I still can't believe that Dave was in a band and drank some lemonade once. That totally invalidates all the research and all these paper he's referring to. Thank you James for exposing the shoking truth!
😂😂😂😂 yup. Definitely shouldn’t listen to anyone who’s ever been in a band, acted a little silly while enjoying life, and drinking lemonade 😮that’s just a step too far😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🎉
"You're not an expert in this field, you can't comment on this!" - Guy who is also not an expert in this field, and is the one arguing against the overwhelming scientific consensus achieved through decades of vigorous research - while one of its foremost researchers is thanking Dave and telling him he's correct.
On the "Soup" description of James: He is using the Motte-and-bailey fallacy. Essencially he proposes two things. One controversial (That throughout education, the "lizard out of a lightning struck stew" model is being taught) and one mundane (That the early conditions are refered to as "primordial soup"). He argues for his more controversial view, but upon being called out for it, he retreats to the Motte (the mundane position) and proclaims that Dave did not prove him wrong, because look: Textbooks really do say "primordial soup". James is dishonestly substituting his controversial claim, with a more easily deffendable one, while acting as if the critique of his controversial claim is now directed at the mundane one.
They do this with Evolution when they employ the Haeckel's embryos argument. Yes, his drawings are in textbooks, but they aren't used to argue his recapitulation theory.
@TheSleeper33 Don't know. James came out today and said they have not asked him to respond to Dave and he has done so on his own and with his own money.
@galileog8945 well so far I haven't seen any lies. All I've seen is people stretching the definition of lie. At most it's misread. Professor Dave just makes it sound much worse because he feels the need to try and destroy religion. What really needs to happen is they both need to just debate things on a video or whatever and go through all the studies and papers themselves. Cause this back and forth crap is hard to follow sometimes. One seems right, then the other does and then back to other....its like at the end of the day I'm just more confused.
I went to Christian middle school. My seventh grade “biology” textbook, along with the single paragraph about “primordial soup”, literally had a cartoon of a man in shadows looking forlornly into a pool of muck with the caption “I crawled out of this slime.” The level of integrity for the religious who deny evolution to present science accurately has always been at a zero.
@@andrewkelley9405 That’s unfortunate, the Catholic schools I attended all taught evolution (correctly) as fact. The Vatican approved evolution as reasonable and compatible with Catholicism all the way back in 1950 (still a few holdouts though, sadly). Ironically, it was my public middle school science class that “taught the controversy.” Can only imagine what goes on in Evangelical Christian schools.
Damn, Dave, you should be flattered. James took a year off to absolutely scour the internet to find clips of you in your daily life that almost none of your subscribers have probably ever seen. Looks like you've got a super-fan on your hands. Edit: looks like either a dirty delete, or the idiot in the comments got blocked for spamming 😂
@@lifewasgiventous1614 Sorry, Dave already “took away” from all that ages ago. I suggest you muster up the courage to actually watch Dave’s debunks. You might even learn something.
@@lifewasgiventous1614 Yeah, as much as I like Dave, he’s not my hero. I think you’re projecting just a teensy bit, mate, and it explains a lot about your attitude.
@@lifewasgiventous1614 "James has credentials in something, so he's best informed to address this." A literal argument from authority. His credentials are in an unrelated field, he doesn't know anything about evolution or abiogenesis. And James didn't reach out directly to Dave with his "debate" offer, he announced it publicly on some Christian broadcast channel, so Dave didn't find out about it until James was already bitching that he had refused the "offer", which you'd know if you had watched Dave's videos.
"Facts speak louder than words and truth outlasts lies, so let us calmly and objectively examine the claims and counter them with evidence-based reasoning."- deduced by this video
fools and despots thrives on ignorance.. insight and fairness thrives on knowledge... indeed , review and dismantle the arguments first and keep the 'charisma game' for entertainment
Unfortunately, we live in a time and society in which people can ignore facts, make up their own reality and lie about everything, and still survive because it doesn't kill them directly. Natural selection doesn't apply anymore, because money rules. Or maybe natural selection has gotten a different meaning in a society where money determines your survival and not how well you understand the world you live in...
Hey Dave, I’ve watched you for(I believe) around 2 1/2 years now. I discovered you in my freshman year of high school toward the end of first quarter when I was really struggling with Physics, which I eventually passed because of your videos. In fact, thats not the only class you’ve helped me through; so far you’ve helped me get through Physics, Biology, and now you’re helping me through Chemistry. Having ADHD, providing the information in distinct, easy-to-follow videos as opposed to a textbook was very helpful. You’ve become my go-to when it comes to learning all-things science without having to read through a high school textbook. I probably have an entire notebook’s worth of reference just from the notes that I’ve taken on your videos alone(though the notes are a bit disorganized and, quite literally, all over the place; I don’t tend to keep them all in one spot). I’ve even recently started on your series on Economics in my spare time because I’m doing well enough in my other classes to take on more. Even if we set aside the fact that you are single-handedly leading me through high school, you’re an amazing content creator. I’ve probably watched your demolition of anti-science hacks about a million times. I’ve done my best to watch through most of your debates, though some of your opponents tended to talk over you and repeat themselves over and over to the point where I grow bored because I can refute some of their claims myself. I even have a tradition where, whenever you release a new Debunks/Debates/Discussions video, I go the stove, boil some water, and make a nice bowl of ramen noodles for myself to eat while I watch the video. I’ve even started using your stuff in my debate club, especially against people who think like Creationists and Flerfs. I’ve seen one or two minds change after I’ve linked your content. I eventually found myself using your mannerisms and tone during debates, which is honestly great, because if I’m wrong about something, it hits a lot harder and I actually learn from the experience. Another thing I’ve learned from you: if mistakes are made obvious for all to see, there is a greater incentive to correct them. Thanks for making my high school so much easier, thanks for giving me something entertaining on a normal basis, and thanks for even helping me change a few minds. Stay awesome.
I love his videos for my Bio class too! I actually had to find simpler videos for test studying: Dave's stuff is just a little too in depth for a time constraint. But it's been great going through the actual class listening to him. I get so much more out of it, as my professor is, I would guess, keeping things simple so more people pass. He said something about it at the beginning of the course about being sure most of us would pass, which I took as him being confident he was a good teacher. I suspect he could be if he wanted to be, but things are damn near dumbed down. But I feel like I'm getting enough out of it, even if I'm supplementing it elsewhere.
It's kinda funny that these debunks have gotten to the point where James Tour and the DI are all but declaring war on dear Professor Dave. It doesn't matter how many times they try to assassinate his character, Dave always just stands firm, says "Really?" and then proceeds to grind his foes into the dust. Because none of his attackers attack him with actual science. And the only thing that defeats science is better science.
Basically, in a debate situation where one position is substantiated by reality and the other isn't, you'll see this happen. All Dave has to do is present reality, and their putrid wind is stopped dead Even the authors of the papers Tour evoked have pointed out that he has misrepresented and outright lied about their papers. This is a desperate attempt to drum up some support and slip in some damage control, which is made obvious by the profound number of mistakes he / DI made in this newest series
Dr. Dave has ground nothing but his own reputation into dust. He just cannot argue on facts. He is making money on his channel however and laughing all the way to the bank.
Hard for Tour to debunk and counter anothers arguments when he doesn't understand them well enough to even comprehend ... Sounds like a Trainwreck.... **Pulls up a chair**
@@Unsensitive what are you talking about? Dave interviewed pioneers of the field whose research had been misrepresented by the current offender. It is flat out said by them. Or do you mean the other way around?
@@leobriccocola8141 as a shard of a entity yet for all homo species to comprehend i hoppe you all seek to adress the colour bleed this james specimen has on your species collective weave of patterns influencing the course of your societies , cultures and over arching civilization
For sure if it was James reviewing someone else’s statements made that way, he would mock them for “not even knowing how to pronounce the thing they claim to understand.”
The whole rabbit walking by the counter said a lot to me. James knows that the people he is talking to are easily manipulated so when the actual explanation started James tossed out a distraction so they wouldn't be paying attention to it, thereby being able to continue his claim that the process wasn't explained.
It may seem like an unimportant distraction to do these videos, but they’re so, so important. The bullshit in this world needs to be countered at every opportunity, or else the bullshitters will win.
If only Dave would attempt to stick with the chemistry he would actually learn something. OOL research by Dave begins with laboratory obtained pure chemicals not understanding that is not available on a supposed early earth at all.
Eh, I for one don't have the determination to constantly try and debunk people who are wrong. Dave is a stronger willed person than I, and I can respect that.
All JT has to do is demonstrate that one single vital part of abiogenesis is absolutely impossible under any natural circumstances. If he wasn't a creationist, he likely wouldn't even care about abiogenesis in the slightest.
This is by far the strongest point in my opinion and tour's blind followers don't seem to understand. Why is tour so motivated on this topic, it's so OBVIOUS it's creationism. Otherwise you are absolutely correct, why would he care at all?
