Great episode! The thing I find is that you can’t teach someone something they don’t want to learn. They have their mind set on their point of view being correct and it’s unshakable no matter how nonsensical it is and no matter how much evidence points to the contrary. Frustrates me so much
@gilmadreth680
5 жыл бұрын
"Ignorance isn't just what you don't know. It's also what you won't know." -Aron Ra
@wolfboy18
5 жыл бұрын
But sometimes all it takes is one piece of evidence. I was raised to be a Racist, it took one piece of Evidence to change my mind. I left all of that behind at age 9. Same with Religion, just took one piece of evidence to start me on the path.
@rhondah1587
5 жыл бұрын
@@wolfboy18 Yep. Indoctrination can be broken, just takes different methods for different people.
@Dracopol
5 жыл бұрын
The Creationists need some mind-limbering exercises, like standing in front of the mirror and repeating, "What if you're wrong?" one hundred times. Tough for anyone! There was the classic scene from Happy Days when the Fonz gets tongue-tied admitting he was wr...wr...not quite correct. Also they should ask if dirty shepherds with half our lifespan, one-tenth our education and one-twentieth our cleanliness were somehow superior spiritually. Attacking ancestral (?) wisdom is like attacking the authority of the father and it is scary to them.
@loki6626
5 жыл бұрын
"Ignorance may be bliss for the ignorant, but for the rest of us it's a fucking pain in the arse". Ricky Gervais.
@811JKLM
5 жыл бұрын
Seth, I love your podcasts. I try to listen to as many as I can. Please, keep them coming!
@ZombieRyushu
5 жыл бұрын
They kinda explain this in Jurassic World. One of the Scientists from the first Jurassic Park said that he knew that some of the configurations of the Dinosaurs were wrong, because they had mixed too much DNA from Contemporary Frogs and Salamanders. He learned that the creatures he was making were not real Dinosaurs, but rather, lizard monsters for the amusement of the public.
@Vigamadur
5 жыл бұрын
That was also mentioned in the first novel, in relation to the camoflauging raptor, if I remember.
@simonhagebolling3571
5 жыл бұрын
Thanks, Seth, great podcast. Greetings from Frankfurt, Germany
@trick361
4 жыл бұрын
Donald was my Natural Disasters professor at Cal Poly. I was a business student and I can recall more information from his one course than I could my entire major. He is 1 of 3 important professors I have had over 4 years I will say motivated me to become a master at my own craft.
@TheAndrebonner
5 жыл бұрын
Funny story, I listen to a Religious Lecture which started me on my journey to becoming less religious. By the way the speaker I didn't know up until recently is a Globe denier. Skepticism needs to be applied on all unverified claims.
@laurajarrell6187
5 жыл бұрын
Seth, an excellent interview! Dr. Prothero, wow, I'm always impressed by the learning some people consume. As for on line, good layman evolution, Aron Ra has his great series, as you know. 👏💖☮️🎃
@smooth_sundaes5172
5 жыл бұрын
Love listening to Doctor Don. creationist slayer :)))
@notwhatiwasraised2b
5 жыл бұрын
One of the best TTA episodes! Nothing new to me, but the 'faithful' will benefit from this high altitude overview.
@kristinwright6632
5 жыл бұрын
I talked to a friend recently who is on Great Courses. She convinced me. Signing up because I want to and under your label to support your work.
@edwincasimir28
5 жыл бұрын
Finally, no more talking about death! Back to the clear, concise, no-nonsense discourse I've come to love from the podcast.
@danniealexander4131
5 жыл бұрын
Lol. Have something against talking about death?
@edwincasimir28
5 жыл бұрын
@@danniealexander4131 No, unless it's done too frequently. It's a depressing matter to talk about all the time.
@PRHILL9696
5 жыл бұрын
Death is reality. We are all dying as soon as we are born
@edwincasimir28
5 жыл бұрын
@@PRHILL9696 I really was talking about the finality of death. Though, the view that life itself is little more than a slow death from the get go is too bleak to take seriously.
@minim-ms
5 жыл бұрын
48:00 I'm glad he brought up wisdom teeth! Every older adult I've talked too has had wisdom teeth removed but I only ever developed one and it's never tried to crown! I know my sister and my mother both had 2 that needed to come out but getting wisdom teeth removed seems to be becoming rarer and rarer (at least in my social circles)
@markvonwisco7369
4 жыл бұрын
I'm the complete opposite to you. All four of my wisdom teeth came in without issue. I can actually use them to chew food. Another fun fact, I have two supernumerary nipples. Look that one up if you've never heard of that...
