Her smile and calm tone doesn't hide her ire for this man. She's not showing much respect at all. Especially when she started dealing veiled insults, unprovoked.
She is infuriating. Her tone, her smile, the head tilt she does as if she inquisitive but is actually snobbish, her choice of words. Can’t stand people like her.
@@auntiegarfunkel They keep repeating that because they aren't smart and/or willing to actually understand the evidence, it's so frustrating. Just like you could bring a flat earther to space in a ship and they just say it's CGI or some dumb shit...
Reverse psychology! The doubt the personal trainer held has motivated the runner to run the entire marathon. Like when my parents told me not to look at porn, works every time
“I hate this because I’ve been hurt by someone like this” Adam just summed up my entire childhood growing up in a private Christian school. I’ve met so many people just like her
It’s so annoying and condescending. They only care about people because it’s useful to them, they don’t care about people for the sake of it. So many times I see special needs kids get cared for by religious people mostly to use as a prop at Sunday school. It’s gross.
@@ajzeg01 any grifter fundie will fall into this. Right wing, left wing, MLM scammer, religious nut. If they're personally and financially identified with an emotional belief, it's near impossible to change their mind.
it's so exhausting dealing with these kinds of people, they literally wear you down mentally so when you walk away in exasperation they can interpret that as winning the argument
“I made you mad enough to not care about this debate with my ignorance and arrogance so clearly that means you have no arguments left” is the most pervasive fallacy online and amongst these kinds of (abusive) people.
@@JohnSmith-yd5wq Faith is exactly that, a believe in something even in the presence of facts. These "debates" achieve shit, both parties declare a win. It's to the point I'm not sure which is side shows more intelligence, arguing against science in the name of a God or arguing against a person of faith with any amount of facts.
You can't debate someone who isn't motivated by truth, they won't measure evidence. All these people want is to feel that they're right and the smart one in the room
The most insane and hypocritical part of this video to me is the fact that she keeps asking for physical evidence, when one of the biggest pillars to most religions (and consequently creationism) is "believing without seeing"
@@Unnlikable I can't remember to be sure, and I might be paraphrasing a bit, let me try and find it quickly. Edit: Looking it up, it's possible it's a negative derivation of "hominem unius libri" (" the man of a single book") (or sometimes said "hominem unius libri tomeo" ["I fear the man of a single book"]) made by a friar Thomas Aquinas. Originally the phrase was meant to mean "all you need is a single book", however further citings have come to derive the opposite. Of course I may have missed a more obvious derivation, but the meaning still holds true. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_unius_libri
The true believers usually haven't read their book either. They hear one of a couple dozen short excerpts once a week from their village shaman and consider that adequate.
It’s hilarious how she treats science like a religion. These people are delusional. You can’t reason with someone that far gone. Edit: it’s also hilarious how she keeps asking for physical evidence when their whole faith is “believing is seeing.” Besides, there’s so much evidence for evolution that it’s hard to debate against. Another thing that gets to me about creationist is that they only believe that the Christian creation myth is the only real story and all other stories/creation myths are never mentioned, never happened, or were misinterpreted from the Christian myth. She talks about loving your fellow man but she and her lot straight up ignore or disrespect other people, bulldozing down their words with their bs.
Pro choice leftys - "I'm going to shout you down and not listen to anything you say if your viewpoint differs in anyway from mine... antifa and BLM forever; my body my choice!!"
Ok, so the things she doesn't want are: - Things imposed down your throat - Points of view that lead to aggressive societies that use these views to lead others into genocide - Places that don't allow differing points of view and will force their way into people's personal life - Facts without solid evidence behind it to be thought to children I have never seen a christian project so hard everything that is wrong with modern day christianity as she did, like, every single point. How can one person be so awfully unselfaware
@@Soyuz2578 Nope, all they want is for women to be left alone. Nobody is forcing you to get an abortion, all attempts at force are coming from the anti-abortion side.
