Dr Tour thanks for sticking to this. A little more detail in Is 40-46 would heal all wounds! Temporarily at least. Thanks. God is blessing your ministry!
Being a modern model of Faith in our Holy God while holding a vocation in science revered by the world showing there is No Conflict between the two but rather the gift of intelligence to man from God supports His Creation of all things not the inverse ...I am thankful for your courage through faith in Christ and His Word to be a tool for our Father to use you to show this world that we are His Creation and He gave us incredible ability to study His Works and to not attempt to upend them BUT TO BE IN AWE OF OUR AWSOME CREATOR .
Thank you, Dr. James Tour... Thank you for your Bible studies and your teachings. We really truly appreciate you. My the Lord Jesus Christ always bless you. I know you have a lot of haters that come to your website. Just to criticize anything you say, you can say the sky is blue and they'll jump all over that and say. No, it's not and they'll criticize everything. It's because you're doing the work of God. We love your brother's stay encouraging in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ amen and amen!!!
I appreciate the fact that you are so highly intelligent by the worlds standards yet have the faith of a little child. Faith of a little child is believing God regardless of how bizarre it seems to our flesh. Gods word is true. I’ve noticed you receive more criticism than many of the pastors and Bible teachers that I listen to and I believe it’s because you are so well known in the scientific community of whom many “ thinking themselves to be wise have become fools” because their great amount of knowledge and learning has hindered their ability to humble themselves as a little child before the Almighty God. The Lord will use your teaching, hold fast.
no tour gets criticism because hes always cited by u people to say ´WE HAVE NO CLUE HOW LIF HAPPENED ANIMO ACIDS DONT EVEN EXISTWITHOUTH HOOMAN´ THATS why also NO U need to humble YOURSELS and stop believing in a 2000 YEARS OLD FAIRYTALE if u believe it then do u also believe earth is ONLY 6000 years OLD WHICH I S WHAT TOUR BELIEVES thats wrong just so U KNOW
no also thats the problem tours behaves like a little child or pastor nnot scientist and get get critcism for staight up lying about abiogenesis which ALL his followers think is thhe truth kust like u are like ´the bible is trueeeee´ okay its not simple as that WE KNOW ITS NOT
Praise Haya! Isaiah could always reach me, even when arrogant or wallowing in self-pity. Your explanation of "hell" was clear. When I taught 6th grade Bible I taught the kids 3 days of hell, and 7 days of heaven. Hell~like your explanation. The negative connotations are because the Paradise side is now empty. It's hard for folk to get past the negative load of today, as opposed to Lazrus & the rich man. Many think Jesus went to the evil side, because they were not aware Jesus took it with Him when He arose. I found no support for Jesus going to Sennacharib's side of hell. Wherever demons or Rebel sidereals went is Tartarus, not Sheol/hades/hell/grave.
You're the best, Dr. Tour! We see your heart longs for people to know Yeshua and be with our Father in Heaven ❤ Thank you for all you do! Thank you for taking time to talk with people about the Ressurection!
You are certainly a brilliant scientist. I love your awe for the wonder of life. Your understanding of Scriptures regarding Sheol, GeHinnom, fire and worms and soul is abysmal, though. They are dead. These are metaphors.
Thank you Dr James Tour. This is the first of your podcasts that I have listened to. I will listen to more. You are faithful to God's word. Our spirit is eternal and we have a choice to spend eternity with God or not. God bless your ministry, in the precious name of Yeshua. Amen 🙏
What I find interesting is the guy on the bad side of Sheol was thirsty, so he had a body that seem to require water, not just in spirit form, which you wouldn't think a spirit would require water.
@@zuukash First you need to learn how to write English. Bible doesn't say there is a glass dome over the earth. Bible doesn't state the age of the earth, only the ages of Adam and his descendants.
@@buckjones4901 John 7:37-38 Or “Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. 38 For the Scriptures declare, ‘Rivers of living water will flow from the heart of anyone who believes in me.’” the living water is the holy spirit.