On his blog this scientist openly states his faith and belief are beyond scientific evidence, and that he doesn't even accept the regular biological evolution part of life's history-- for theological reasons. Not in his public sermons that people actually watch though, there he says he doesn't mention god and it's all about the science and he didn't even mention god _once!_ Not that it matters though, I've tried and asked a whole bunch of his fanboys to comment on or verify this for themselves, and they all flat-out refused...
@@jasonjansen9831 I don't even get why he cares in spite of being a creationist. Creationists will just roll back to their favorite "so what" response of "God included the abiogenesis potential in his creation for funzies". I've literally heard them declare that fossils were put there by God for us to find and marvel at, that the critters they use to be never actually existed.
@@camonly849 No, what he _thinks_ is that his god created humans separately from all other life through magic, and that OoL researchers should stop doing the research they are doing. Have you not seen Dave and myself quoting Tour stating this in less visible places..?
It was very fun watching Tour claim that Dave didn't do something only to see that Dave did the thing, but in a part of the video Tour edited out for the response. This happened multiple times while I watched the back and forth, so I fully expect they will be addressed during this new series.
AIG and DI both do this kind of thing- they'll say "Why won't they X if Y" and "Why did they hide X" ..only to find out they simply cut that part of the target's video out. Unfortunately for them, they're attacking an academic who knows the game and has demonstrable reality on his side. The only people this crap would fool are Tour's lackeys and fans, who do not care if Tour is blatantly lying or not.
@@Krugis as someone who grew up as a hardcore YEC, one of the first things that ended up changing my mind was how often a creationist article would say “evolutionists don’t know how to solve X problem with their theory, so they just ignore it” and then I would Google it and find out that there would be like 6 different theories on how to solve X problem, all with lots of research and rigorous debate. Creationists may not be good at science, but they sure are good at splicing things exactly the way that fits their argument best
@@Krugis Dear lord this has happened so many times. Like, there was this one where a DI scammer was accusing a scientist of deliberately editing bones to make them fit together in a way that proved his claim, while conveniently cutting out the part of the 10+ minute video that made very clear he was just cleaning them. Namely, the entire _rest_ of the video aside from the one clip he cherry picked.
@@blakksheep736 I remember that! The dramatic cut to a scientist taking an angle grinder to a Fossil! Except that isn't even remotely what actually happened What a shame that they ensnare so many with this bottom-barrel idiocy
@@Krugis I agree, especially since that's not stupidity, that's literally fraud, statements made with the intent to deceive. The DI should be glad all he got was Dave picking him apart on the internet, he should be _sued_ for that.
Dude looks legit shook in his videos, and when he just keeps repeating shit like "boy did I have a heyday with that" it reminds me of someone who just got broken up with saying "I don't even care anymore I'm over it" every 5 minutes to try to convince themselves they're actually over. While being very much not over it.
@@jasonjansen9831 and then when their ex is like "cool me either" and hangs up on them and they sit there with their friend trying to support them saying stuff like "I just think it's so funny that..." and then they'll say stuff that they do not find funny at all but are actually very hurt by
The more I learn about James Tour the more “Kent Hovindy” he seems. That whole thing with criticizing an experiment for not reaching a goal it never said it have is exactly what Kent Hovind did with the Miller-Urey experiment.
I don't know what I've been anticipating more for 2023- Madalorian season 3, Loki season 2, or another Professor Dave debunk of James Tour! Four parts you say?!! Oh, this is going to be a good year!
What makes me despair is that the only benefit for people like Tour and other religious 'elite' to keep their flock ignorant, is that they are knowingly using knowledge and the lack thereof to keep people down. That's terrifying. There is no good implication for doing thing like this.
I genuinely wonder how can the higher-ups of Rice can justify not revoking James’ professorship. Don’t they realize that Jim’s slanderous and anti-science behavior is an embarrassment to Rice? Especially because he uses his title to justify getting in fights with random people on the Internet and slanderizing others? I wanna state that I’m not being insulted in anyone’s behalf even if the emotional charge of this comment says otherwise. If watching Bechly whine like a toddler about Dave taught me anything, it’s to never be offended on someone’s behalf because I think Luskin and Meyer took his videos to stride (as far as I know, they haven’t made any videos or articles about Dave). It’s just that Tour pisses me off particularly more than the other DI conmen because he calls himself an organic chemistry and carbon nanotechnology researcher, topics that I MYSELF am interested in studying. I feel like because of Tour alone, I’ll never go to Rice to get my Ph.D. If there’s even a tiny probability of having HIM as my graduate advisor, I don’t want to be a part of it.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains don’t take it personally, he’s only attacking you because you’re destabilising his BS world. He’s clearly got a god complex so the best you can hope for is to entertain us and perhaps enlighten his followers
If it counts for anything, I have a phd in theoretical chemistry and Dave thoroughly mops the floor with Dr. Tour. It’s quite astonishing how narrow-mindedly but yet confidently a scientist can approach fields outside their own expertise - ending up with completely irrelevant analogies. The rest of us in the figurative lecture hall are cringing in our seats for this one dude who just won’t shut up…
@@ducphan7590 it's always hilarious to see you guys struggling to believe someone could have a PhD. They are relatively common, I have one and so do many of my friends.
Look at these morons. James must be right because he has a PhD. Anyone else with a PhD must be wrong because they’re not James. You morons should be sterilized.
While I admit I haven't gone to college and have trouble picking up the complexities of science, I have learned a whole lot about psychology by trying to understand the psychologically manipulative behavior of these ideologues. I haven't learned how to explain the scientific method to dogma, but I have learned how and why that would be a waste of time and effort on my part. Thanks for putting in the time and effort for those willing to rationally process.
It's worth learning the scientific method even if you don't plan to explain it to anyone else. I'd argue it is the most fundamentally important concept for a species to master after becoming sentient.
I think saying James doesn't know or doesn't understand is giving him too much credit. I don't think he's acting in good faith at any point. I don't have a Ph.D, or even a Master's degree, the highest level of education I completed was a Bachelor's of Science degree, (in Biology)yet I can read and understand the papers Dave is citing with some effort, even though it's not really my field, and I can understand why Dave is right. I also know the difference between primary and secondary literature. I find it nearly impossible to believe that a man with a Ph.D can't do the same. Especially a chemist, who should be far more proficient than me at deciphering a chemistry paper. I think James understands exactly what those papers are saying, exactly what the real state of origin of life research is, and is just outright lying about it to advance his agenda. James isn't operating in good faith at all, in my opinion.
It’s a cocktail of dishonesty as well as stupidity. He’s a complete narcissist and assumes he must be right even when going outside of his field. He doesn’t know that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about, and anyone who informs him of that is wicked or corrupt.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Fair enough. I've certainly encountered well educated people with some very dumb ideas about things they absolutely should know better about.
@@djzoodude James was in another video yelling about red blood cells found in dinosaur fossils proving the Earth isn't old. He insisted that he knows molecules so he is an expert. The problem is they didn't find cells, but the remains of them. So either James didn't even read the details of the paper, or he's just repeating the same lie that non chemist creationists do.
@@NinjaMonkeyPrime Last year Tour did a video called "Richard Dawkins deceived us!" where he was just a regular creationist PRATT spewing machine. We got the usual "scientists are CLUELESS on the mechanisms of evolution!" and the ever popular "No one has even seen one thing evolve into another thing!!" I used to think he was just confused but now it's clear the man is a full fledged religious idiot.
Let me state how important this series is: I produce content here in you tube in Spanish. Mostly fighting anti science and science denialism. During my live streams about evolution, there are always creationists and fundamentalists disparaging OOL and evolution. Since I have used prof Dave videos as reference in some of my videos and live streaming and after this James Tour started his new attacks, my live shows have been plagued by these fanatics claiming that Dr. Tour had destroyed Prof. Dave. This video, and the ones coming will help me shut them up. Prof. Dave content (and he might not know this) is used in other languages by science promoters very often. I cannot thank him enough for his efforts and love of science. Thank you again.
"This entire section ranting about calcium hydroxide is one big turd sandwich..." That genuinely made me LOL! From beginning to end, this was another most EXCELLENT annihilation of "little" Jimmy's bullcrap. Well done, as always Prof Dave!
Thanks Dave - that was great & I'm glad your took the time to explain the Calcium Hydroxide thing - I was scratching my head wonder why he was going on about it so much - just pure deflection! He really is a *Sinner* (those clips cracked-me up.)
NGL... I have no idea what you said for like 5 minutes while you were explaining the paper... but the way you explained it inspired confidence that at least YOU knew what you were talking about... unlike James who couldn't even pronounce the words on the paper...
The infantile tactics employed by the Discovery Institute and James Tour are a testament to the damage Professor Dave single-handedly dished out to these charlatans.
