not a thing" is very much NOT identical to "a thing".
Atheism is the lack of belief in any god. That's it. It contains zero beliefs. Lack of belief ≠ a set of beliefs.
@@kenbrown2808is it tho? It’s not a belief at all, atheists don’t believe in any deities whatsoever because there’s zero proof for any of them. It’s not our belief there’s no god, it’s a fact that there’s zero proof for any of them. You should google what atheism means.
Atheism is a religion? What system of faith do they prescribe? To whom do they pray? Whom do they worship? What rituals do they perform, and on which days? What are their Holy days? Etc...
Arguing viruses look different now is like complaining why silent movies ever existed
Silence might be too abstract a concept if you have voices in your head.
"Why doesn't a cow look like a boa constrictor? They are both animals!"
I’ve never HEARD a silent movie; therefore, they never existed.
Science threatens his cherished beliefs, and he can't deal with the prospect of being wrong.
You do realize the government controls science
If the apple falls because of bouancy, why doesn't it fall upwards or sideways? Why does the Apple always fall towards the (center of the) Earth? Even if you go by density, the air gets less dense the higher it is. So.. the Apple should then ALWAYS fall up. But it never does.
Yeah or like when the say "It goes to to the ground because it's the closest dense object"...
if you are standing inside & hold your arm up then drop an object it should go to the ceiling because it is closer than the floor
The fact is that without gravity, there is no buoyancy.
They ignore the fact that the atmosphere gets less dense as it gets farther away from the earth.
I just love that the equation for buoyancy has little g in it too. Incredibly ironic that flerfs are quite happy to accept this!
As he said in the video "Because G*d". That's the answer for people who don't actually want to know how things work.
He definitely wasn't taught that in elementary school he wasn't paying attention when they said SOME of the stars are burned out already and it takes that long for the light to get here
How would you know? In a physics lecture in university, they said, that scuba divers don´t use pure oxigen, because they are afraid to burn. Diving wasn´t their field and they just said nonsense, which they either made up themselfes to make sense of it or they repeated something they heard somewhere. I could add more examples. So, why would you assume, that such mistakes don´t happen in elementary school?
@@martinhuhn7813Well if you “believed” that you failed. You should not have accepted a call to authority as your evidence for the scuba example. Upon hearing something that does not make sense ask for the proofs. This is science.
I think we can safely assume that nothing from elementary school stuck with Hans.
@@martinhuhn7813 Your example is pretty bad considering the teacher should teach in their respective fields. Even if they didn't you shouldn't take it at face value if you are taught something outside their expertise. Even kids knows to be skeptical of what a teacher says if they don't teach the subject. I know, I am a teacher myself and my pupils are hesitant to ask me geography questions even if I teach them biology, physics and chemistry. It is only when I tell them that I also teach geography that they value my insights on the field.
That being said. Your professors were stupid. Even if it wasn't their field, that conclusion is not something one should arrive at.
@@martinhuhn7813breathing pure oxygen can essentially burn your lungs...they don't use pure oxygen
Scientology is a religion. I think that’s what Hans meant.
Science and Scientology are two very different and mostly unrelated things.
@@VulpisFoxfire Yes, Scientology stole the word science to try and lend themselves credibility, as they manipulated their cult victims, stole all their savings and made them slaves.
Scientology exists so we can laugh at it.
Flerfers exist so Scientologists and Jehovahs Witnesses can laugh at someone else for a change.
I m not sure if scientology is a religion, I view it more of pseudo psychology. However I am not a expert.
Ah yes, buoyancy. The property of an object that famously includes gravity is its formula.
Don't you need a liquid medium for buoyancy to mean anything?
@@gregorymoore2877 i think you can do with fluids... gases can be the medium just fine, can't they?
@@irrelevant_noob I think you're correct. I've watched videos on airships, such as R-101, and believe "loss of buoyancy" is the term used when the gas bag tears and starts leaking hydrogen. As long as the object weighs less than the mount of fluid/gas it displaces it is considered buoyant?