@shawnambrisco4598 this verse is about physical perishing, not eternal. Condemnation. Jesus was prophesying the destruction of Israel, which later came in 70 AD.
The War in Heaven …Revelation 12:10And I heard a loud voice in heaven saying: “Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ. For the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down-he who accuses them day and night before our God. 11 They have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony. And they did not love their lives so as to shy away from death. 12Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them! But woe to the earth and the sea; with great fury the devil has come down to you, knowing he has only a short time.”…
No, it's Where The Streets Have No Name. It's a pretty good song. We're still building then burning down love; Burning down love. I guess I could still sing it instead with, Where The Worm Does Not Die.
I'm a retired, Bible-believing Christian pastor ... but I'm also a fisherman. I can't help but think that worms that do not die would make great bait. They'd just keep wriggling on the hook; you wouldn't have to keep them in the frig to keep them alive, which irritates the wife. Imagine buying only one dozen for a whole fishing season. Digging them up is the problem.
Noooo! Not you too! How can you believe that we will not surely die? We know the origin of that belief and yet you hold it near? To hold that belief means that torture is good, the dead know something, and that Lazarus was not asleep. It is to hold the belief that heaven is watching people be tortured for eternity and be unable to help them. Hell will be suffering, and heaven will be suffering. We are told that for the dead, their love, and their hatred, and their envy is perished.(Ecclesiastes 9:6) We are told that the dead do not praise God, rather they go into silence, into the pit(Psalm 115:17, Isaiah 38:18). God is the God of the living not of the dead(Mark 12:27), when we are dead we have no God that we speak too, all we can do is wait for God to reunite our breath and our body so that we will live again. When we die our dust returns to the earth, and our breath returns to God(Ecclesiasties 12:7), we return to what we were pre-creation(Genesis 2:7). Our soul, our nepesh(mind, body, desires, passions, being), is the union of breath and dust, that is what we are, death is the separation of those two things. Just like a bulb without electricity sheds no light, a body without breath, thinks no thoughts. You say the phrase "there once was..." means that these events actually happened, but this was a common opening to stories and parables at the time. I could use the same reasoning to say the phrase "once upon a time..." means that a time existed that the following events happened upon. Look at what this parable was a response too, the covetous Pharisees deriding Jesus for teaching that one can not serve mammon and God. This parable is not teaching what happens to people after they die, rather it using a common story(one similar to the modern st. peter at the pearly gates jokes) to teach that earthly prosperity has nothing to do with with salvation, rather it is listening to the word of God. The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life(Romans 6:23). The chaff will be consumed by unquenchable fire (Matthew 3:12), but the righteous will dwell with the unquenchable fire and their water will be sure (Isaiah 33:14-16). God has promised over and over through out the old and new testament, through parable and prophecy, that the wicked will be destroyed, that they will not live forever. Hell is the final destruction of Sin and Evil, and even death and hell(hades/sheol) will be thrown into the lake of fire to be destroyed. Nothing unrighteous can dwell in everlasting burnings. I love your work on explaining the state of origin of life research. I appreciate someone who is able to stay on topic, it is a skill few people practice.
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina? Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively - Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology - Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically - Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs - Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams - Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology - Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works - King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
When I was a kid I went to visit my grandparents countryside. The communal garbage dump was at that time right at the edge of the village . People would bring their garbage and throw it down the valley. There were also bodies of dead animals and yes there were worms as this is the natural way of decay. Villagers would set fires occasionally to "sanitize" the place. Year after year during my vacation visits to my grandparents I saw the same thing. Fire was always burning and worms were always eating away. But....the dead bodies of the animals wouldn't feel the fire or the worm, because they were....dead. Sheol means grave and it's the place where all living people go. Our Lord was also in Sheol for 3 days and nights. Yet we are told explicitly that in Sheol there is no work, thinking, talking,feeling, etc. In Sheol/grave all senses cease to function. If somebody wants to know how death is, he/she can think of the time before birth. That is what death/Sheol feels like. The stories of dead being more alive than ever ...are not biblical. They are distorted versions of parables and metaphorical sayings. Adam didn't receive an immortal soul but Adam was made a living soul. A living soul (person) can feel and experience all the senses while alive. However in Sheol/grave they cease to exist. It is only at resurrection when these senses are restored again. All people will be resurrected and will have to a correctional time under the guidance and supervision of the Lord and His Churc/Bride. Those who realize that life means to obey God's principles and commandments will receive life eternal on Earth as perfect human beings. Those who will reject the correction during the Millennial reign of Christ, will go into the second death/Sheol/grave for eternity. There is no torture, God is not a sick human being to come up with sickening punishments. God is the giver of life (conditionally) and the taker of life if the conditions are not met.