Right? I mean, I could see if you were a serious person that maybe one video would be sufficient to counter someone, but unleashing a 14 part series of mostly attacks? That speaks to an attempt to drown out a critic with valid complaints.
after watching the debate i decided to watch tours series to try to commit to an open mind and look at both sides. i nearly went insane and this feels like i’m breathing fresh air for the first time in weeks
They have spent a LOT of money trying to do damage control regarding you specifically. Great work! A couple things they don't quite grasp.. 1) Even if abiogenesis research shows life could have successfully started by itself this doesn't rule out their 'God' story necessarily. 2) By getting this outraged over challenges to James Tour's opinion, and handling it the way they are, via youtube videos rather than scientific papers, it shows they have no evidence to support their claims. Keep up the great work. It's working.
The God story as they present it isn't just that God *did* do it, but that *only* God could. They believe it's magic. Showing it isn't magic *does* dismantle that version of their position.
@@zacheryeckard3051 Exactly - as Aron Ra has put it people like the DI, AIG, etc worship a book, they believe the Bible is literally true so they refuse to accept it could be a god did start the whole process of life and use evolution.
@@zacheryeckard3051 Yeah, But a lot of these people are using God of the gaps. So once its known and undeniable they just shift the goal posts back. So even if its proven to them to the point they cannot deny. they'll just retreat god into another gap. Some creationists are starting to admit that micro evolution happens. They just refuse to admit that once you stack enough changes you end up with macro evolution. I feel its mainly because everything is a spectrum/gradient and these people only think in binary. Like a ton of creationists think that an example of speciation would be a bear giving birth to a dog.
28:14 Do you think Tour is gonna drag this on so long that Dave is going to have to show the tiniest little picture of the research within a 100 monitors? lol
Wowie! I'm excited for this up coming trilogy of debunks, I thought last video about him was the last, but we viewers really are being treated with some high quality content of Dave debunking these clowns! Thank you Dave :D
Ooh perfect, I ended up on his channel last week and was saddened by how little pushback that guy gets. I wondered whether it would be worth it to suggest anyone in this business debunk him, but really don't expect him to have anything new... I hope you'll find some interesting things to say by the time I manage to listen to this video, but I can already give you a provisional _great job!_
Hey guys! After you watch Dave's video, if you can't get enough of seeing James Tour getting called out, head over to Joel Duff's channel. Dr. Duff is a biology professor. He shows that Tour makes serious errors. Dr. Duff says that Tour is frequently saying things that are wrong. "Every time I've watched him, and he touches upon something that I know about, I recognize that he doesn't know what he is talking about." Tour's fans think that people criticize Tour because of an atheist agenda, however Dr. Duff is a very polite and religious fellow. It's been a lot of fun to see James Tour get called out twice in one day.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Yeah he is a cool dude. He is religious but he is completely science-affirming. Like he has this one video where he talks about a fossil hunting trip that he went on and he shows how the fossils he found on that one trip single-handedly debunk young earth creationism. He's long-winded but his science info is on the money.
Great suggestion. I like how Joel challenged James "educate" himself. He's trying real hard to be polite. There was one section where he basically says "each time I hear James talk about something that I know about, I start to think he doesn't understand the topic at all".
Interesting. He must be going nuts being attacked from all sides. That he does not understand biology at all, I had already figured out, but that he does not understand crystallization is baffling, really. If I wanted to debunk someone about a paper, I would pick one I understand. I think he is senile: you know, early dementia...
This is the kind of content that I absolutely love, complex explanations, and full of nuances. It's just too bad that the majority of people that need to learn this information glaze over like a donut and say shit like "well that's their opinion."
These debunks going into really complicated and advanced areas are a goldmine for anyone wanting and eager to learn, I so love this. I wish I had the brains for this kind of science and had Dave as professor, the proficiency in communicating information in a digestible way going in a curve from complicated things making them easy to understand to post-graduate level sciences and still making them possible to somewhat get a grasp of even if you have never studied it is outstanding. No wonder so many people come to your comments saying they got hyped their Uni teachers recommended your channel for more learning subjects. I'm sure that if I was studying anything you teach and cover, I would always be here to try to get a deeper understanding of the subjects, I already don't study but I'm always watching the videos because the joy you make them with to pass knowledge on is lovable. Everyone should have someone like this as teacher.
Honest question: I currently follow both, you and Dr. Tour. My understanding in chemistry is very basic if anything. Not to stir war or hate comments, but my question is the following: For someone like me, how can I tell who is right in this online/video debate? Both seem credible and I lack the proper understanding in chemistry to understand most of the points exposed on both sides.
Admittedly it's rather difficult, but this series should make it abundantly clear that James is always wrong/lying. If you watch all four parts and still are not convinced, email me and I'll take you through the details.
It is difficult, because you lack the thing that can help you dicern who is right or wrong on this topic. On my part i would suggest you to look for whom sticks to the scientific process (because all this topic has been about science) when presenting their ideas, and use scepticism the moment fallacies and other dishonest tactics appears constantly.
You could watch the previous videos from Dave about James. There's a few examples where James is easily shown to lie that don't involve chemistry knowledge. Off the top of my head, when he cuts off Lee Cronin mid sentence before he says "but", and his entire rant to the Texas congregation about the article in Nature. Aside from that, you can almost always tell he's being dishonest by reading the abstract for any of the papers he discusses. Nearly every time he misrepresents the purpose or findings of the paper. If you want the real easy answer to whether or not you can trust James, just look at the fact he refuses to correctly represent what science actually says about abiogenesis research. It's all about finding possible pathways, which we have several. Yet James claims the research is clueless and keeps insisting we should have a definitive answer by now.
15:08 that's insulting to even middle school students. I was dumb when I was 13, and was still smart enough to understand much more complex Abiogenesis chemistry than that guy.
23:55 - "We get from A to B, but we don't know how it happened." This sounds very much like the "god of the gaps" argument. That is, if we don't have a current understanding of how some part of an otherwise well-defined process works, then it must be because "god did it." It leaves me to wonder, how many things did we not understand 2,000 years ago, asserting that some god must have done it, only to come to understand it very well today? If we generally accept the highly causal assertion that history is prologue, then isn't it more likely that if we simply don't understand today, we will at some point, and no god will be needed for that gap in today's knowledge? This is precisely why science and religion don't (and shouldn't) mix; the same can be said for politics and religion. If you believe something to be true, at least here in America, that is certainly your right. But, just because you believe in something doesn't mean the rest of us are obligated to the same. Keep your beliefs to yourself and work harder on the science. We'll all be better off for it.
The god of the gaps argument is really my least favorite aspect of intelligent design (otherwise known as creationists) advocates. Just because science at the moment doesn’t have the exact answer to abiogenesis doesn’t automatically mean their “theory” holds the same amount of worth in a scientific discussion
I was in school back in the 60s and I remember a Scientific American article about successfully duplicating the creation of amino acids in what they believed was a duplication of the "primordial" soup. No where did they say anything about stuff crawling out of said goo. Mostly they were just pleased they had the building blocks of life. Sadly, all the hard sciences and I parted company over the math about the same time, but even I know that nothing was climbing out of the fluid until many, many millions of years later when things started getting complex. People like James Tour make my brain itch.
Genuine question- is the kid friendly simple version of abiogenesis actually taught all the way up to middle school? I genuinely don't remember because I've had a specific interest in the subject since *I* was in middle school, and I don't know if I learned about the subject on my own, via the accelerated classes I was in, or as just part of my normal middle school classes. I'm curious to see what other people learned at that age and how the curriculum varies across regions (for anyone outside the us, "middle school" is from roughly age 10 to age 13).
Wow! Perfect timing! Someone just asked Jimmy Snow and Forrest Valkai to look up James Tour yesterday on because I wanna. I was waiting for them to point him towards your videos!
@@someguy5438 i used to be catholic so I'm not surprised that he might lie. Back then I sometimes genuinely thought about lying justifying it by saying that "God exists anyways so even if I lie it shouldn't matter as long as I manage to make someone believe"
@@keypey8256 In the catechism of the Catholic Church it clearly states that lying is an important sin. Even lying for Jesus/God is not acceptable. I have a copy of it in my library that I inherited (despite never being religious), so I decided to keep it and read it once. This is very different in some protestant Christian denominations.
That’s not what my college biology book looked like regarding the “primordial soup,” it was much more hypothetical. That said, I took college biology over 20 years ago and much of that research was ongoing or unverified back then. Funny how that works, new information is discovered, and the books change. What happens to your book when new information is discovered James?
I googled this James Tour guy and found his rate my professor page and lol.....there are reviews from students back from 2003 mentioning how he is arrogant and injects his political and religious beliefs into...his organic chemistry lectors? This guy seems like a piece of work.