@vincebuckley1499
5 жыл бұрын
I've recently had moderate success putting it like this. To say you believe in "adaptation" but not "evolution" is like saying you believe earthquakes happen but tectonic plates aren't real. It's a matter of scale.
@mercedeswalt6621
3 жыл бұрын
I’ve been looking for this for ages! For some reason, I thought this episode hadn’t been made yet.
@johnwohara
4 жыл бұрын
Great guest, full of accurate information! Extremely interesting episode.
@kristinwright6632
5 жыл бұрын
It is funny to think back on my childhood. My conservative christian folks never broached the subject. My brother and I loved dinosaurs and that was encouraged. So I came from a more sane christian background. I got more fundy in high school due to insecurity and influences and briefly got confused about the bible versus science. But I didn't really think it through because it wasn't all that important to me. I never questioned science and that may have come from a strong science upbringing in a christian family that I dodged that bullet. I didn't even realize until the last decade or so that creationism and science denial was a thing. I have lots of christian friends who consider creationists whack jobs. We do need to fight the science deniers but don't confuse them with christians in general. I grew up around basically all christians and they all accepted science and evolution.
@markvonwisco7369
4 жыл бұрын
I grew up Catholic. And since the modern Church doesn't deny scientific consensus, evolution vs. creationism was never an issue. My deconversion likely took longer because I didn't have to deny science to be a good Catholic. It was pretty easy to simply compartmentalize. Science was science, religion was religion. It's a lot easier to hold onto your religion when biblical inerrancy isn't part of doctrine.
@robindavis7023
5 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@robertac4065
5 жыл бұрын
Seth, your podcasts are like a giant dose of fiber for the constipated brain! Thanks dude. I'm very happy you were rescued from the "belivers". Did you hear my eyeroll just now?
@raysalmon6566
4 жыл бұрын
671 As usual, Gish hadn't done his homework or bothered to read more recent sources. The fact that he cited an out-of-context quotation from Weishampel et al. (1990) shows that he could apparently read a more authoritative source, but either he could not read well enough to also discover that the other transitional forms like Psittacosaurus are mentioned in the same chapter or his biases were so strong that he can only find short snippets that fit his prejudices. Either way, he completely missed the forest for the trees. And he definitely hasn't looked at the fossils himself or acquired the training necessary to understand what he was looking at. During our debate, I nailed him on this point. I seriously doubt prothero ever debunked Gish His book is loaded with presumptuous
@joshthomas7999
4 жыл бұрын
Preach, Doctor Don, preach!
@kevindemars7328
3 жыл бұрын
Cheers!
@rogerfroud300
5 жыл бұрын
At 17:00 It's surely a bit misleading to think in terms of the whole organism, although clearly the organism must survive long enough to pass on its genes. It's genes that are being selected for, and there's a huge diversity of mutations in a population, some of which just might be pivotal at some point, say in the resistance to an outbreak of disease. Surely, most of the time you only have to be 'fit enough' to survive. Perhaps the phrase "survival of the fit enough" would be a better statement of what the situation is at any one moment. If it's a beign environment, it's not going to matter much if you're taller, fatter, can see in more colours, have hair or anything else. Those things only become valuable and hence selecter for when the going gets tough.
@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself
5 жыл бұрын
Another problem with the "survival of the fit" line is that evolution doesn't happen because of survival, evolution occurs because what doesn't work dies.
@NieroshaiTheSable
4 жыл бұрын
I'd feel less like a proper sci-fi nerd if I didn't point out that Jurassic Park canon has it that the dinosaurs were improperly described by Hammond, and that they were chimeras designed to resemble what dinosaurs looked like to popular culture to attract the tourists. The genetic engineers left out feathers on purpose.
@TheCMoneyPlaya
5 жыл бұрын
Once I was told by a Rastafarian Christian " how do the scientists know what dinosaurs were called?" no shit
@markusnavergard2387
5 жыл бұрын
if i could recreate dinosaurs I would recreate dinosaurs, no second thoughts about it
@markdoldon8852
5 жыл бұрын
I would HOPE that long before you get to that point you'ld have been exposed to enough more contemplative thought and discussion that you WOULD have worked through 2nd, 3rd,...and 100th thoughts. Everything we do has consequences, and we have to consider those consequences against any benefits (including how 'neat' it might be) before we do anything.