It's a pretty epic self-report about your moral compass if the only way you can and would treat humans with dignity is if you believe your own deity made them. Whereas I treat people with respect because they are sentient beings capable of experiencing suffering.
sometimes it feels like the only thing stopping religious people from going out and fulfilling their twisted fantasies is that they literally think an invisible man is judging them.
this is really hard to watch. it boils down to person1: *gives a well formed argument* person2: "but there's no evidence for that" person1: *gives evidenve* person2: "why do you want to convince people of your opinion so badly?"
You forgot one exchange. person1: *could your unfalsifiable beliefs be so malignant that my questioning is percieved as a personal attack?* person2: "INDECENTY1!!1! YOU WANT TO FORCE YOUR BELIEFS ON ME!!! THROUGH PERSONAL ATTACKS! ALSO HERE'S A LATIN PHRASE I CLEARLY DONT UNDERSTAND."
as someone who has dealt with hyper-religious people who don't believe in evolution/science in general in my day-to-day life every day, I will always appreciate this type of content no matter how much I see westerners complain about "Reddit neckbeard atheists" on the internet.
Yeah, if calling atheists names and attacking their character is the only thing those types of people have to say in response to criticism of their religion, then I think that goes to show just how weak their ideology, epistemology and belief systems really are.
The religious people who complain about atheists all the time are just insecure about their faith and don’t like hearing arguments against their belief system. This woman is insane though. The way she speaks and her body language is quite interesting. I’d like to know what she thought about Richard before this interview. As in, why would she agree to do this interview or debate if she is completely unwilling to listen to anything he has to say. Perhaps she thought people listening to this conversation would side with her? Delusional.
People have shit on atheists for their anti-theism, but just look at the religious beliefs of some of the people in power and how it informs their decision and policy making. Can you really say the current shitshow in America would be the same in a secular world?
Gish Gallup, rocket powered goal posts, and a complete lack of good faith will win every argument! Who has conversations with others just to 'win,' 'gotcha,' and completely ignore your interlocutor while you think of your next point without considering what they've just said? Really, I'm of the belief that if you can't steelman the the "opposition," you've got no business discussing anything with them at all.
“It would be a very unpleasant right wing society” “I don’t know about right wing” Idk if that’s funnier than how she mispronounced basically every word over 2 syllables but it’s close 😂😂
Back in the early 2000's, I was talking to a girl online who came from a very religious family. She told me that she'd never met an atheist like me that was a good person, and that it shocked her. Like... what kindof life do you have to have lived, for that to happen?
Jeez that makes me feel bad for these people. They’re so isolated and are taught that anyone outside their bubble is bad and wrong. What kind of life is that?
It can work both ways. I live in part of the world where religion is a private matter, and I never met an "out" Christian like in the States until I got to college. So my image of fervent Christians was gathered from televangelists and Chick Tracts.
Creationist will often backtrack from changing species to a term they made up called "kinds" they'll say you'll never see a dog evolve into another kind. Of course they won't acknowledge that some dinosaurs evolved into birds (which are still dinosaurs)
The whole "kinds" thing is so vague too, because a kind can be whatever you want. It can be a species, or a genus, or even a *kingdom* . For example, they'll call dogs a kind, but they'll also call bacteria a kind. The worst example of this argument was when Ray Comfort argued that a bacteria would have to become an animal to prove a change of kinds. It makes no sense and that's the point, it's just used to further confuse people who don't understand evolution.
There is a ton of projecting going on here. She accuses him off being aggressive when she is. She accuses him of having no evidence when she has none. She says science text books rely on illustrations when her book of fairy tales can't even do that, etc.
@@krissuyx Back when it was still kept together before social justice and radical right thinking entered the scene, and before The Amazing Atheist went off the deep end
This is what starting with a conclusion and then finding evidence to support it looks like. She is incapable of changing her mind, or even imagining it.
The general theory behind Protestant Christianity is based entirely on the concept of “faith”. Because you _MUST_ have faith, ie blind belief, God intentionally provides absolutely zero evidence in the real world that the Bible is true and that Christianity is real. That’s what these Christians arguing against evolution have wrong, that there is a way for them to prove earthly theories wrong. Applying logic to the Bible is exactly the opposite of what the Bible tells you to do.