Every month I eagerly await your next DI or fraud exposé video..... while I'm BEYOND ecstatic the newest James Tour destruction....but a 4-PART series?!?! I know that's due to you having to go into exponentially more detail in every new video... so needing the 4 part series is necessary... But for the love of God, please tell me we have to wait 3 more months for the whole thing
@@camonly849 I am not enough of a masochist to sit through 7 videos of James Tour making logical errors. I may sample them enough to see if Dave has unfairly edited Tour's responses to him. At first I found Tour interesting. He made valid points about some of the futile approaches in abiogensis research. Then I lost interest when he made the identical errors in his refutation of abiogenesis that he explained other researchers made. Anyone that self-blind is not a reliable source of knowledge. He is smart enough to know that his model for computing the probability that life could form spontaneously has no resemblance to nature. His continuing to support that model even after he has been shown that it fails for the same reasons he claims other people's work on abiogenesis fails makes him dishonest.
I do directed evolution and protein design and optimization. It’s always intrigued me that biomolecules actually compete to form specialist classes adapted to exploit specialist niches in resource-limited systems. Cooperation also developed, with one class generating products used as starting materials by another class. In other words, cooperative ecosystems can develop and evolve in prebiotic systems with only molecules, partitioning, and selection.🎉
When we do lab evolution, we toss the chips and let hidden selection processes, of which we are ignorant, direct the outcome. No input other than asking “let the fittest enzyme win”. The results often surprise us, and we learn about the hidden life of molecules and uncover previously unknown mechanisms.
A skinned cat is found. There are numerous ways in which the cat could have reasonably been skinned by a human, but not enough is known to determine which method that took place. James Tour comes along, and says that since the _specifics_ of how it was done aren't _known_ for _certain,_ that God must have done it.
I've watched about all I can of Tour's current "live" Q&A session. He's taking softball questions and just regurgitating the same lies he's told for a decade. Straight out of the Creationist 101 Handbook.
There's very few questions that can really force him into a corner that he can't escape from. Asking why he won't publish is one. He needs to either admit there's no errors in the papers, which means he's lying at times, or that there's a conspiracy, but that doesn't excuse him from trying.
@@NinjaMonkeyPrime He was asked that in the Q&A. His answer was he isn't allowed to publish because the science powers-that-be won't allow papers questioning science orthodoxy. Again straight Creationists 101 bullsh!t excuse.
@@sciencerules2825 _"His answer was he isn't allowed to publish because the science powers-that-be won't allow papers questioning science orthodoxy"_ He really said that? I'd love to hear more details on that. I wonder if he meant Rice University, or, more comically, that an actual publication rejected to even look at someone with over 700 papers. If he means the publisher didn't allow him to submit, then that means he HAS a paper that he could self publish. I guess that would be the next logical question. If he's forbidden by these "powers", then where's his paper showing his evidence?
@@NinjaMonkeyPrime Not those exact words but yes. He starts around 7 min 15 sec of his video. Even more surprising was his admission he isn't interested in convincing other scientists of his position, he's only interested in convincing ignorant laymen.
I've been watching professor Dave for a few months now and it's absolutely entertaining to see how he makes James and others absolutely ridiculous. Keep up the good work 👍
The only issue with Professor Dave's argument here...is that the next video isn't out yet and boy can I not wait for it, this series of videos has been absolutely brilliant
The sad thing about all of this is that James probably isn't even incapable of correctly understanding the papers and concepts that Dave is going over in this video, his reasoning is just so motivated by his religious convictions that he can't allow himself to do it. His religious convictions are literally preventing him from learning the science in this field so that he can stop putting his foot in his mouth speaking about it
That 'is' why he just sits and 'reads' most of these papers just trying to find things to nitpick. He knows he doesn't have any real objections to any of it. If you put this guy in a room with one of the paper's authors and they both went over the work, Tour would turn into a little puppy and just nod and accept what they are describing.
If James Tour wasn't so thoroughly dishonest, I would feel bad about laughing at him stumble over the word phenylalanine multiple times. It's not an easy word, but when you're depicting yourself as an expert?
I still can't believe that Dave was in a band and drank some lemonade once. That totally invalidates all the research and all these paper he's referring to. Thank you James for exposing the shoking truth!
😂
I didn't even know it was possible to drink lemonade without rum.
@Ks
Do you actually have citations in MLA or APA format to back your claim?
@@GamesFromSpace Wow! that sounds like it'd produce one heck of a hangover. If I didn't quit drinking, I would certainly give it a go!
😂😂😂😂 yup. Definitely shouldn’t listen to anyone who’s ever been in a band, acted a little silly while enjoying life, and drinking lemonade 😮that’s just a step too far😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🎉
"You're not an expert in this field, you can't comment on this!"
- Guy who is also not an expert in this field, and is the one arguing against the overwhelming scientific consensus achieved through decades of vigorous research - while one of its foremost researchers is thanking Dave and telling him he's correct.
Bu t consensus = bad :(:(:(
On the "Soup" description of James: He is using the Motte-and-bailey fallacy. Essencially he proposes two things. One controversial (That throughout education, the "lizard out of a lightning struck stew" model is being taught) and one mundane (That the early conditions are refered to as "primordial soup"). He argues for his more controversial view, but upon being called out for it, he retreats to the Motte (the mundane position) and proclaims that Dave did not prove him wrong, because look: Textbooks really do say "primordial soup".
James is dishonestly substituting his controversial claim, with a more easily deffendable one, while acting as if the critique of his controversial claim is now directed at the mundane one.
I just said he's completely full of shit, but thanks that is much more articulate!
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Yes. but you was more precise.
aye.. semantic slight of hand so to speak
They do this with Evolution when they employ the Haeckel's embryos argument. Yes, his drawings are in textbooks, but they aren't used to argue his recapitulation theory.
@@davidbutler1857 true that kind of fallacy is used there to to keep ther flocks deaf to reality
The systematic deconstruction of the entire Discovery Institute has been incredibly fun to watch
Doubly so seeing how hard it's resulted in them coming after Dave, only to offer him more opportunities to dismantle them further.
Except they haven't asked him to do anything and haven't payed for any of James stuff.
@TheSleeper33 Don't know. James came out today and said they have not asked him to respond to Dave and he has done so on his own and with his own money.
@@camonly849 It could be, but given his proven record of dishonest behavior, it is most likely a lie.
@galileog8945 well so far I haven't seen any lies. All I've seen is people stretching the definition of lie. At most it's misread. Professor Dave just makes it sound much worse because he feels the need to try and destroy religion.
What really needs to happen is they both need to just debate things on a video or whatever and go through all the studies and papers themselves. Cause this back and forth crap is hard to follow sometimes. One seems right, then the other does and then back to other....its like at the end of the day I'm just more confused.
I think that the Discovery Institute is appropriately named only in the context that they discover new levels of overt gaslighting and corruption.
I still prefer the name of Dishonesty Institute
@@XraynPR Ya, I can see how that's preferable. Just adding another quip to the pile
People convinced of immortality through faith are immune to new information. They refuse to give up their life after death fantasy.
Accurate.
Dust to dust man, good viewpoint. But evolution of one species turning into another is not proven.
@@bbbrown7553 No, it is. It's literally been observed. Get an education.
@@bbbrown7553 ua-cam.com/video/7w57_P9DZJ4/v-deo.html
That's why we must focus on teaching children, as the old dies, those who commit those attacks will slowly disappear
I went to Christian middle school. My seventh grade “biology” textbook, along with the single paragraph about “primordial soup”, literally had a cartoon of a man in shadows looking forlornly into a pool of muck with the caption “I crawled out of this slime.”
The level of integrity for the religious who deny evolution to present science accurately has always been at a zero.
It's so funny because the other illustrations i saw in regards to creation look equally hilarious.
omfg dont get me started on that. i also grew up in that. all its done is make me hate catholicism
It's not proven.
@@andrewkelley9405 That’s unfortunate, the Catholic schools I attended all taught evolution (correctly) as fact. The Vatican approved evolution as reasonable and compatible with Catholicism all the way back in 1950 (still a few holdouts though, sadly).
Ironically, it was my public middle school science class that “taught the controversy.” Can only imagine what goes on in Evangelical Christian schools.
@DrWhom3
AMEN 🙏🏻
"Goo and the Lightning Lizard" is one of those movies the rental place has behind the beaded curtains right?
Reminds me of that band called King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard. Great band, btw.
Babe wake up, new Professor Dave debunking Dr Tour just dropped
Damn, Dave, you should be flattered. James took a year off to absolutely scour the internet to find clips of you in your daily life that almost none of your subscribers have probably ever seen. Looks like you've got a super-fan on your hands.
Edit: looks like either a dirty delete, or the idiot in the comments got blocked for spamming 😂
@@lifewasgiventous1614 Tell me you didn’t watch the video without telling me you didn’t watch the video.
Oh no doubt the Seattle based Discovery Institute team tasked their web and video developers to do all that. That’s the stuff they tend to do
@@lifewasgiventous1614 Sorry, Dave already “took away” from all that ages ago. I suggest you muster up the courage to actually watch Dave’s debunks. You might even learn something.
@@lifewasgiventous1614 Yeah, as much as I like Dave, he’s not my hero. I think you’re projecting just a teensy bit, mate, and it explains a lot about your attitude.