@markusnavergard2387
5 жыл бұрын
@@markdoldon8852 counter point: DINOSAURS!
@TheStacanova
4 жыл бұрын
Here is an issue I see that causes some people to distrust science & academics, outside of religious dogma. It’s the mindset of academia that confuses people. Prothero may teach something he believes about evolution, to be absolute fact, but that “fact” may have another challenging theory, that many other academics are teaching as fact. Eventually, it will be sorted out through testing and new discoveries of who was right, however, they could also both be wrong. A perfect example of this is, how many academics (for many decades) treated anyone suggesting human civilization may be much older as what was being taught like complete idiots and calling it pseudoscience? We are coming to a tipping point where the evidence that human civilization is much older than what these smug academics have always taught is undeniable. It’s funny, this may be the one thing creationists and main stream academics sorta agreed on & they are both more than likely wrong! This makes people question everything else they were taught. If they were wrong about that, what else were they wrong about? If academia ever develops the humility to be clear about what is actually fact and what is “the best evidence currently says...” it may become less confusing on what to trust and what not to. We still have Egyptologists claiming the Great Pyramid was DEFINITELY a tomb and built in only 20 years. Which is absolutely ridiculous, even using 21st century technology. There are roughly 2.3 million stone blocks in the Great Pyramid. That’s 315 ton-muti-ton blocks a day that have to be placed, perfectly next to and on top of each other every single day, for 20 years straight. I would love to see someone attempt just ONE day of this, with all of the modern equipment that they can fit on the site. In addition, how many decades was it taught that slaves built the Pyramids and anyone who disagreed was ridiculed? No one teaches that now.
@gogroxandurrac
4 жыл бұрын
The problem with applying evolution to modern humans is that it is a process that works via exclusion and pressure. We're erasing all forms of exclusion, interbreeding with every possible population that could evolve into something else. We're also removing all forms of biological pressure. Your tax bracket has more to do with how many children you'll have than any gene profile. Infertility isn't even enough to get in the way as we have invitro fertilization and moving closer to cloning and gametic manipulation (eggs to sperm, vice versa, or infertile to fertile) every year. You could say we have sexual selection, but not only do social perceptions of beauty change too fast for evolution to reinforce them it isn't a pressure so much as a form of exclusion that doesn't last beyond that generation. That brings me to his prediction of humans without wisdom teeth, but I don't see a selection pressure to enact that. Many get them pulled, but that has zero impact on their genes. Nobody dies from having bad wisdom teeth anymore, so the selection pressure is gone. Nobody is more reproductively fit because they didn't have to have their teeth removed. In fact, we're moving closer and closer to artificial replacements being better than the original meaning any tooth production could become irrelevant as any set of teeth can be replaced at will (assuming you have the money, which is not a genetic trait). tldr: we're not evolving anymore.
@gogroxandurrac
4 жыл бұрын
You say one side is populated by the most science denial, but I'd say what is much more dangerous is acceptance of soft science as equally valid to hard science. I can't tell you how many times I've had to reply to sources of facts to see surveys or citations to papers that sound like they support the argument I'm replying to if you only read the headline or introduction but don't if you read the whole thing.
@JamesRichardWiley
5 жыл бұрын
Creationists rely on a Bronze Age collection of Hebrew writing to form their worldview, while I prefer direct experience, using testable, unfalsifiable evidence, that is free of religious bias. What is wrong with that?
@jacketrussell
4 жыл бұрын
Unfalsifiable evidence? Not sure if that is the term you intended to use?
@jacobopstad5483
5 жыл бұрын
It seems the big problem we face now is getting scientists to use the internet more.
@theriveroffaith852
5 жыл бұрын
Do you consider archeology to be part of science?
@jacobopstad5483
5 жыл бұрын
@@theriveroffaith852 Sure, absolutely
@ASMRyouVEGANyet
5 жыл бұрын
Hehe my wisdom teeth never errupted.
@wolfboy18
5 жыл бұрын
I personally don't view the Dinosaurs in the JP films as Dinosaurs. I view them as an artificially created animal. Maybe we could genetically engineer something to look like one, but it would never be one. It would be as artificial as a Humming Bird Feeder. Though I would love a pet one. But I will content myself with my Cat. Can't have a dog.
@kristinwright6632
5 жыл бұрын
One thing I hadn't thought of before is that we might need to take to the courts to address the fact that the creationists have managed with success in the south to throttle science teachers from teaching incredibly important scientific facts. I'm not a lawyer so have no idea how to craft that but we need to go on the offensive.