She has an internal script, whenever the convo goes off script; she malfunctions and just repeats like a broken record - as if Dawkins just didn't hear the point or something. My dad does this even with mundane topics, it's quite funny to hear him go in a circle if he doesn't get to finish his script.
You’re an idiot for even giving this shit the time of day. I was into these debates when I was 16, then I moved on. It's like watching serious debates about the existence of Santa, kinda pathetic. Pick a harder target, cause this is just a circle-jerk for wannabe intellectuals.
Now I don't think religion is really all bad, and mind you this is coming from an atheist who holds everything connected to it with distaste. Most of all it wouldn't have been so prevalent in human society if it didn't have a positive effect . And it did have at least one good thing that I can think of, it was an easy and simple way for people to form their morality ,now that wasn't always effective, and it was sometimes twisted to something disgusting ,but it did work most of the time.I think the main problem here and in general with religion today is that we are not really dealing with normal religious people, but instead with a bunch of fanatics ,who instead of using their beliefs as a vague guideline to live their lives by they consider them absolute law.
@@АлександърДюлгеров-г1с I don’t know maybe I’ve listen to too much Christopher Hitchens because I do take the view that God Is Not Great: That Religion Poisons Everything. All the good it seems to do can be done by secular means, more effectively. Though it has its moments of virtue - there’s a reason why fundamentalists are considered by everyone else to be some of the most confused, unnecessarily evil people around. The fundamental texts of the most powerful monotheisms are themselves the twisted and poisonous aspect of the religions. The fact that it had some benefit in the past doesn’t mean it’s good for the present or future. I don’t even think it was necessary for the past because stoicism and humanism existed before Christianity took over the world. That’s really what stifled human progress prior to the enlightenment. IMO.
@@knotlock I mostly agree with you here, although I have one clarification to make and one thing to add. When talking about merits ,I was more focused on the micro aspect of religion, or how it affects an individual in his daily life . While you are right ,this is a really minuscule part of the whole picture, I still think it important and meaningful today. Also in general I think we are having less religion problems and more human problems. Religion is just one of many systems that we as humans found ways to abuse for our benefit, and the results speak for themselves .
Coming from someone in a Catholic School we were NEVER taught the theory of evolution in class, every year we got to any chapter that brought it or sex education up was ripped from our textbooks. Luckily my parents are open minded enough that they taught me about both subjects, whether or not my classmates got the same luxury I can't say
i just admire and adore adum's frustration to the fake laugh thing and how dishonest it is. I mean like,, i relate to it. this sheer urge for manipulative people to refuse self reflection, to be in good faith even just A LITTLE BIT. it's so vile, and it transforms into such ugly actions.i will always appreciate how good faith adum is.
btw this lady is against gay marriage. so much for the old "being a creationist makes the world a better place because we accept and respect each other more"
If this was a mockumentary I would think she's trying too hard to look evil, comically so. But wow, she does reminds me of some people I've encountered, horrifying if forced to deal with. And religious people are relying on material evidence to be convinced of anything, lol opposed to mainly -THE BOOK- Also that laugh is folding me up inside, holy shit. "Are you by chance emotional about the evolution?" *Condescending laughter*
14:11 I'm religious and this is the thing that I try to really stress when talking to creationists. If you really believe in an "intelligent creator," it makes sense that he'd create evolution. It's like if a software designer could invent a self-updating patch, instead of having to manually do it every time there was a bug in the program.
I've thought this as well. If there is a higher, omniscient, all powerful God wouldn't it be understandable that said God dumbed down the workings of the universe in a way we would understand thousands of years ago? Because we were not in a place to even fathom the intricacies and massive amounts of time that went into the formation of our world.
I'm about as atheist as I can be, but I also find creations funny and exactly that way. On one hand they want to call God all powerful, and on the other hand there painting him out to be the tiniest possible God. Especially the young earth ones who also happened to be flat earthers? You ask them "could your God have made an entire universe with planets orbiting stars inside galaxies and stuff?" And they say yeah he could have, But then they start talking about the firmament and how Earth is only a few thousand years old. Brain rot. They worship the weakest version of their god.