@@lifewasgiventous1614 "James has credentials in something, so he's best informed to address this." A literal argument from authority. His credentials are in an unrelated field, he doesn't know anything about evolution or abiogenesis. And James didn't reach out directly to Dave with his "debate" offer, he announced it publicly on some Christian broadcast channel, so Dave didn't find out about it until James was already bitching that he had refused the "offer", which you'd know if you had watched Dave's videos.
"Facts speak louder than words and truth outlasts lies, so let us calmly and objectively examine the claims and counter them with evidence-based reasoning."- deduced by this video
fools and despots thrives on ignorance..
insight and fairness thrives on knowledge...
indeed , review and dismantle the arguments first and keep the 'charisma game' for entertainment
Professor Dave has contributed greatly to the dialectic diadem that rests above the hive mind we all create together.
If only most of the world followed this mindset.
@@jamesfarquhar8507 the algorithm avatar of your species civilizations spirit doth give thee a nod
Unfortunately, we live in a time and society in which people can ignore facts, make up their own reality and lie about everything, and still survive because it doesn't kill them directly. Natural selection doesn't apply anymore, because money rules. Or maybe natural selection has gotten a different meaning in a society where money determines your survival and not how well you understand the world you live in...
When some people say "you couldn't be more wrong if you tried", James Tour seems to take it as a challenge.
Hey Dave,
I’ve watched you for(I believe) around 2 1/2 years now. I discovered you in my freshman year of high school toward the end of first quarter when I was really struggling with Physics, which I eventually passed because of your videos. In fact, thats not the only class you’ve helped me through; so far you’ve helped me get through Physics, Biology, and now you’re helping me through Chemistry. Having ADHD, providing the information in distinct, easy-to-follow videos as opposed to a textbook was very helpful. You’ve become my go-to when it comes to learning all-things science without having to read through a high school textbook. I probably have an entire notebook’s worth of reference just from the notes that I’ve taken on your videos alone(though the notes are a bit disorganized and, quite literally, all over the place; I don’t tend to keep them all in one spot). I’ve even recently started on your series on Economics in my spare time because I’m doing well enough in my other classes to take on more.
Even if we set aside the fact that you are single-handedly leading me through high school, you’re an amazing content creator. I’ve probably watched your demolition of anti-science hacks about a million times. I’ve done my best to watch through most of your debates, though some of your opponents tended to talk over you and repeat themselves over and over to the point where I grow bored because I can refute some of their claims myself. I even have a tradition where, whenever you release a new Debunks/Debates/Discussions video, I go the stove, boil some water, and make a nice bowl of ramen noodles for myself to eat while I watch the video.
I’ve even started using your stuff in my debate club, especially against people who think like Creationists and Flerfs. I’ve seen one or two minds change after I’ve linked your content. I eventually found myself using your mannerisms and tone during debates, which is honestly great, because if I’m wrong about something, it hits a lot harder and I actually learn from the experience. Another thing I’ve learned from you: if mistakes are made obvious for all to see, there is a greater incentive to correct them.
Thanks for making my high school so much easier, thanks for giving me something entertaining on a normal basis, and thanks for even helping me change a few minds.
Stay awesome.
I love his videos for my Bio class too! I actually had to find simpler videos for test studying: Dave's stuff is just a little too in depth for a time constraint. But it's been great going through the actual class listening to him. I get so much more out of it, as my professor is, I would guess, keeping things simple so more people pass. He said something about it at the beginning of the course about being sure most of us would pass, which I took as him being confident he was a good teacher. I suspect he could be if he wanted to be, but things are damn near dumbed down. But I feel like I'm getting enough out of it, even if I'm supplementing it elsewhere.
It's kinda funny that these debunks have gotten to the point where James Tour and the DI are all but declaring war on dear Professor Dave. It doesn't matter how many times they try to assassinate his character, Dave always just stands firm, says "Really?" and then proceeds to grind his foes into the dust. Because none of his attackers attack him with actual science. And the only thing that defeats science is better science.
Basically, in a debate situation where one position is substantiated by reality and the other isn't, you'll see this happen. All Dave has to do is present reality, and their putrid wind is stopped dead
Even the authors of the papers Tour evoked have pointed out that he has misrepresented and outright lied about their papers. This is a desperate attempt to drum up some support and slip in some damage control, which is made obvious by the profound number of mistakes he / DI made in this newest series
"The only thing that defeats science is better science"! Love that statement.
Dr. Dave has ground nothing but his own reputation into dust. He just cannot argue on facts. He is making money on his channel however and laughing all the way to the bank.
Wow, Professor Dave was right about you science denier types. No addressing the science at all, just whining about money.
Dr tour*
Thanks for being a great teacher and debunker :)
A 4 part debunking by Professor Dave?
*cracks open a cold one and grabs popcorn*
This is gonna be good.
Hard for Tour to debunk and counter anothers arguments when he doesn't understand them well enough to even comprehend ...
Sounds like a Trainwreck....
**Pulls up a chair**
They’re getting exponentially longer. You’d think James would learn to shut up at some point.
@@Unsensitive what are you talking about? Dave interviewed pioneers of the field whose research had been misrepresented by the current offender. It is flat out said by them. Or do you mean the other way around?
@@Unsensitive I suppose that is a way to tell how tour's series failed miserably
@@Unsensitive you can't understand the wordsalad and gibberish tour spouts, He is a conman.
As someone named James I would like to apologize for his behavior.
As a member of the human race, I'd like to apologize for Jame's behavior.
As a homo sapien, I apologize for his lack of self esteem.
@@leobriccocola8141 as a shard of a entity yet for all homo species to comprehend i hoppe you all seek to adress the colour bleed this james specimen has on your species collective weave of patterns influencing the course of your societies , cultures and over arching civilization
As an alien observing James’ behaviour, I have no hope for the survival of the human species.
As a member of the Universal council of intelligent life, Tour is dooming your planet for sterilization.
My favorite part is when James struggles to pronounce "phenylalanine"
He does that a lot in his own videos. Just struggles reading some of the papers.
Yikes. i have zero interest or background in chemistry, but i read a diet Coke can, so i can nail that one
For sure if it was James reviewing someone else’s statements made that way, he would mock them for “not even knowing how to pronounce the thing they claim to understand.”
Phenyl-la-la-uhh-wut 🤣
@@muskyoxes well, i doubt jimmy boi ever drinks diet coke so you might be more qualified on that topic than he is.
The whole rabbit walking by the counter said a lot to me. James knows that the people he is talking to are easily manipulated so when the actual explanation started James tossed out a distraction so they wouldn't be paying attention to it, thereby being able to continue his claim that the process wasn't explained.
Exactly the type of trick a magician would use to distract an audience
I can't tell what was more distracting; the rabbit or the fact a team of "editors" couldn't animate it properly.
@@Arisius13 it started floating in the middle lmfaooo
It may seem like an unimportant distraction to do these videos, but they’re so, so important. The bullshit in this world needs to be countered at every opportunity, or else the bullshitters will win.
And there are sooo many of them now on the internet- it’s seemingly endless !
It IS endless!! Thanks to Dave and others, we have an endless army out there fighting the good fight!
Have you even seen James stuff?
If only Dave would attempt to stick with the chemistry he would actually learn something. OOL research by Dave begins with laboratory obtained pure chemicals not understanding that is not available on a supposed early earth at all.
Eh, I for one don't have the determination to constantly try and debunk people who are wrong. Dave is a stronger willed person than I, and I can respect that.
All JT has to do is demonstrate that one single vital part of abiogenesis is absolutely impossible under any natural circumstances.
If he wasn't a creationist, he likely wouldn't even care about abiogenesis in the slightest.
This is by far the strongest point in my opinion and tour's blind followers don't seem to understand. Why is tour so motivated on this topic, it's so OBVIOUS it's creationism. Otherwise you are absolutely correct, why would he care at all?
On his blog this scientist openly states his faith and belief are beyond scientific evidence, and that he doesn't even accept the regular biological evolution part of life's history-- for theological reasons. Not in his public sermons that people actually watch though, there he says he doesn't mention god and it's all about the science and he didn't even mention god _once!_
Not that it matters though, I've tried and asked a whole bunch of his fanboys to comment on or verify this for themselves, and they all flat-out refused...
@@jasonjansen9831 I don't even get why he cares in spite of being a creationist.
Creationists will just roll back to their favorite "so what" response of "God included the abiogenesis potential in his creation for funzies". I've literally heard them declare that fossils were put there by God for us to find and marvel at, that the critters they use to be never actually existed.
JT says he thinks we will one day discover it, he just doesn't agree with the way we are going now.
@@camonly849 No, what he _thinks_ is that his god created humans separately from all other life through magic, and that OoL researchers should stop doing the research they are doing. Have you not seen Dave and myself quoting Tour stating this in less visible places..?
It was very fun watching Tour claim that Dave didn't do something only to see that Dave did the thing, but in a part of the video Tour edited out for the response.