@svendtang5432
2 жыл бұрын
Great no bullshit comments around the errors of creationists... Clean evolution discussion..
@gogroxandurrac
4 жыл бұрын
I can understand why Jurassic Park didn't feather their dinosaurs. It's the same reason sequels happen at all. They're banking on brand recognition and nostalgia to pay half of their profit. Endangering that for accuracy that most probably wouldn't care about anyway is a risk. A big one. Expecting realism over profiteering from a movie about doing science that is impossible to fund a theme park seems funny to me. If they were following realism, they wouldn't be using dino DNA, they'd be sculpting new dinos based on what they think they should look like with their superior gene modification technique. CRISPR x 1000, not cloning.
@markdoldon8852
5 жыл бұрын
When Dr Prothero was discussing the infinite monkeys questions, he didnt even include the obvious second flaw in the concept, the simple fact that evolution HAS NO GOALS. Rather than the traditional Complete Works of Shakespeare, a better (but still flawed) analogy might be that they could produce a complete novel in some language. No evolutionary model restarting even a short time ago would result in the identical current ser of creatures. If we could reset evolution to the time of the K-t boundary, the results would be drastically different from what we see today. Unimaginably different
@barkYdarkATFB
5 жыл бұрын
Those topics were discussed.
@jdnlaw1974
5 жыл бұрын
I’m proud of this. I think it really is accurate and makes a lot of sense, and I’ve never heard anyone make this point from this perspective before. If not for the laws of science, physics, biology, gravity and mathematics, and a deep respect and acceptance of those man-made laws, their would be nothing by or against which miracles could be claimed, shown or demonstrated. For you cannot claim nor believe in the supernatural nor the miraculous without those standard, recognized laws and principles that any such claimed miracles purportedly defy, less they be not miracles at all. Jarrod Nichols
@ppronny12345
5 жыл бұрын
And there was no intelligent design who created the tree to branch off of? It just all happen. Bullshit meter off the chat
@gogroxandurrac
4 жыл бұрын
I think it's funny how the conversation to prove evolution is so different from the climate "science" one and yet proponents tie them together like they're equally valid.
@TheRobdarling
2 жыл бұрын
Are you a climate "science" denier? If so, it is you who is " funny".
@gogroxandurrac
2 жыл бұрын
@@TheRobdarling Thanks for proving my point, yet again.
@TheRobdarling
2 жыл бұрын
@@gogroxandurrac You didn't have a point. Just foolishness.
@gogroxandurrac
2 жыл бұрын
@@TheRobdarling ditto
@TheRobdarling
2 жыл бұрын
@@gogroxandurrac What? Are you 10 years old or?
@MrWholphin
4 жыл бұрын
Say there is a tiny population of 100 organisms (never mind how they got there). One organism has one beneficial mutation and 10 deleterious mutations. The only way for the beneficial mutation to propagate through the whole population and become fixed is for most of the organisms to be culled and the new colony be rebased on the offspring of the organism with the beneficial mutation. Except the offspring is not only going to propagate the beneficial mutation but also the 10 deleterious mutations. Thus we now know that evolution is impossible, at least in the way it has been taught for decades. You guys need to evolve the theory again
@ozowen5961
3 жыл бұрын
Incorrect. Very incorrect. Your claim relies on the strange assumption that the beneficial mutation is such that it caused speciation. This is not the case. Mutations accumulate in the population and the population itself changes. Your assertion is based on a discredited notion called saltation.
@patrickderp1044
2 жыл бұрын
speciation has never been observed
@mcmanustony
2 жыл бұрын
@@patrickderp1044 you are categorically wrong. Do you know how books work?
@ozowen5961
2 жыл бұрын
@@patrickderp1044 Speciation certainly has been observed.
@sexybeast1701
5 жыл бұрын
Dinosaurs that were like elephants and rhinos Didn’t have feathers I thought, what am I not understanding?
@Dracopol
5 жыл бұрын
47:43 [mention of whether evolution in humans is happening, women's brains smaller though not having a difference in intelligence] "...even though we are getting much more complex thots than we would have had 300,000 years ago..." LOL
@kc0itf
5 жыл бұрын
I'm confused... what does an individual's reputation have to do with science? I thought science was about evidence?