Science is not a belief, either you understand or don't understand science.
science is a way of thinking, comparing observed effects with existing theories and if needed changing the theory to account for the observed effects
@@zebo-the-fat Science is a belief, and anyone who says it's not 'don't understand science'
@zebo-the-fat , even if you don't understand science it doesn't make it not true.
Sounds like fight club.
Absolutely. Science is a process, not a belief system.
There's his problem right there. You don't experiment to prove yourself right, you do it to test your hypothesis, if the results agree you have a theory.
What they probably told him in school was that some stars are long dead.
If you are being serious they would be right. A star that is visible could have indeed died long ago due to the speed of information being limited. Betelgeuse for example could have already gone supernova and we don't see it yet because the light has yet to reach us.
@@do_research Yes, but the guy remembered them saying all stars were dead.
@@do_research to add to the above. He likely wasn't paying attention in class. By the evidence of the video he posted, he was likely praying during the lecture, instead of paying attention.
some people hear things very differently, i was taught about how "some" stars could be long dead, hans's problem is he hears almost everything differently, i would bet he gets stories from the bible wrong.
"I don't believe" is a form of saying "I don't understand, but I'm too narcissist to admit other people understand more things than I do".
You can literally find the explanation of why G = 9.8m/s by typing it on google. Religion is like a blindfold to these people: if it isn't in their bible, it isn't true, and they won't believe it no matter how many times we explain it to them or PROVE it to them.
'if it isn't in their bible, it isn't true' oh boy, this brought back a memory of an old girlfriend who was a religious nutter. I was watching some TV show about UFOs, Bigfoot and other strange phenomena. She happened to be passing through the room just as they said that Bigfoot could be a link to man a million years ago (or something like that) and she stopped and said, that that couldn't be true, the earth wasn't here a million years ago since the Bible says it is only 6000 years old. Later, she walked through as they were talking about aliens and she said that they couldn't be real because 'she would have read about them in the Bible.' I'm so glad I got out of that relationship.
This idiotic idea there has to be a ‘why’ stems from the arrogance of us humans. Things just ‘are’.
And thanks to the vagaries of language, in English some 'why' questions are really 'how' questions. Think of the classic small child's question.
"Why is the sky blue, Daddy?"
"Because of Rayleigh scattering, which I'll explain properly to you when you're older. For now, though, you can just think of the sky being blue because of sunlight."
"Look a wrong-way driver" ... "one? thousands!!!"
Just another case of ‘I don’t believe it therefore it must be wrong’ syndrome.
If you adhere to a religion you take it on faith that you're on the correct path.
So for the lay-person who can't / doesn't understand a scientific concept would they not have to have faith that scientistic weren't leading them astray?
@ then the default position should be ‘I don’t know’ which is the most honest answer you can give.
Merry Christmas Dan. All the best!
Flerfers assuming* up and down are universal directions 😂😂😂
*edit, Thanks for the suggestion
Correction: theyre not thinking. If they were, i dont think theyd be flerfs for long.
"because god made the world in a way that makes sense"
It makes sense because he was born in it and learnt how the world works living in the environment...
He's "fine with" saying god did it. Meaning, he doesn't know how god did it because there is no factual evidence on how. Yet, he's not fine with the factually based scientific reasoning. He says science is a "lie", and not the bible, which still as yet is not proven to be factually correct at all.
I'm a Christian and I absolutely love science, this channel and many like it. Science has never been an issue in regards to my faith.
Perefect logic: "The universe cannot have always existed it must have had a creator"
"And where did this Creator come from?"
"Oh, he has always existed!"
Religeon is belief; Science is skeptisism.
Religeon says, "Trust the word of God".
Science says, "I won't believe it until its proven under scientific methods. . . then I still won't believe it until the majority of my peers agree with it. . . even then it will still be considered just a theory so that future generations have a chance to disprove it with future scentific methods.
"science adjusts its views based on what's observed; faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved."