This happened multiple times while I watched the back and forth, so I fully expect they will be addressed during this new series.
AIG and DI both do this kind of thing- they'll say "Why won't they X if Y" and "Why did they hide X" ..only to find out they simply cut that part of the target's video out. Unfortunately for them, they're attacking an academic who knows the game and has demonstrable reality on his side. The only people this crap would fool are Tour's lackeys and fans, who do not care if Tour is blatantly lying or not.
@@Krugis as someone who grew up as a hardcore YEC, one of the first things that ended up changing my mind was how often a creationist article would say “evolutionists don’t know how to solve X problem with their theory, so they just ignore it” and then I would Google it and find out that there would be like 6 different theories on how to solve X problem, all with lots of research and rigorous debate. Creationists may not be good at science, but they sure are good at splicing things exactly the way that fits their argument best
@@Krugis Dear lord this has happened so many times.
Like, there was this one where a DI scammer was accusing a scientist of deliberately editing bones to make them fit together in a way that proved his claim, while conveniently cutting out the part of the 10+ minute video that made very clear he was just cleaning them. Namely, the entire _rest_ of the video aside from the one clip he cherry picked.
@@blakksheep736 I remember that! The dramatic cut to a scientist taking an angle grinder to a Fossil! Except that isn't even remotely what actually happened
What a shame that they ensnare so many with this bottom-barrel idiocy
@@Krugis I agree, especially since that's not stupidity, that's literally fraud, statements made with the intent to deceive. The DI should be glad all he got was Dave picking him apart on the internet, he should be _sued_ for that.
Dude looks legit shook in his videos, and when he just keeps repeating shit like "boy did I have a heyday with that" it reminds me of someone who just got broken up with saying "I don't even care anymore I'm over it" every 5 minutes to try to convince themselves they're actually over. While being very much not over it.
..and then calls their ex just to tell them they're not thinking about them anymore lol
@@jasonjansen9831 and then when their ex is like "cool me either" and hangs up on them and they sit there with their friend trying to support them saying stuff like "I just think it's so funny that..." and then they'll say stuff that they do not find funny at all but are actually very hurt by
@@devonglide1830 I wish, it's just a common trope
Your comparison genuinely made me laugh out loud.
@@jasonjansen9831 Yours too.
I can't believe that James came back for more! This is gonna be a great 4 part series!
The more I learn about James Tour the more “Kent Hovindy” he seems. That whole thing with criticizing an experiment for not reaching a goal it never said it have is exactly what Kent Hovind did with the Miller-Urey experiment.
How badass would that be if lightning struck soup and then lizards sprang out? I mean, that's pretty lit if you ask me. 😅🤣🤣💀
I don't know what I've been anticipating more for 2023- Madalorian season 3, Loki season 2, or another Professor Dave debunk of James Tour! Four parts you say?!! Oh, this is going to be a good year!
What makes me despair is that the only benefit for people like Tour and other religious 'elite' to keep their flock ignorant, is that they are knowingly using knowledge and the lack thereof to keep people down. That's terrifying. There is no good implication for doing thing like this.
“it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” - Upton Sinclair
(7:46) "Racemic Asperigine,"
My brain: "dynamite with a laser beam. Guaranteed to blow your mind." :)
I genuinely wonder how can the higher-ups of Rice can justify not revoking James’ professorship. Don’t they realize that Jim’s slanderous and anti-science behavior is an embarrassment to Rice? Especially because he uses his title to justify getting in fights with random people on the Internet and slanderizing others?
I wanna state that I’m not being insulted in anyone’s behalf even if the emotional charge of this comment says otherwise. If watching Bechly whine like a toddler about Dave taught me anything, it’s to never be offended on someone’s behalf because I think Luskin and Meyer took his videos to stride (as far as I know, they haven’t made any videos or articles about Dave). It’s just that Tour pisses me off particularly more than the other DI conmen because he calls himself an organic chemistry and carbon nanotechnology researcher, topics that I MYSELF am interested in studying.
I feel like because of Tour alone, I’ll never go to Rice to get my Ph.D. If there’s even a tiny probability of having HIM as my graduate advisor, I don’t want to be a part of it.
Typical tactic... When you can't attack the message... You attack the messenger... Which is what cowards and/or idiots do
He sure is a coward and idiot.
Edit: misunderstood the comment, my bad
Yes, James Tour really is a coward, sell out, and liar.
Nuh uh they're rubber you're glue!
@@ProfessorDaveExplains don’t take it personally, he’s only attacking you because you’re destabilising his BS world. He’s clearly got a god complex so the best you can hope for is to entertain us and perhaps enlighten his followers
Lol Dave is not letting James off the hook.
Let him have it!
If it counts for anything, I have a phd in theoretical chemistry and Dave thoroughly mops the floor with Dr. Tour. It’s quite astonishing how narrow-mindedly but yet confidently a scientist can approach fields outside their own expertise - ending up with completely irrelevant analogies. The rest of us in the figurative lecture hall are cringing in our seats for this one dude who just won’t shut up…
@@JM-19-86 lol, he/she won't tell you because they're probably just a keyboard warrior lol.
@@ducphan7590 it's always hilarious to see you guys struggling to believe someone could have a PhD. They are relatively common, I have one and so do many of my friends.
Sad you're a PhD and don't know that the origin of law involves organic chemistry....yep....not James's field at all 🤣🤣
@@JM-19-86 What's James h-index for abiogenesis?
Look at these morons. James must be right because he has a PhD. Anyone else with a PhD must be wrong because they’re not James. You morons should be sterilized.
"Professor Dave is schooling Tour!" *everyone clears the Nebuchadnezzar's break room*
Loved that movie. "Neo is fighting Morpheus."
Love Dave humiliating creationists too.
Seeing you dismantle these hacks bone by bone has been some of the most entertaining and educational content on this site!
While I admit I haven't gone to college and have trouble picking up the complexities of science, I have learned a whole lot about psychology by trying to understand the psychologically manipulative behavior of these ideologues. I haven't learned how to explain the scientific method to dogma, but I have learned how and why that would be a waste of time and effort on my part. Thanks for putting in the time and effort for those willing to rationally process.
It's worth learning the scientific method even if you don't plan to explain it to anyone else. I'd argue it is the most fundamentally important concept for a species to master after becoming sentient.
I heard once it was differential calculus😄😄
How about the manipulative behavior of the people who won't fund his nano research because he said evolution needed to be researched further
Campbell's Biology is still an amazing text. Started my love of Biology, and spurred me to get a BS in it, then a Doctorate. Love that book.
@Deipatrous in the States we just call it a BS. And yes, it was. 🤩
I think saying James doesn't know or doesn't understand is giving him too much credit. I don't think he's acting in good faith at any point. I don't have a Ph.D, or even a Master's degree, the highest level of education I completed was a Bachelor's of Science degree, (in Biology)yet I can read and understand the papers Dave is citing with some effort, even though it's not really my field, and I can understand why Dave is right. I also know the difference between primary and secondary literature. I find it nearly impossible to believe that a man with a Ph.D can't do the same. Especially a chemist, who should be far more proficient than me at deciphering a chemistry paper. I think James understands exactly what those papers are saying, exactly what the real state of origin of life research is, and is just outright lying about it to advance his agenda. James isn't operating in good faith at all, in my opinion.
It’s a cocktail of dishonesty as well as stupidity. He’s a complete narcissist and assumes he must be right even when going outside of his field. He doesn’t know that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about, and anyone who informs him of that is wicked or corrupt.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Fair enough. I've certainly encountered well educated people with some very dumb ideas about things they absolutely should know better about.
@@djzoodude James was in another video yelling about red blood cells found in dinosaur fossils proving the Earth isn't old. He insisted that he knows molecules so he is an expert. The problem is they didn't find cells, but the remains of them. So either James didn't even read the details of the paper, or he's just repeating the same lie that non chemist creationists do.
@@NinjaMonkeyPrime Last year Tour did a video called "Richard Dawkins deceived us!" where he was just a regular creationist PRATT spewing machine. We got the usual "scientists are CLUELESS on the mechanisms of evolution!" and the ever popular "No one has even seen one thing evolve into another thing!!" I used to think he was just confused but now it's clear the man is a full fledged religious idiot.
@@NinjaMonkeyPrime if I was feeling generous, I'd say he just didn't read the paper, but he's probably just lying.
Let me state how important this series is: I produce content here in you tube in Spanish. Mostly fighting anti science and science denialism. During my live streams about evolution, there are always creationists and fundamentalists disparaging OOL and evolution. Since I have used prof Dave videos as reference in some of my videos and live streaming and after this James Tour started his new attacks, my live shows have been plagued by these fanatics claiming that Dr. Tour had destroyed Prof. Dave. This video, and the ones coming will help me shut them up.
Prof. Dave content (and he might not know this) is used in other languages by science promoters very often. I cannot thank him enough for his efforts and love of science. Thank you again.
Wind in your sails, fighter.