You did not include the lake of fire. What verse explicitly states that we possess no senses in Sheol? I agree that the catholic notions of torment are false.
@LordSunrunner ahhh, the lake of fire. Revelation 21:8 states that all evil doers will end up in the lake of fire. WHICH IS THE SECOND DEATH! Also Rev 20:14 tells us that death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. In other words, death itself is destroyed and no longer to be feared. What we should get out of this is that once the evil is dealt with there will be no more death occurring. People have been tried and all have been made a choice either with God or against. Those who decide to be with God and obey His laws will receive life, those who will be against God will end up in the lake of fire which symbolizes complete destruction. Death, evil, devil, all will be destroyed in the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the ultimate destroyer of evil/death. Satan himself is to be destroyed ( heb 2:14) and all evilness will be too. Now about the cessation of all senses: ecclesiastes 9:10, psalm 6:5, psalm 88:11, psalm 115:17 dies, Isaiah 33:18, the soul (person) dies: Ezekiel 18:20, Ezekiel 18:4 etc.
@liviuconstantin9960 Yeap , today's concepts of sheol, hell, hades all being a place of eternal suffering for sinners is actually not found in the Bible. My understanding is that these ideas all came about during the Middle age's for control and power.
The Far Sought was called Abraham Bosom that was also called Paradise .. But the Far North is called 3 Heaven Paradise.. After Jesus die He went to Resurrected the Holy Fathers that was kept in Spiritual Prison that was kept is Shoal.. Shoal has many level the deeper the level the Hotter Hell will be . But Abraham Bosom is not Hot at all, for this is where the Holy Fathers was kept until Jesus came to released them ..
I have the utmost respect for Dr. Tour, but I think that we make a mistake in creating doctrine and theology based upon various phrases, idioms and colloquialisms found in the Bible. To consider Sheol to be anything other than a term to refer to those who have died is to make things out of something that isn't there. Does Jacob present a tutorial on what happens to people immediately after they die in Genesis 42 or is he just offering a lament? Are dead people really awake and conscious and mingling with others somewhere or are they just dead? Does "the worm that does not die" refer to eternal conscious torment or is it just an idiom that highlights the fact that death is forever, barring an act of God? Do worms typically infest the bodies of those who are alive? The answer is unequivocally "No". Is Jesus offering instruction on what happens immediately after death in Luke 16 or is he presenting a story about rich people? Did Jesus want his listeners to re-evaluate the idea that God favored the rich and has abandoned the poor or was he trying to explain how all rich people will just to go Hades (deliberately using the word associated with Greek mythology, and not Gehenna/Gehinnom or Sheol), and that all poor people will go to "Abraham's Bosom"? Maybe he trying to get people to examine themselves and their hearts by using the extra-biblical beliefs of the Pharisees and others as the setting for a parable about who God really favors and doesn't favor? "There was a..." This is a common way that Jesus introduced fictional characters in a parable. There was absolutely no reason that they had to actually exist. Nor did they exist simply because Jesus gave them a name.
How well your life goes has nothing to do being with right with God or not, bad things happen to good people and good things happen to bad people. You can argue a biblical morality can protect your self from a increase in poor life choices though, but nothing is promised.
poor Tour, just one more liar for his cult. Funny how his cult's sadistic fantasies will never come true. No heaven, no hell, just a cult that needs to scare people into it and to keep them there.