The problem with that idea is it presupposes God is neither omniscient nor omnipotent, thus rendering God not a god at all. If God is a god, God should be able to make evolution happen through direct influence.
"Scientists who don't believe in evolution are censored out" Is she talking about people publishing creationist papers and having them shot down through peer review? Because if that's the case, I would hope they're not just freely putting that stuff out there. I would HOPE there's more of a screening process than just some random dude walking up, writing a bunch of unproven biblical scripture in a paper, and then having it thrown out there next to, like, actual cancer research and theoretical physics papers and stuff, like it's just as verified. Shes literally saying this while also complaining about a fraud someone tried to pull in the 20s, there SHOULD be a buffer for what scientists put out there as a genuine fact. The only problem this lady has is that the buffer should only exist when it DOESN'T stop her unfounded belief from being spread. She'd be fine with literally anything else being """censored""".
Nah, that stuff isn't freely put out, they're smart enough to put a pricetag on it and sell it to Christians. Ken Ham sells all of his "research" as DVDs and books.
@@danieldsantiagorodriguez4955 Legit. Any group that has to rely on anti-intellectualism to actually make its arguments, like anything that argues from intuition and tradition, such as religion, will always eventually have to go into conspiracy bullshit because they'll eventually have to argue with actual facts and proven research.
These people are so insufferable! Like, he's telling you where to look and where and how much research has been done and you're rejecting it! I swear this got me so heated. I can't with people like her.
Dogs and Wolves aren't different species. The domestic dog as we know it is still categorized as a subspecies of gray wolf (Canis lupus), the scientific name for domestic dogs is actually a combination of the species and subspecies epithet: Canis lupus familiaris. Their genomes are extremely similar.
That's true, but if you showed a Grey Wolf, a Chihuahua, and a Great Dane to an alien and told them they were the same species, they probably wouldn't believe you.
@@Moony1568 Well, yes. We have pushed breeds of dogs in different directions through artificial selection. It's basically accelerated evolution selecting for specific factors.
"Where is the evidence??? All they have are drawings!!" Ma'am, you believe in an invisible being based on scribbles in a book. I don't like being one of those people who says "LUL UR GOD DOESN'T EXIST I DON'T SEE HIM!!!" because it's unnecessary, but the hypocrisy is crazy. Also I agree with Adum, her face and mannerisms are infuriating.
How she just refuses to accept the evidence is infuriating. If it was me, I would have stopped that debate sheet 5 minutes. Dawkins has the patients of a saint.
The reason moths and other insects follow our artificial light is actually pretty neat. Insects have used the moon to successfully navigate for millions of years without a hitch. "If I fly, and the moon is in this part of my vision, then I know I will be going straight if I keep the moon in the same location." Then humans came along and made local artificial lights, and now this rule of thumb doesn't work as well anymore. Because as soon as the moth start flying, the "moon" will start moving as well. So, to keep the "moon" in the same location in their vision, the moth spirals ever inwards until it hits the light.
@@greengarnish1711 Quite possibly. Surprisingly complicated behaviour can arise with remarkably simple rules of thumb. The insect wouldn't need to understand the difference between artificial light and the moon. Just like we don't need to do actual calculus in real time as we watch and predict the perfect time to hit a ball with a bat. Having big brains is costly in terms of resources, after all. If a rule of thumb is effective enough at solving a problem, that's plenty good enough. That's why optical/audio illusions are effective at tricking our brain: the illusions show in what cases our rules of thumb differ from objective reality.
I always wonder how these people explain the appendix a part of our body we don't need or use but at one point did. Clearly there was some kind of evolution there and its only a short time in the grand timeline of it all
Some of them explain it as being degeneracy from the fall of humankind due to original sin. Others explain it as the appendix performing any kind of small physiological function and that this is what it was designed for all along.
ackshully, the appendix is still pretty useful to us since it contains a lot of immune cells. obviously you can live without one, but these days a doctor won't just yoink it out on a whim now that there's research showing how people with an intact appendix recover from illness more quickly than those who had an appendectomy. i feel like a better comparison might be wisdom teeth: we needed them back when we were hunter-gatherers chewing on basically everything for sustenance, but now that we're spoiled with soft, cooked foods, they just crowd our mouths and make us miserable.