"This entire section ranting about calcium hydroxide is one big turd sandwich..." That genuinely made me LOL!
From beginning to end, this was another most EXCELLENT annihilation of "little" Jimmy's bullcrap. Well done, as always Prof Dave!
It’s honestly kinda sad watching desperate James attacking people who are smarter than him.
I just remember that he otherwise spends his time peddling misinformation/bad science for his own benefit and that gets rid of any risk of sympathy.
Talk about sad, watch the videos of him lying to people dumber than him
@Cincoat yeah he's the sort of guy that gives humanity a bad name 😅
Thanks!
Thanks Dave - that was great & I'm glad your took the time to explain the Calcium Hydroxide thing - I was scratching my head wonder why he was going on about it so much - just pure deflection! He really is a *Sinner* (those clips cracked-me up.)
"go be a bunny farmer"
sounds like a dream job, but also sounds morally questionable
NGL... I have no idea what you said for like 5 minutes while you were explaining the paper... but the way you explained it inspired confidence that at least YOU knew what you were talking about... unlike James who couldn't even pronounce the words on the paper...
*has a "PhD"
*Can't pronounce the name of a chemical introduced in high school biology/organic chemistry
yeah that checks out
The infantile tactics employed by the Discovery Institute and James Tour are a testament to the damage Professor Dave single-handedly dished out to these charlatans.
Right? I mean, I could see if you were a serious person that maybe one video would be sufficient to counter someone, but unleashing a 14 part series of mostly attacks? That speaks to an attempt to drown out a critic with valid complaints.
after watching the debate i decided to watch tours series to try to commit to an open mind and look at both sides. i nearly went insane and this feels like i’m breathing fresh air for the first time in weeks
4:43 "Because the average is the average of what you get" - James Tour
I mean, at least he didn’t lie🤣
It just hit me that Jimbo says "your expert" as if he was in court, something like the prosecution's expert or the defense's. I wonder why...
They have spent a LOT of money trying to do damage control regarding you specifically. Great work!
A couple things they don't quite grasp..
1) Even if abiogenesis research shows life could have successfully started by itself this doesn't rule out their 'God' story necessarily.
2) By getting this outraged over challenges to James Tour's opinion, and handling it the way they are, via youtube videos rather than scientific papers, it shows they have no evidence to support their claims.
Keep up the great work. It's working.
avi8r66
Man and Dave has even admitted 1 *_several_*_ times_ and yet to him and others it's gotta be 14:30...
The God story as they present it isn't just that God *did* do it, but that *only* God could.
They believe it's magic.
Showing it isn't magic *does* dismantle that version of their position.
@@zacheryeckard3051 Exactly - as Aron Ra has put it people like the DI, AIG, etc worship a book, they believe the Bible is literally true so they refuse to accept it could be a god did start the whole process of life and use evolution.
@@zacheryeckard3051 true
@@zacheryeckard3051 Yeah, But a lot of these people are using God of the gaps. So once its known and undeniable they just shift the goal posts back.
So even if its proven to them to the point they cannot deny. they'll just retreat god into another gap. Some creationists are starting to admit that micro evolution happens. They just refuse to admit that once you stack enough changes you end up with macro evolution.
I feel its mainly because everything is a spectrum/gradient and these people only think in binary.
Like a ton of creationists think that an example of speciation would be a bear giving birth to a dog.
28:14 Do you think Tour is gonna drag this on so long that Dave is going to have to show the tiniest little picture of the research within a 100 monitors? lol
I think this is a simple case of James having a man crush on Dave.
24:07 bro predicted the debate💀💀💀💀
Wowie! I'm excited for this up coming trilogy of debunks, I thought last video about him was the last, but we viewers really are being treated with some high quality content of Dave debunking these clowns! Thank you Dave :D
tetralogy not trilogy
But I'm in full agreement with you
@@borttorbbq2556 Quadrilogy, no?
Ooh perfect, I ended up on his channel last week and was saddened by how little pushback that guy gets. I wondered whether it would be worth it to suggest anyone in this business debunk him, but really don't expect him to have anything new... I hope you'll find some interesting things to say by the time I manage to listen to this video, but I can already give you a provisional _great job!_
I get so happy everytime you drop another one of these 😂 when will they learn?!?
Hey guys! After you watch Dave's video, if you can't get enough of seeing James Tour getting called out, head over to Joel Duff's channel. Dr. Duff is a biology professor. He shows that Tour makes serious errors. Dr. Duff says that Tour is frequently saying things that are wrong. "Every time I've watched him, and he touches upon something that I know about, I recognize that he doesn't know what he is talking about." Tour's fans think that people criticize Tour because of an atheist agenda, however Dr. Duff is a very polite and religious fellow. It's been a lot of fun to see James Tour get called out twice in one day.
I’ve never heard of him I’ll check him out
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Yeah he is a cool dude. He is religious but he is completely science-affirming. Like he has this one video where he talks about a fossil hunting trip that he went on and he shows how the fossils he found on that one trip single-handedly debunk young earth creationism. He's long-winded but his science info is on the money.
Great suggestion. I like how Joel challenged James "educate" himself. He's trying real hard to be polite. There was one section where he basically says "each time I hear James talk about something that I know about, I start to think he doesn't understand the topic at all".
Interesting. He must be going nuts being attacked from all sides. That he does not understand biology at all, I had already figured out, but that he does not understand crystallization is baffling, really. If I wanted to debunk someone about a paper, I would pick one I understand. I think he is senile: you know, early dementia...
@@galileog8945 Oh yeah I also think early dementia could be involved
This is the kind of content that I absolutely love, complex explanations, and full of nuances. It's just too bad that the majority of people that need to learn this information glaze over like a donut and say shit like "well that's their opinion."
I really appreciate people like you. Educating people and standing up to those with an agenda! Well done!
Is the discovery institute using the name “discovery” to confuse people with the discovery channel?
Don't see why. They're both shit.
These debunks going into really complicated and advanced areas are a goldmine for anyone wanting and eager to learn, I so love this. I wish I had the brains for this kind of science and had Dave as professor, the proficiency in communicating information in a digestible way going in a curve from complicated things making them easy to understand to post-graduate level sciences and still making them possible to somewhat get a grasp of even if you have never studied it is outstanding. No wonder so many people come to your comments saying they got hyped their Uni teachers recommended your channel for more learning subjects. I'm sure that if I was studying anything you teach and cover, I would always be here to try to get a deeper understanding of the subjects, I already don't study but I'm always watching the videos because the joy you make them with to pass knowledge on is lovable. Everyone should have someone like this as teacher.
Truly wish I had the cash to donate, the work you are doing here to expose frauds is legendary.
Maybe he will eventually expose his own fraud on people like you but I doubt it because he's making so much money off of you.
Honest question:
I currently follow both, you and Dr. Tour. My understanding in chemistry is very basic if anything. Not to stir war or hate comments, but my question is the following: For someone like me, how can I tell who is right in this online/video debate? Both seem credible and I lack the proper understanding in chemistry to understand most of the points exposed on both sides.
Admittedly it's rather difficult, but this series should make it abundantly clear that James is always wrong/lying. If you watch all four parts and still are not convinced, email me and I'll take you through the details.
Great comment.
Its easy. One side has applications for their claims and the other does not. The one with no applications can be disgarded as pseudoscience.
It is difficult, because you lack the thing that can help you dicern who is right or wrong on this topic.
On my part i would suggest you to look for whom sticks to the scientific process (because all this topic has been about science) when presenting their ideas, and use scepticism the moment fallacies and other dishonest tactics appears constantly.
You could watch the previous videos from Dave about James. There's a few examples where James is easily shown to lie that don't involve chemistry knowledge. Off the top of my head, when he cuts off Lee Cronin mid sentence before he says "but", and his entire rant to the Texas congregation about the article in Nature. Aside from that, you can almost always tell he's being dishonest by reading the abstract for any of the papers he discusses. Nearly every time he misrepresents the purpose or findings of the paper.
If you want the real easy answer to whether or not you can trust James, just look at the fact he refuses to correctly represent what science actually says about abiogenesis research. It's all about finding possible pathways, which we have several. Yet James claims the research is clueless and keeps insisting we should have a definitive answer by now.
15:08 that's insulting to even middle school students. I was dumb when I was 13, and was still smart enough to understand much more complex Abiogenesis chemistry than that guy.
The fact that this channel has 2,5 Million subscribers gives me hope.
23:55 - "We get from A to B, but we don't know how it happened."
This sounds very much like the "god of the gaps" argument. That is, if we don't have a current understanding of how some part of an otherwise well-defined process works, then it must be because "god did it." It leaves me to wonder, how many things did we not understand 2,000 years ago, asserting that some god must have done it, only to come to understand it very well today? If we generally accept the highly causal assertion that history is prologue, then isn't it more likely that if we simply don't understand today, we will at some point, and no god will be needed for that gap in today's knowledge?