I don't subscibe to the lake of fire being a conscious suffering for ever. First the lake of fire is the second death, second non living things go into the lake of fire, death, hell, beast and false prophet. These things are analogs of things on earth, honorable dead in tombs (heaven), dishonorable dead in the burning trash dump. The lake of fire is a final end, but hell is a prison for spirits awaiting judgement, here you have suffering which is literal.
The Bible you are reading may not be the preserved words of God…. Please do research to study to show yourself approved…. You need not be ashamed you are a great teacher. But we can be decieved
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry? Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina? Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively - Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology - Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically - Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs - Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams - Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology - Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works - King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry? Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina? Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively - Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology - Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically - Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs - Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams - Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology - Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works - King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry? Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina? Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively - Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology - Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically - Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs - Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams - Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology - Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works - King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry? Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina? Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively - Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology - Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically - Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs - Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams - Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology - Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works - King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry? Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina? Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively - Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology - Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically - Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs - Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams - Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology - Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works - King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry? Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina? Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively - Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology - Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically - Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs - Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams - Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology - Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works - King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
@@ianlee5812 When did atheists ever stop coming with counter arguments? And why bombard the comment section? It gives a somewhat desperate vibe. Have you ever thought that the reason you have ended up "stuck" here, is because Jesus is drawing you?
@@ingela_injeela I tried asking Jim via email since he said he was open to that mode of communication. Even under the guise that I wanted to hear him talk about Jesus. All I got were crickets.
@@ianlee5812 I can understand if he can't get back to everyone at once. He must be such a busy man. * Is there any way I can help you? As a believer in Jesus. What do you think about Jesus?
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry? Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina? Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively - Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology - Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically - Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs - Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams - Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology - Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works - King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry? Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry? Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry? Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr Tour thanks for sticking to this. A little more detail in Is 40-46 would heal all wounds! Temporarily at least. Thanks. God is blessing your ministry!
Powerful! Thank you allowing God to use you.
Being a modern model of Faith in our Holy God while holding a vocation in science revered by the world showing there is No Conflict between the two but rather the gift of intelligence to man from God supports His Creation of all things not the inverse ...I am thankful for your courage through faith in Christ and His Word to be a tool for our Father to use you to show this world that we are His Creation and He gave us incredible ability to study His Works and to not attempt to upend them BUT TO BE IN AWE OF OUR AWSOME CREATOR .
no give me the papers where its because tour scientist god exist that not how this works
God bless you Dr Tour. God bless your people. Wonderful reading and exposition from God's good word!
Amen Dr. Tour! I pray for the lost to be found in Jesus Christ the ONLY way, blessings xo
Thank you, Dr. James Tour... Thank you for your Bible studies and your teachings. We really truly appreciate you. My the Lord Jesus Christ always bless you. I know you have a lot of haters that come to your website. Just to criticize anything you say, you can say the sky is blue and they'll jump all over that and say. No, it's not and they'll criticize everything. It's because you're doing the work of God. We love your brother's stay encouraging in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ amen and amen!!!
Amen!! ❤
I appreciate the fact that you are so highly intelligent by the worlds standards yet have the faith of a little child. Faith of a little child is believing God regardless of how bizarre it seems to our flesh. Gods word is true. I’ve noticed you receive more criticism than many of the pastors and Bible teachers that I listen to and I believe it’s because you are so well known in the scientific community of whom many “ thinking themselves to be wise have become fools” because their great amount of knowledge and learning has hindered their ability to humble themselves as a little child before the Almighty God. The Lord will use your teaching, hold fast.