A lot of people will just throw logic right out the window if someone's offering them a simple explanation that satisfies their emotional needs. As long as they can feel good within themselves and their tribe they don't care what's true.
She’s just performing for the camera. There’s no conversation going on, she doesn’t care at all what he’s saying. She just imagined a highlight reel that would frame her as the smart Christian lady, and forces her own planned talking points. Too bad they they kept it unedited. Her cringy performance betrays her.
He did an interview somewhere with an archbishop, and it's interesting, because you'd think that would be a very hostile conversation, but both seemed to be reasonable, and listen to understand, rather than to respond. Meanwhile, this lady is so condescending and rude, and almost cuts him off constantly to interject a pre-loaded response.
She reminds me of a Bigfoot believer. The burden is on others to provide proof she is wrong, so absence of evidence is her evidence. Doesn't matter what the belief is. Without context or examples, there's no reason to respect someone's conclusion.
religious people are statistically way more violent than non-religious people. Turns out when you believe you were made by a loving cre-a-TOR that tells you the ones who dont think like you are inherently evil you kinda nullify all that love and kindness she talking about
As a Christian or self aware one- I always never understood why people thought of evolution as wrong or bad: I mean Jesus was birthed by Mary, so it would make sense that the animals or at least the many others had to come some were right? And for the violent religious one, its either that they are fanatics or been abused by someone they know. And so they had been brainwashed in a way to think everyone who is wrong is a sinner.
Exactly, like for example the reign of terror after the french revolution.... oh wait, they weren't religious, anyway Mao's cultural revolution... no this one wasn't religious as well. Lenin and Stalin purges are good examples... DAMN IT!
@@Clipzilla42 I sorta botches the message or asking a question that doesn't fit what i said. But essentially people can be stupid or arrogant and could be hard to reason with. So it's either best to ignore them or give them a reality check somehow EDIT: wait I just notifications I thought you were replying to me sorry
I will never get over how religious folk can't comprehend non-religious folk's ability to not be constantly robbing and murdering each other. Also, young-earth creationists seem to have teamed up with the flat-earthers, so that's hilarious.
Looking it up, the law they broke when they were 'sent to jail for 6 months for just praying' was that they were violating a restraining order. And they couldn't argue that they weren't aware, because part of their 'just praying' was taking a physically printed copy of the restraining order and tearing it up in public. Edit: I probably should've finished the whole video before making this comment tbh
You don't get it, she specifies many times that "evolutionists" can't come up with the evidence that *she's* looking for. And the evidence that she's looking for is whatever she wants it to be. I've had creationists tell me that the evidence is this warm feeling they get when they pray, or the connection they feel with God. So literally nothing verifiable and therefore nothing substantial or worthwhile. Meanwhile fossils don't count because obviously God put them there to test us.
When I went to school they taught us that when it rained god was spitting on you and that he invented the tv because he created the materials that humans used to make the TVs… and even as a eight year old i called their bull
Ah yes, I love textbooks where instead of using illustrations and drawings to show the evolution between horses and whales, they instead jam 7 whales, 14 horses, and 45 skeletons into the textbook. They're really hard to carry to class though.
What frustrates me is that there are religious people who have come to the conclusion they have through research and thought. It's not impossible to find a Christian who can give good arguments for their beliefs. The problem is that they are very rare, and almost all Christians fall into the "the Bible said it so it must be true" mentality.
Oh my god I know exactly what you mean about her patronising laughing to signify superiority and confidence in her winning the argument. I hate it. I’ve dealt with people like that too, horrible ones.
Lol what countries is she constantly referring to when she says that countries of athiests are barbaric and cruel and religious counties are all caring and great?? I looked it up and some countries with the most amount of athiests are places like Japan and Sweden, so is she saying Japan and Sweden are terrible places to live in, in comparison to America? Did she just.... Assume all third world countries are athiest?