This is precisely why science and religion don't (and shouldn't) mix; the same can be said for politics and religion. If you believe something to be true, at least here in America, that is certainly your right. But, just because you believe in something doesn't mean the rest of us are obligated to the same. Keep your beliefs to yourself and work harder on the science. We'll all be better off for it.
Based content once again. Finish them!
The god of the gaps argument is really my least favorite aspect of intelligent design (otherwise known as creationists) advocates. Just because science at the moment doesn’t have the exact answer to abiogenesis doesn’t automatically mean their “theory” holds the same amount of worth in a scientific discussion
I was in school back in the 60s and I remember a Scientific American article about successfully duplicating the creation of amino acids in what they believed was a duplication of the "primordial" soup. No where did they say anything about stuff crawling out of said goo. Mostly they were just pleased they had the building blocks of life. Sadly, all the hard sciences and I parted company over the math about the same time, but even I know that nothing was climbing out of the fluid until many, many millions of years later when things started getting complex. People like James Tour make my brain itch.
That study was debunked years ago. The chemicals they used were not present at the time
@@georgewagner7787 Oh really? Which chemicals exactly?
Genuine question- is the kid friendly simple version of abiogenesis actually taught all the way up to middle school? I genuinely don't remember because I've had a specific interest in the subject since *I* was in middle school, and I don't know if I learned about the subject on my own, via the accelerated classes I was in, or as just part of my normal middle school classes.
I'm curious to see what other people learned at that age and how the curriculum varies across regions (for anyone outside the us, "middle school" is from roughly age 10 to age 13).
Honestly I don’t think it’s taught at all anywhere. I don’t remember hearing about anything like that.
I learned it in late elementary and have taught it in middle school.
Wow! Perfect timing! Someone just asked Jimmy Snow and Forrest Valkai to look up James Tour yesterday on because I wanna. I was waiting for them to point him towards your videos!
👍💯
I like how James Tour of all people is talking about using papers to seem smart
I mean, he is smart, just devoted to his religion
He is smart when not talking about religion and conspirancies... Too bad that is mostly what he does lately.
@@keypey8256 devotion to religion isn't a free pass to lie.
@@someguy5438 i used to be catholic so I'm not surprised that he might lie. Back then I sometimes genuinely thought about lying justifying it by saying that "God exists anyways so even if I lie it shouldn't matter as long as I manage to make someone believe"
@@keypey8256 In the catechism of the Catholic Church it clearly states that lying is an important sin. Even lying for Jesus/God is not acceptable. I have a copy of it in my library that I inherited (despite never being religious), so I decided to keep it and read it once.
This is very different in some protestant Christian denominations.
That’s not what my college biology book looked like regarding the “primordial soup,” it was much more hypothetical. That said, I took college biology over 20 years ago and much of that research was ongoing or unverified back then. Funny how that works, new information is discovered, and the books change. What happens to your book when new information is discovered James?
Just waiting for the DI to go for a World “Tour”. I’m sure it will be a real “Tour Day Farce”.❤😂
I googled this James Tour guy and found his rate my professor page and lol.....there are reviews from students back from 2003 mentioning how he is arrogant and injects his political and religious beliefs into...his organic chemistry lectors? This guy seems like a piece of work.
Every month I eagerly await your next DI or fraud exposé video..... while I'm BEYOND ecstatic the newest James Tour destruction....but a 4-PART series?!?! I know that's due to you having to go into exponentially more detail in every new video... so needing the 4 part series is necessary...
But for the love of God, please tell me we have to wait 3 more months for the whole thing
No these are coming out rapid fire.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains YES!!!!!!!
Thank you Dave! By the time your done, James will be flopping on the ground asking for his mommy to help.
It appears to me as if James Tour only looked at the pictures in the paper being argued over, did I miss him reviewing the written content?
Apparently you missed all 7 videos or whatever.
@@camonly849 I am not enough of a masochist to sit through 7 videos of James Tour making logical errors. I may sample them enough to see if Dave has unfairly edited Tour's responses to him.
At first I found Tour interesting. He made valid points about some of the futile approaches in abiogensis research. Then I lost interest when he made the identical errors in his refutation of abiogenesis that he explained other researchers made. Anyone that self-blind is not a reliable source of knowledge.
He is smart enough to know that his model for computing the probability that life could form spontaneously has no resemblance to nature. His continuing to support that model even after he has been shown that it fails for the same reasons he claims other people's work on abiogenesis fails makes him dishonest.
If only they spent the money they did on special effects on an actual study to disprove abiogenesis...
I do directed evolution and protein design and optimization. It’s always intrigued me that biomolecules actually compete to form specialist classes adapted to exploit specialist niches in resource-limited systems. Cooperation also developed, with one class generating products used as starting materials by another class. In other words, cooperative ecosystems can develop and evolve in prebiotic systems with only molecules, partitioning, and selection.🎉
Tour would say this is irrelevant since you as a researcher interfered ...
Of course we can show the OOL research in which systems evolve without external intervention by an intelligence 😅
When we do lab evolution, we toss the chips and let hidden selection processes, of which we are ignorant, direct the outcome. No input other than asking “let the fittest enzyme win”. The results often surprise us, and we learn about the hidden life of molecules and uncover previously unknown mechanisms.
Tour: Now your room feels empty. THAT PROVES THAT ABIOGENESIS DIDNT HAPPEN!1!1
references: Calcium hydroxide.
A skinned cat is found.
There are numerous ways in which the cat could have reasonably been skinned by a human, but not enough is known to determine which method that took place.
James Tour comes along, and says that since the _specifics_ of how it was done aren't _known_ for _certain,_ that God must have done it.
Ah, I think I missed that commandment: Thou shalt not bear false witness (unless it's for your specific Jesus cult).
I absolutely love your debunks, sir. I can't wait for part 2
Why don't you look at both sides of the arguments instead of believing one side only?
I've watched about all I can of Tour's current "live" Q&A session. He's taking softball questions and just regurgitating the same lies he's told for a decade. Straight out of the Creationist 101 Handbook.
The house of cards is crumbling around him.
There's very few questions that can really force him into a corner that he can't escape from. Asking why he won't publish is one. He needs to either admit there's no errors in the papers, which means he's lying at times, or that there's a conspiracy, but that doesn't excuse him from trying.
@@NinjaMonkeyPrime He was asked that in the Q&A. His answer was he isn't allowed to publish because the science powers-that-be won't allow papers questioning science orthodoxy. Again straight Creationists 101 bullsh!t excuse.
@@sciencerules2825 _"His answer was he isn't allowed to publish because the science powers-that-be won't allow papers questioning science orthodoxy"_ He really said that? I'd love to hear more details on that. I wonder if he meant Rice University, or, more comically, that an actual publication rejected to even look at someone with over 700 papers. If he means the publisher didn't allow him to submit, then that means he HAS a paper that he could self publish. I guess that would be the next logical question. If he's forbidden by these "powers", then where's his paper showing his evidence?
@@NinjaMonkeyPrime Not those exact words but yes. He starts around 7 min 15 sec of his video. Even more surprising was his admission he isn't interested in convincing other scientists of his position, he's only interested in convincing ignorant laymen.
Glad to see Dave reprising his role as our favorite Tour Guide to this nonsense.
*airhorn noises*
Explain what is specifically nonsensical about Tour is saying.
Keep up the very good work Professor Dave & thank you 🇬🇧/🇯🇲👏🏾👏🏾
I've been watching professor Dave for a few months now and it's absolutely entertaining to see how he makes James and others absolutely ridiculous. Keep up the good work 👍
The only issue with Professor Dave's argument here...is that the next video isn't out yet and boy can I not wait for it, this series of videos has been absolutely brilliant
About time! Just kidding. I knew you’d be doing another rebuttal. I’ve been waiting anxiously.
"Goo and Lightning Lizard" would be a kick-ass Pokemon
The sad thing about all of this is that James probably isn't even incapable of correctly understanding the papers and concepts that Dave is going over in this video, his reasoning is just so motivated by his religious convictions that he can't allow himself to do it. His religious convictions are literally preventing him from learning the science in this field so that he can stop putting his foot in his mouth speaking about it
That 'is' why he just sits and 'reads' most of these papers just trying to find things to nitpick. He knows he doesn't have any real objections to any of it.
If you put this guy in a room with one of the paper's authors and they both went over the work, Tour would turn into a little puppy and just nod and accept what they are describing.
He understands it very well. He's lying on purpose like all the other DI members.
48 theoturd butts have been *SERIOUSLY HURT* by this video, so far.
Keep up the good work, Professor Dave :) .
If James Tour wasn't so thoroughly dishonest, I would feel bad about laughing at him stumble over the word phenylalanine multiple times. It's not an easy word, but when you're depicting yourself as an expert?
The fact that he put Part 1 of 4 I just knew this guy was about to get tore into
I hope this conflict never ends, this is just gold
"the average is the average of what you get". either he was grasping at straws or for his life, either way, a truly biblical smack down!!
Lol..the floor is made out of floor. 🤣