no tour gets criticism because hes always cited by u people to say ´WE HAVE NO CLUE HOW LIF HAPPENED ANIMO ACIDS DONT EVEN EXISTWITHOUTH HOOMAN´ THATS why also NO U need to humble YOURSELS and stop believing in a 2000 YEARS OLD FAIRYTALE if u believe it then do u also believe earth is ONLY 6000 years OLD WHICH I S WHAT TOUR BELIEVES thats wrong just so U KNOW
no also thats the problem tours behaves like a little child or pastor nnot scientist and get get critcism for staight up lying about abiogenesis which ALL his followers think is thhe truth kust like u are like ´the bible is trueeeee´ okay its not simple as that WE KNOW ITS NOT
Praise Haya! Isaiah could always reach me, even when arrogant or wallowing in self-pity. Your explanation of "hell" was clear. When I taught 6th grade Bible I taught the kids 3 days of hell, and 7 days of heaven. Hell~like your explanation. The negative connotations are because the Paradise side is now empty. It's hard for folk to get past the negative load of today, as opposed to Lazrus & the rich man. Many think Jesus went to the evil side, because they were not aware Jesus took it with Him when He arose. I found no support for Jesus going to Sennacharib's side of hell. Wherever demons or Rebel sidereals went is Tartarus, not Sheol/hades/hell/grave.
You're the best, Dr. Tour! We see your heart longs for people to know Yeshua and be with our Father in Heaven ❤ Thank you for all you do! Thank you for taking time to talk with people about the Ressurection!
You are certainly a brilliant scientist. I love your awe for the wonder of life.
Your understanding of Scriptures regarding Sheol, GeHinnom, fire and worms and soul is abysmal, though.
They are dead. These are metaphors.
God don’t send people to hell . People choose!
How can people who dont believe there is a hell choose???
@@incrediblystupid8483That’s your choice to not believe
Amen. Excellent teaching. Very clear and concise. Isaiah is one of my favorite books. Thank you.
Thank you Dr James Tour. This is the first of your podcasts that I have listened to. I will listen to more. You are faithful to God's word. Our spirit is eternal and we have a choice to spend eternity with God or not. God bless your ministry, in the precious name of Yeshua. Amen 🙏
What I find interesting is the guy on the bad side of Sheol was thirsty, so he had a body that seem to require water, not just in spirit form, which you wouldn't think a spirit would require water.
I think it's not literal water. John 7:38: “He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water”
wello u kNOW ´for the bibel tells me so´ the biel also says earth is 6000 years old or tht we have a GLASS DOME OVER US thats BOTH WROOOOOOOOONG
@@ivortomic4545 Interesting take, that could be!, or maybe it has double meaning even.
@@zuukash First you need to learn how to write English. Bible doesn't say there is a glass dome over the earth. Bible doesn't state the age of the earth, only the ages of Adam and his descendants.
@@buckjones4901 John 7:37-38 Or “Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. 38 For the Scriptures declare, ‘Rivers of living water will flow from the heart of anyone who believes in me.’” the living water is the holy spirit.
So be it in the name of Yeshua the King of Kings, the Supreme Master of all spirits.
Praise the Lord ❤️❤️❤️✝️✝️✝️
“E-X-C-E-P-T you ‘REPENT’;
You Shall ‘A-L-L’ likewise Perish !!!”
~ JESUS CHRIST ~
(St Luke 13:3)
~~~
:o
@shawnambrisco4598 this verse is about physical perishing, not eternal. Condemnation. Jesus was prophesying the destruction of Israel, which later came in 70 AD.
perish implies an end though.
@supersilverhazeroker perish implies death. Can be physical, can be spiritual. In this context, it is referring to physical death.
Thanks 🙏
The War in Heaven
…Revelation 12:10And I heard a loud voice in heaven saying: “Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ. For the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down-he who accuses them day and night before our God. 11 They have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony. And they did not love their lives so as to shy away from death. 12Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them! But woe to the earth and the sea; with great fury the devil has come down to you, knowing he has only a short time.”…
Students what is Love with patience?
No, it's Where The Streets Have No Name. It's a pretty good song. We're still building then burning down love; Burning down love. I guess I could still sing it instead with, Where The Worm Does Not Die.
A great teacher.
Lord if only can hold. Who can hold? A little child "i" AM. Humility will say, come here my conversations!
Everyone is still in Sheol until the last day, when the two resurrections take place. Thank you for your contributions.
@@LordSunrunner r u sure?? Don’t be
Question, what version of the Bible does Dr. Tour read from? I use NKJV, but would just like to sync up with the one he reads from. Thanks ahead.