@barkYdarkATFB
5 жыл бұрын
A broken clock is right twice a day, but you wouldn’t depend on it for anything. And it’s not someone’s general character that’s in question, but their accuracy in applying the scientific method, or the accuracy of their conclusions.
@kc0itf
5 жыл бұрын
@@barkYdarkATFB Again, science is relies on reproducibility so someone's accuracy is always measured against other experiments regardless, no? So, where is reputation in the scientific method... I'm not finding it!
@barkYdarkATFB
5 жыл бұрын
@Jayson Quilantan I’m thinking you’re being a little purposefully obtuse. If, time and time again, your work is falsified, then you would not have a good reputation within the scientific community. If you could never pass a math test, you can call yourself a mathematician, but you will not be chosen to work at NASA, no matter how many books you write on the subject.
@kc0itf
5 жыл бұрын
@@barkYdarkATFB Yet, Dr. Prothero doesn't believe his own statements... that his work should be peer-reviewed by his worst enemy! Would not his enemies be creation journals? Otherwise, you submit to echo chambers, shielded from criticism!
@barkYdarkATFB
5 жыл бұрын
...but let me clarify. Falsification can ultimately be part of the process of discovery. So simply finding errors, or not having work reproduced, does not give a suspect reputation. However, if your assertions are never proven, or your work is consistently sorely lacking, you will not be the one to whom others turn to for collaboration. Or, again, if you continue to assert an idea as fact, even though the idea is debunked, you can still be a scientist, but with a bad reputation in that field of study.
@PRHILL9696
5 жыл бұрын
Scientists keep admitting they cannot test or explore the supernatural so if that is true then how the hell can they claim it does not exist!
@Stratosarge
5 жыл бұрын
Simple. Do you have evidence that there are no invisible fairies living inside your house? If you don't, why would you believe that there are invisible fairies living inside your house. The scientists are not claiming that supernatural doesn't exist, there just isn't any reason to believe that it exists. Or in other words, supernatural is nothing of interest for science. Same with gods and other make-belief stuff.
@thingschange6963
5 жыл бұрын
There is plenty of explanation on where humans came from, how the earth was formed and how the universe was created. No need for gods or the supernatural.
@PRHILL9696
5 жыл бұрын
@@thingschange6963 Then you are going against what scientists say as they admit they do not even know how to investigate the supernatural. and someone else on another video where I said this actually told me that many scientists have actually used scientific methods to prove the supernatural exists and that a spiritual realm exists and he gave me many names of these scientists and I looked them up and its fascinating!
@torotanaka3788
5 жыл бұрын
There has never been an example of a scientific explanation being replace by a supernatural one. Ever. There is NO evidence of anything or entity subverting natural law. None.
@torotanaka3788
5 жыл бұрын
"many scientists have actually used scientific methods to prove the supernatural exists and that a spiritual realm exists and he gave me many names of these scientists and I looked them up and its fascinating!"------------------------NO. (My wife is a scientists and faculty member at a major research university.)
@beastebeat4956
4 жыл бұрын
I find Dr. Donald Prothero is poor at presenting new ideas. What I mean by that is saying that science is about proof makes the idea that someone religious is believing it without them thinking they have any proof. People do have a problem with creating a conclusion then trying to prove that conclusion instead of going off of evidence and then creating our conclusion. He has very little respect for the people who believe in a form of religion which, to me at least, makes the student always want to neglect those ideas
@thoughtlesskills
5 жыл бұрын
This analogy doesn't work. Nor does his spell check. Spell check keeps a list of correct words for comparison, evolution does nothing like that. A mutation happens, if the genetic line with this mutation survives so does the mutation. If the line dies, the mutation does too. Even if there is some other way for mutations to be kept or discarded there is no conciousness or collection of knowledge about what is or isn't a mutation to keep. I really don't like some of his explanations.
@wolfboy18
5 жыл бұрын
But you have to remember the audience he is talking to. He may be having to undo decades of indoctrination in a few months, or less. I met someone once who was home schooled in a religious home. He could quote the Bible insanely well; but he couldn't do simple math, and had the reading skills of a 3 year old. Also the Average American reads and comprehends things at the 3rd to 5th grade level. How do you think Politicians are so successful? Religious Apologists are just like Politicians; and their audiences have the same comprehensive levels. Not saying that they are stupid at all; just that they want a quick, easy soundbite of an answer that they can put on their Twitter Feed or their Facebook Wall. And we are fighting against this, so we have to rely on analogies in order to get them started on what winds up being far more complicated than said individuals realize. I have a Coworker who is an Antivaxer. She is just afraid and Concerned at the end of it, and doesn't know who to trust, or where to go to for good information. And we don't help out by putting 99% of the info behind University Paywalls. What people like my Coworker need is something massively dumbed down and over Simplified that only takes a short time to read.