I wonder what she's say if someone brought up Saudi Arabia which has state-sponsored Wahhabism and Iran which is a literal theocracy. I guess they're barbaric too because it's the wrong religion. The Spanish who were a devoutly Christian state but also committed mass genocide of native Americans and started the Atlantic slave trade under Columbus? Probably some other nonsense excuse. That's all you ever get from these people because they aren't interested in what's real.
i love how she keeps claiming that people who believe in evolution practice “dangerous philosophies” like the crusades or the holocaust never happened.
The Holocaust, though it was enabled by the passivity of German Christians, was not based on orthodox Christian belief, as can be clearly seen in the Vatican's response to the persecution of the Jewish people during the Nazi era. The notion that the Crusades, which were a completely justified response to an imminent military threat to medieval Christendom, can be ascribed to religious fundamentalism is incredible. It is a pity that such basic historical knowledge is lacking in modern education.
@@jojotoofor9eight766 Most wars are fought in the Early Modern and Modern Eras because of nationalism, not religion, religion being an excuse for conflict. In Western Europe this can be seen from the later thirteenth century.
@@hilairebelloc3368 ok but the brass tacks of it is that a group of religious people were persecuted and brutally executed because of their beliefs. i’m in no way implying that the holocaust or the crusades were done based on any orthodox christain (or any religious) belief. i’m not an atheist and i have nothing but respect for well-meaning and kind hearted religious people, but any type of text is subject to interpretation. while religious beliefs are not inherently dangerous, it isn’t any more or any less dangerous than any other belief system, the crusades/holocaust were the 2 most obvious examples of this.
@@jakesmith9438 This completely sidesteps the fact that the Crusades were not in fact an act of religious persecution. The Crusaders allied with certain Islamic states and vice-versa; later on, they tried allying with (and converting) the Mongols (some of whom, it should be noted, were Nestorian Christians). And considering the fact that the Catholic Church interprets its religious text chiefly by its magisterium, guided by the ancient tradition, it does not fall under the charge of being guided by individual interpretation, which, while you did not explicitly state this, implied as much.
Whoever operated the camera is the unsung hero. Doing laps around the room with sweeping cinematic shots to make two people standing in place more interesting.
I remember my Christian dad saying "if we evolved from apes then why are there still apes?" like it was some gotcha. ??? Like... the same reason there are still wolves while there are dogs? Wildcats and housecats? My dad was not very smart. Or rather he was, but his Christianity shut him down to critical thinking, which was just so sad to see.
As an aside, I'm just gonna say the ONLY people I've been abused throughout my life by are Christians. My father and stepmother, a babysitter who literally got her kids (my friends at the time) to lock me in a dark room for hours listening to nothing but revelation gospel and how non-believers go to hell. I'm very curious how this insufferable know-it-all woman would react to that. Dogma breeds shitty people, too. Maybe the shittiest. Deal with it. Edit: My mother was also a teacher and several religious families pulled their kids from her science class because it taught evolution. Almost all the poor kids even told the parents they wanted to learn just so they knew both sides. But noooo, no religious people are biased.
Imagine you had a hand carved wooden statue of a dog. That was once a block of wood. That block of wood had an uncountable amount of individual scrapings with a knife, each changing the shape of the block slightly. No one scraping was responsible for making it look like a dog, but after all is done it looks like a dog... How is the concept of evolution so hard to understand for these people? This lady is asking for that one scrape where it looked like a block of wood then afterwards looked like a dog and assumes that if you can't find it the original block of wood never existed.
The fake laugh is not to signify "winning" as much as it is to suppress one's own emotions becuase to them "not losing" is about control. If she were actually gloating, the laugh would be the slightest bit convincing. This woman has no answers and feels threatened by those who do.
Hyper-religious people always talk with an almost cartoonishly intense smile on their faces at all times, it's not pleasant or endearing, it's kind of just disturbing
"Critical factories". This lady has the oversweet singsong voice people get when they speak too much to Sunday School classes, and other people who can't answer back. Next time someone says: where is the evidence?, ask them what SPECIFIC evidence would convince you -- and don't let them evade or change the subject.