NASB95
@@mikek7029 Thanks that will help me to follow when he reads scripture. Have a great day.
I'm a retired, Bible-believing Christian pastor ... but I'm also a fisherman. I can't help but think that worms that do not die would make great bait. They'd just keep wriggling on the hook; you wouldn't have to keep them in the frig to keep them alive, which irritates the wife. Imagine buying only one dozen for a whole fishing season. Digging them up is the problem.
Noooo! Not you too! How can you believe that we will not surely die? We know the origin of that belief and yet you hold it near? To hold that belief means that torture is good, the dead know something, and that Lazarus was not asleep. It is to hold the belief that heaven is watching people be tortured for eternity and be unable to help them. Hell will be suffering, and heaven will be suffering.
We are told that for the dead, their love, and their hatred, and their envy is perished.(Ecclesiastes 9:6) We are told that the dead do not praise God, rather they go into silence, into the pit(Psalm 115:17, Isaiah 38:18). God is the God of the living not of the dead(Mark 12:27), when we are dead we have no God that we speak too, all we can do is wait for God to reunite our breath and our body so that we will live again. When we die our dust returns to the earth, and our breath returns to God(Ecclesiasties 12:7), we return to what we were pre-creation(Genesis 2:7). Our soul, our nepesh(mind, body, desires, passions, being), is the union of breath and dust, that is what we are, death is the separation of those two things. Just like a bulb without electricity sheds no light, a body without breath, thinks no thoughts.
You say the phrase "there once was..." means that these events actually happened, but this was a common opening to stories and parables at the time. I could use the same reasoning to say the phrase "once upon a time..." means that a time existed that the following events happened upon. Look at what this parable was a response too, the covetous Pharisees deriding Jesus for teaching that one can not serve mammon and God. This parable is not teaching what happens to people after they die, rather it using a common story(one similar to the modern st. peter at the pearly gates jokes) to teach that earthly prosperity has nothing to do with with salvation, rather it is listening to the word of God.
The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life(Romans 6:23). The chaff will be consumed by unquenchable fire (Matthew 3:12), but the righteous will dwell with the unquenchable fire and their water will be sure (Isaiah 33:14-16). God has promised over and over through out the old and new testament, through parable and prophecy, that the wicked will be destroyed, that they will not live forever. Hell is the final destruction of Sin and Evil, and even death and hell(hades/sheol) will be thrown into the lake of fire to be destroyed. Nothing unrighteous can dwell in everlasting burnings.
I love your work on explaining the state of origin of life research. I appreciate someone who is able to stay on topic, it is a skill few people practice.
Students shared "i" AM will say, remember unto all professors! Students nor a little Child will grow?
🌈😎❤️⚡🕊️
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina?
Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively
- Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology
- Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically
- Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs
- Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams
- Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology
- Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works
- King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
When I was a kid I went to visit my grandparents countryside. The communal garbage dump was at that time right at the edge of the village . People would bring their garbage and throw it down the valley. There were also bodies of dead animals and yes there were worms as this is the natural way of decay. Villagers would set fires occasionally to "sanitize" the place. Year after year during my vacation visits to my grandparents I saw the same thing. Fire was always burning and worms were always eating away. But....the dead bodies of the animals wouldn't feel the fire or the worm, because they were....dead. Sheol means grave and it's the place where all living people go. Our Lord was also in Sheol for 3 days and nights. Yet we are told explicitly that in Sheol there is no work, thinking, talking,feeling, etc. In Sheol/grave all senses cease to function. If somebody wants to know how death is, he/she can think of the time before birth. That is what death/Sheol feels like. The stories of dead being more alive than ever ...are not biblical. They are distorted versions of parables and metaphorical sayings. Adam didn't receive an immortal soul but Adam was made a living soul. A living soul (person) can feel and experience all the senses while alive. However in Sheol/grave they cease to exist. It is only at resurrection when these senses are restored again. All people will be resurrected and will have to a correctional time under the guidance and supervision of the Lord and His Churc/Bride. Those who realize that life means to obey God's principles and commandments will receive life eternal on Earth as perfect human beings. Those who will reject the correction during the Millennial reign of Christ, will go into the second death/Sheol/grave for eternity. There is no torture, God is not a sick human being to come up with sickening punishments. God is the giver of life (conditionally) and the taker of life if the conditions are not met.