-Tim Minchin
you can't 'prove' anything using the scientific method profs are a mathematical thing you can only disprove something to a certain level of accuracy.
...you do realize that a scientific theory and the colloquial usage of the word theory are not synonymous, right?
To say a scientific theory is "just a theory" is rather dim, as a scientific theory is pretty much a proven fact, whereas when a person uses the word theory in common parlance what they mean is "hypothesis", or "guess".
A scientific theory started out as a hypothesis then was tested again and again in a number of ways by many scientists in laboratory conditions who all came to the same conclusion through experimentation.
A scientific theory is basically fact.
A colloquial theory is basically a guess.
Skepticism.
@@FilipCordas Replace "proven" in the above with either or both of "confirmed" or "demonstrated". And science absolutely can and does falsify things. For example, the discovery in 1697 of black swans on the Swan River in Australia falsified forever the then prevailing hypothesis that all swans were white.
Similarly, the discovery of Neptune confirmed Newton's theory of gravity but its failure to explain the observed precession of the perihelion of Mercury falsified it near a sufficiently large mass (in this case, the Sun). Whereas Einstein's theory of General Relativity is confirmed by the the fact that it does explain the same observations, as well as by the observation of the bending of light around the sun (first seen during the total eclipse of 1919) and the phenomenon of gravitational redshift. If you use a sat nav you are also confirming GR (or at least Special Relativity) because GPS corrects for time dilation (the effect that moving clocks - in this case, on the satellites - run slow) by an accumulating 7 miles per day.
I always wonder how they cross a busy road? A short prayer, close their eyes and walk (belief) or look both directions and cross if there is no traffic (science)?
That was wonderful! I'll have to remember it!
@@Pete_R63 You can cast most reasoning problems in terms of practical issues such as crossing the road or putting food in your mouth. It can be an effective way of getting people to think about errors in logic, or in procedure or assumption, especially if you follow a failure up with a question on how that would translate into them teaching a child.
Science adjusts its views based on what's observed
Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved.
Tim Minchin
Yup. Religion denies being proven wrong. The core of science is *challenging* people to prove you wrong, so you can figure out where the error is, and fix it.
Science is an ongoing self-correcting process leading us to better understand the world/universe around us.
I love Tim Minchin- genius on so many levels.
@@slm3945 Exactly, I hate the way this is presented as a flaw.
Just because something is hard to understand doesn’t mean it is a belief. It is no more complicated than that.
Thanks. Merry Christmas to you, too, Dan! 🙂🐕🐕
On that bombshell, I always imagine Clarkson saying it!
I used to be a Christian, but I encountered too many fundamentalists like Wormhat on the Internet. I had to bail: no way was i going to allow liars and lunatics to define my reality.
The vast, VAST majority of Christianity (including the Vatican) is perfectly fine with science, including the earth being what it is, a globe.
It's fringe parts of mainly American fundemantlist spewing this creationist nonsense
When you put it in the very simple way, science deniers shouldn't think 1+1=2.
see Terrence Howard
Poor guy is bitter that he flunked physics at high school and he tries to vent his frustration on the rest of the world.
Merry Christmas everybody
"...the fairy tale of gravity..."
Someone find a window.
I really thought this sponsor was a joke, the name alone is already a weird choice, but then this organic anti-GMO bs is making it even more out of place on a science channel, that's like the flat earth of food
Got to pay the bills somehow, i just ignore them
I was thinking the same thing. I bet there isn't a ton of evidence to back up the claims regarding those mushrooms. These kinds of products are just overpriced BS. If a caffeine crash is a problem for you, you could just drink less caffeine. Tea has less caffeine. It certainly wouldn't be out of place for a Brit to drink tea.
I have Finnish ancestry. So I have no intention of giving up my coffee. I just switch to a dark roast later in the day since it has less caffeine.
@@jennoscura2381lol speaking of pseudoscience, its _not_ your _“Finnish ancestry”_ !! wtf u just like coffee, *most people do* , literally Wormhat.