@xander1756
5 жыл бұрын
This is hilarious: a faith based belief system trying to tell another faith based belief system they're wrong.
@chimpanzeethat3802
4 жыл бұрын
Are you insinuating that evolution is a faith based belief system?
@xander1756
4 жыл бұрын
@@chimpanzeethat3802 Evolution remains a theory due to lack of convincing evidence. Thus those that proclaim it as fact are doing so by believing only, thus just like all religions, the science of evolution is faith based. And like religions, it sounds true when an advocate passionately and confidently shares their knowledge, but when one delve's in further, cross referencing and deeply examining single statements, one can come aross the discepancies, and bit by bit one realizes the concept is nowhere near as sound as the believer's think.
@chimpanzeethat3802
4 жыл бұрын
Do you genuinely believe that? Or are you just pretending not to know the difference between a scientific theory and a theory in the colloquial sense?
@xander1756
4 жыл бұрын
@@chimpanzeethat3802Q: It has nothing to do with belief, for believing is what one has to rely on when one doesn't have any facts. I've heard the arguments about the two definitions of Theory. I still don't buy it. Evolution remains a theory simply because, and despite the amount of claims about what they regard as evidence, The theory has as many holes as religions do. If you believe what evolutionists say, good for you, I'm not convinced. Nor do I put much stock in folks who claim we humans know exactly what was going on with earth millions of years ago. Just more theory proclaimed as scientific fact.
@chimpanzeethat3802
4 жыл бұрын
It's unfortunate that the word theory means one thing in science and something else in everyday language, but it's just the way it is. Science was using the word first, it comes from the word theorem as used in mathematics. What you might call a theory in everyday language is closer to a hypothesis in scientific terms. A scientific theory is a statement that explains everything about the subject, including all the evidence, data, principles, mechanisms, formulas, relevant laws, and all the facts repeatedly confirmed through observations and experiments. Nothing gets elevated from a hypothesis to a theory unless it has already been demonstrated to be true.
@multiyapples
5 жыл бұрын
As a Christian I disagree.
@barkYdarkATFB
5 жыл бұрын
With what, exactly?
@multiyapples
5 жыл бұрын
@@barkYdarkATFB Well the idea of evolution without God.
@barkYdarkATFB
5 жыл бұрын
well, I would suggest letting go of one of those ideas. (Hint: evolution has been proven)
@multiyapples
5 жыл бұрын
barkYdarkATFB actually it hasn’t and I won’t let go of my belief in God.
@barkYdarkATFB
5 жыл бұрын
@multiyapples but it has. And the only reason you shun the idea of it, is because of your belief in god. You are denying it because it doesn’t conform to your preconceived ideas. There are people who believe in god, yet still understand evolution.
@AtheismvsLogic
5 жыл бұрын
So sad. Doctor Donald made it sound like genetic mutations could bring about a living cell. He like all other atheists failed to talk about the ribosome and how it is impossible for a ribosome to come about without a creator.
@sapientbirb7350
5 жыл бұрын
Let me guess, you went on a website that claims that ribosomes need to have a creator, but it barely goes in depth on how exactly, or just completely dodges the question by talking about facts that are completely unrelated or just repeatedly repeat the question. Either that, or you're like that dumbass BARBATVS 89, who thinks that just because it comes out of his mouth in a video he made specifically, it must be original and true.
@LucivarDiablo
5 жыл бұрын
Citation to a *scientific paper from a reputable journal* to support your claim that "it is impossible for a ribosome to come about without a creator". Good luck!
@sapientbirb7350
5 жыл бұрын
@@LucivarDiablo Can you be a bit more specific, because all I've been getting when searching up the quote were many websites that tell an opposite story and fewer websites with titles that make it obvious that they're creationist biased.
@LucivarDiablo
5 жыл бұрын
@@sapientbirb7350 That was my point. I'm an atheist and a proponent of evolution. My quotation was taken from OP comment and as it is a scientific claim that must be supported with scientific data. That's also why I bolded "scientific paper from a reputable journal" to exclude the joke of a journal creationists have started up in an attempt to seem more legit. Hope that clears things up.
Пікірлер: 215