Yeap, I agree with your comment 100%.
You did not include the lake of fire. What verse explicitly states that we possess no senses in Sheol? I agree that the catholic notions of torment are false.
@LordSunrunner ahhh, the lake of fire. Revelation 21:8 states that all evil doers will end up in the lake of fire. WHICH IS THE SECOND DEATH!
Also Rev 20:14 tells us that death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. In other words, death itself is destroyed and no longer to be feared. What we should get out of this is that once the evil is dealt with there will be no more death occurring. People have been tried and all have been made a choice either with God or against. Those who decide to be with God and obey His laws will receive life, those who will be against God will end up in the lake of fire which symbolizes complete destruction. Death, evil, devil, all will be destroyed in the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the ultimate destroyer of evil/death. Satan himself is to be destroyed ( heb 2:14) and all evilness will be too.
Now about the cessation of all senses: ecclesiastes 9:10, psalm 6:5, psalm 88:11, psalm 115:17 dies, Isaiah 33:18, the soul (person) dies: Ezekiel 18:20, Ezekiel 18:4 etc.
@liviuconstantin9960 Yeap , today's concepts of sheol, hell, hades all being a place of eternal suffering for sinners is actually not found in the Bible. My understanding is that these ideas all came about during the Middle age's for control and power.
@@liviuconstantin9960 Thank you for the references.
❤
Amen
Mourning star
Students will say, Lord what is a teacher?
Why would a person who can't believe an ancient book be tortured in hell for eternity. Seems rather unreasonable.
Worm = spirit
The Far Sought was called Abraham Bosom that was also called Paradise ..
But the Far North is called 3 Heaven Paradise..
After Jesus die He went to Resurrected the Holy Fathers that was kept in Spiritual Prison that was kept is Shoal..
Shoal has many level the deeper the level the Hotter Hell will be .
But Abraham Bosom is not Hot at all, for this is where the Holy Fathers was kept until Jesus came to released them ..
I have the utmost respect for Dr. Tour, but I think that we make a mistake in creating doctrine and theology based upon various phrases, idioms and colloquialisms found in the Bible. To consider Sheol to be anything other than a term to refer to those who have died is to make things out of something that isn't there. Does Jacob present a tutorial on what happens to people immediately after they die in Genesis 42 or is he just offering a lament? Are dead people really awake and conscious and mingling with others somewhere or are they just dead? Does "the worm that does not die" refer to eternal conscious torment or is it just an idiom that highlights the fact that death is forever, barring an act of God? Do worms typically infest the bodies of those who are alive? The answer is unequivocally "No". Is Jesus offering instruction on what happens immediately after death in Luke 16 or is he presenting a story about rich people? Did Jesus want his listeners to re-evaluate the idea that God favored the rich and has abandoned the poor or was he trying to explain how all rich people will just to go Hades (deliberately using the word associated with Greek mythology, and not Gehenna/Gehinnom or Sheol), and that all poor people will go to "Abraham's Bosom"? Maybe he trying to get people to examine themselves and their hearts by using the extra-biblical beliefs of the Pharisees and others as the setting for a parable about who God really favors and doesn't favor? "There was a..." This is a common way that Jesus introduced fictional characters in a parable. There was absolutely no reason that they had to actually exist. Nor did they exist simply because Jesus gave them a name.
hahhahhahahah a fictional character naming other fictional charaters AMAZING
💙🙏🏼💙
King of Babylon is difficult was it Nebuchadnezzar ? Because he was called Lords servant?i been with false christ.