It is pretty disappointing to see a science channel push absolute wankery.
But then I try and remember what BoyBoy said. Which was something along the lines of, no matter what we tell you to buy, just ignore it because it's all crap and we have to have sponsors.
That was heavily paraphrased.
Another person disingenuously asking "why" (declaring they do not understand something) and then asserting their particular feelings are facts.
Merry Christmas
As a scientist, I can tell you that science endeavors to answer the "how", not the "why". It's the difference between fact and truth.
"I'm all lost in the super-market..."
Brushing off all of science as "just a religion" is legit so degrading and disrespectful to actual religions that it boarders on parody. What a complete joke.
I'm saying this as an atheist btw.
Can't respect religions, cults are cutls
If all records and memory of religion and science were erased, given enough time, all science would be recreated just as it is, but none of the religions would, it would be all new religions
The irony of it all is that Hans directly defies the Creator he loves. Psalms 147.4 "He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names."
"They don't know why."
So why did god sacrifice himself to himself to serve as a loophole for a rule he himself created?
"God works in mysterious ways."
🤷♂️
Hans Wormhat might have worm in his head...
That would mean he would actually have a brain in his head, tiny as it may be.
Worms might have had replaced his brain completely.
He might find employment with the department of health and human services in the next administration.
Not just one!
@@Er_Guille Ah there it is! DTS syndrome!
Merry Christmas to you and your family, Dan. 🙂
Merry Christmas from Australia. 🇦🇺 🦘 👍
He doesn't understand but he's a big brain boy so it must be fake, he then replaces fact with cause magic.
The reason these scammers say "science is a religion" instead of "religion is science" because they know that calling anything "religion" is a insult.
The only people who think that way are projecting their own crap...
_Why 9.81?_
Why does a religious man ask this instead of saying that God made "G" 9.81?
4:26 Science is about how something happens, science does not assume that there was a why. Why is an assumption, you are assuming there had to be a reason why?
A lot of people cannot cope if they think there is no reason for things. Think how popular fate and the 'everything happens for a reason' discourse is.
I like that everytime they want to disprove gravity they say density and buoyancy.
>Look up how to calculate buoyancy
>There's G
My religion gave me smartphones and antibiotics. How about yours, Hans?
Hans found a reason to accept pain and suffering. " God is testing us "..... Good luck!! Rgr
99% of scientists throught history were fairly religious people so..
@@Canaris3 And still their religion didn´t stop them from making groundbraking science... Did they however bring god into their discoveries??? Rgr
@@Canaris3 100% of ALL people were in those times of ignorance and oppression - to profess otherwise was perilous.
@@borano2031 lots of them did, do you know anything about history?
So happy the first words to this video was, “merry Christmas everyone.” So refreshing to hear. Merry Christmas to you too Dan and everyone else.
6:19 Why aren't dogs and hamsters identical looking? This is what I was taught mammals looked like.
- Hans Wormbrain
Didn't any flat earthers take science courses and do their own experiments? Did any of them go to college and take some science courses there? I had to. And we had to actually DO the stuff.
FEs are either grifters or total idiots
College??? Please, they barely finished high school
You seem a similar thing in politics in the US
Same lack of education they show every time, they honestly believe science is just make stuff up, write it in a book then students just learn it. Like we were all just given the “Bumper Book of Science”. They just don’t get I know the laws of physics to be true because at university I did experiments and saw the results and proved them to be true myself. Higher learning isn’t just a memory test of scientific facts, you understand at a base level by experimenting and proving for yourself. They just don’t get that and it shows they are of very limited education.
3:47 "And here is where they get kinda arrogant about it, too. I have no problem admitting..."
Are we about to witness a creationist admit they don't know everything?
"... that god made this place the way that it works."
Irony, thy name is Hans Wormhat. XD
So if a flat earther will not let other people tell them what to think... will they not let other flat earthers tell them what to think, either?
1:52 for the start of the topic
That video is 4 years old. Why give that guy a platform or any kind of validation?
When he said he’s going to finish with lies I thought he had a realisation! 😂
And then he finished with lies about science.
“Why” (whatever) can not always be answered. That can be distressing for some. Where the answer to “why” ends is where “it just IS” (all we know now) begins.
Some people just revel in thier stupidity.
If everyone was like these science denier conspiracy theorists we'd still be living in caves and running through the forest naked and foraging for food
Hilarious. Religious folk think their God gives a 'why' when it doesn't while they also disbelieve the 'how' of science... leaving them nothing!
5:55 "I'm going to end this video with blatant lies..." Should have stopped right there!
Dude wasn't paying enough attention in elementary school to remember what they said about stars but blames modern sconce because he can't remember... I think most people do not understand evidence.
You lost him at "study" . 3:01
There is no end to the limitations of Hans Wormhat.
God would comment, but he's too busy saving starving children in Africa. Great video. 🇦🇺🦘😀
Without science, I wouldn't drink a drop of water from a bottle bought at the supermarket.
Happy Newton's Birthday!
TWAS the night before Christmas, and all round the ERF, not a creature was stirring, not even a FLERF…
I'm all lost in the supermarket
I can no longer shop happily
I came in here for that special offer
A guaranteed personality
So the apple would fall slower on the moon because he believes the air is more dense?
No. The Moon is in the sky. That's "up". The apple has to fall "down", so it would hurtle towards the Earth, that being the only "down" in existence. Oh, wait! . . . The Moon should fall down too. Ah, that's it - clearly the Moon does not exist!
Satanism and Hans are quite different and he wouldn't make it past the title page.
Hans: I heard it somewhere, maybe, in a book, or something, and I don't believe it and it just doesn't feel right so it's all lies
Satanists: whether or not you BELIEVE or FEEL something is completely irrelevant.
1) Don't be naive and manipulated - trust empirical evidence
2) Don't be a dick
It’s frustrating that so many people don’t actually understand what satanism is.
One of my old science teachers used to say science can never ask "Why?", science can only ask "How?".
All these DENSITY folks seem to not be able to explain how I can set a piece of lead on top of styrofoam and the lead doesn’t magically move under the styrofoam. 😂
I have only ever met 1 flat earther in the wild and they jumped straight to density. I asked them the above and they looked genuinely confused for a min before telling me I don’t understand what density is 😂😂😂. 🤦♂️ obviously when I asked them to explain density they diverted to the dome and I said we are done, bye… lolz
Well, you have to be dense to be a flat earther.
Never understood religious peoples aversion to science. Like if you believe in god, you believed god created everything. Therefore, science is us exploring what god made and how it works and naming it
Scientism.........
Yes but that does not mean what most people think it does.
He just hates science so much because it's true, he has to be spiteful towards it. Such a baby.
So, when he gets sick, what does he do? Shaman? Magic? I’m pretty sure he goes to a doctor, takes medication and trusts the prognosis and test results….. SCIENCE!!!
Lazy Propagandist: People who believe in the science cult can’t answer why. Like why is gravity 9.8 m/s^2? They don’t have an answer for you.
Newton: Am I a joke to you?
Einstein: Am I a joke to you?
It's easy for him to say that science has no answers for him when he does all his research via Google Images and plugs his ears when anyone tries to answer his questions.
As a Christian I can't believe I have been decieved into believing *established, true and proven facts*
You're still being deceived if you're still a christian
Because god 🤣😂🤣😂😂
Religion doesn’t answer the why question with anything other than “bc god wanted to”. It’s pathetic 😂
"We assume of others what we know of ourselves."
6:25 "Why doesn't a kangaroo look like an eagle?"
This is common for fundamentalists. They can't conceive of anything being driven by reason (science) so they have to twist it around to try to define it as religion so they can engage with it in a way that they understand. The only problem is it's definitionally wrong but that doesn't stop them.