Satan is his image. Lucifer was his ID. As others in the Bible - their names change so too does Lucifer…
How well your life goes has nothing to do being with right with God or not, bad things happen to good people and good things happen to bad people. You can argue a biblical morality can protect your self from a increase in poor life choices though, but nothing is promised.
Sheol is just the grave! The place of the dead...
Is not his name O’ Lucifer. The Bible you are reading has an issue. Christ is the Morning Star too…. Something seems wrong
351 Freeman Locks
In a bottle of tequila 😊
Who ye talking too unseen nor seen?
poor Tour, just one more liar for his cult. Funny how his cult's sadistic fantasies will never come true. No heaven, no hell, just a cult that needs to scare people into it and to keep them there.
I don't subscibe to the lake of fire being a conscious suffering for ever. First the lake of fire is the second death, second non living things go into the lake of fire, death, hell, beast and false prophet. These things are analogs of things on earth, honorable dead in tombs (heaven), dishonorable dead in the burning trash dump. The lake of fire is a final end, but hell is a prison for spirits awaiting judgement, here you have suffering which is literal.
The Bible you are reading may not be the preserved words of God…. Please do research to study to show yourself approved…. You need not be ashamed you are a great teacher. But we can be decieved
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry?
Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
What facts?
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina?
Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively
- Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology
- Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically
- Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs
- Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams
- Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology
- Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works
- King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry?
Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina?
Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively
- Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology
- Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically
- Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs
- Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams
- Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology
- Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works
- King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry?
Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina?
Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively
- Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology
- Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically
- Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs
- Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams
- Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology
- Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works
- King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry?
Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina?
Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively
- Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology
- Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically
- Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs
- Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams
- Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology
- Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works
- King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry?
Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina?
Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively
- Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology
- Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically
- Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs
- Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams
- Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology
- Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works
- King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry?
Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina?
Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively
- Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology
- Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically
- Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs
- Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams
- Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology
- Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works
- King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
Your spamming is just annoying.
@@ingela_injeela I’ll stop asking once James answers my questions in a way that won’t raise any more questions
@@ianlee5812 When did atheists ever stop coming with counter arguments?
And why bombard the comment section?
It gives a somewhat desperate vibe.
Have you ever thought that the reason you have ended up "stuck" here, is because Jesus is drawing you?
@@ingela_injeela I tried asking Jim via email since he said he was open to that mode of communication. Even under the guise that I wanted to hear him talk about Jesus. All I got were crickets.
@@ianlee5812 I can understand if he can't get back to everyone at once. He must be such a busy man.
* Is there any way I can help you?
As a believer in Jesus.
What do you think about Jesus?
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry?
Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
Dr. Tour, do you have plans on debating any of these people now that you’ve debated Dave Farina?
Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) - knows paleoanthropology (human evolution), debunks young earth creationism extensively
- Aron Ra - knows paleontology and evolutionary biology, argues against various flavours of theists in biology
- Creation Myths (Dr Dan) - knows genetics, disproves very specific claims of creationists mathematically
- Forrest Valkai - knows a lot about biology, great for education of science newbs and ex-YECs
- Dapper Dinosaur - knows a lot, debunks all kinds of pseudoscience, kinda like Prof Dave but more livestreams
- Based Theory (Grayson) - knows abiogenesis, debates many topics in molecular biology and geology
- Age of Rocks - very small channel, has great explainers on radiometric dating and how it works
- King Crockoduck - knows a lot, had a famous debate with Kent Hovind on age of the universe
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry?
Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry?
Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique
If Dr. Tour is so confident that his statements on origin of life are factual, why doesn’t he publish his critiques on origin of life research in reputable peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Angewandte Chemie? It’s not like you can’t publish critiques in these journals. I read 2 critiques published in Angewandte Chemie and Nature about how a compound made by Stephen Liddle’s group may not exhibit aromaticity. Why CAN you publish critiques on those topics but not origin of life if, like Jim said, they’re both basically synthetic chemistry?
Critiques: [{Th(C8H8)Cl2}3]2− is stable but not aromatic, Bonding in a Crystalline Tri‐Thorium Cluster: Not σ‐Aromatic But Still Unique