The problem is she will inevitably say something amazingly dumb like “show me the bones!” A statement like that provides you with the barebones of an argument *in her mind* so she’s given you an in-road for “honest debate.” Once you engage that question with another question (which you naturally would, since there is 0 context to what she means), she’ll then shame YOU for evading the question. You can’t win, PERIOD. You always have to play defensive strategies and even when you look objectively correct to most people, the highlight reels made after the fact that are shared by the fundamentalist Christian Right wing are far more important to them feeling validated in their non-position than their actual performances in debates.
@@BradsGonnaPlay Stupid people respond to stupid tactics. To her "show me the bones!" ask "what bones?" Repeat as necessary and do not budge. Ever. The problem is letting her slide away to topics without thrashing out even one. If she says bones, we're sticking to bones, whether the interview is five minutes or a half an hour.
Dude, even just Dog breeding shows some level of evolution. A few years ago Pugs actually had snouts, but because of inbreeding to try and get a specific aesthetic, they completely mutated into a different dog, and that fucked them up. Now people are breeding Pugs to try and fix their little squished snout, and that's a pretty recent thing, which I feel like it's a good example o evolution. Sure, it's being assisted by humans, but it's still a kind of evolution, right?
Evolution is commonly agreed to be based on at least 4 variables. Mutation, e.g. random changes in the gene pool that happen between generations, Selection: an outside force, either in a specific ecological niche or competition between species, giving certain individuals a higher chance of reproduction, gene drift, random natural disasters effecting the gene pool, and migration, the exchange of individuals and genes between different populations. For you dog breeding example Mutation would take place in meiosis and fertilization, selection happens through the breeders, allowing dogs with specific noses to reproduce, migration would be transporting your pug to a different location, because his genes are needed there and gene drift would be accidents happening to your dog at home or while traveling. While this is a rather narrow example and evolution usually happens on a much larger scale, I just find the principles of evolution so fun and easy to apply, that I couldn't help but rant about your example. TL, DR: Dog breeding is an example for evolution.
The "Micro Evolution" bullshit comes down to this. "No it's literally impossible to go from California to New York traveling at 1 mile per hour. It's just too slow, you can't make it that far at that speed. Sure you can go small distances from point A to B, but you can't go cross-country, I just can't believe that, it makes no sense" That's what they sound like to me
Snakes are a fantastic example of evolution: The Crawl Kay Boa is found on a small island with that very name living mostly within mangrove swamps on Birds as they migrate, this means that they eat very rarely causing them not naturally grow far smaller than most other species of boa. These "Dwarf" type boas, of which there are many, get taken in as pets. As their owners begin to feet them more frequently, the subsequent generations of these more domestic snakes begin to grow larger losing their "dwarf" characteristic. (My facts might be slightly off, i'm not a herpetologist )
There are lots of animals in general that prove evolution. Dogs, like Adam said are a good example. Polar bears used to be brown bears, but obviously the white fur mutation would survive better in the arctic. Mudskippers obviously are fantastic, too, it's literally a fish crawling on land. Coming back to your example, there's a type of snake that still has little nubs where there used to be legs. Evolution is everywhere, you really have to turn a blind eye to not see it.
@@corvusastrum2982 yeh. I think this snake one is cool because we unintentionally changed it over such a short space of time. Also some snakes still have their legs in the form of tiny bones that don't do anything, not just little nubs
36:00 somewhat off topic- I’d actually love it if schools taught the Flying Spaghetti Monster in mythology classes. It’d be a great way to contrast stories with anti-stories, and how useful they both are for cultures.
I have never seen a clearer example of gaslighting than every sentence that comes out of this woman’s mouth. This is highly entertaining…and incredibly frustrating.
Here is the thing: Every religious person I ever talked with has forced the conversation and bricked against aguments. Every scientific person I ever talked with was always interested in mutually exchanging and playing with ideas and most important: honest listening.
most creationists just kind of forget that species is a very ambiguous spectrum, as most things are in biological classifications. humans are still going to be closely related to chimp families and no semantic barrier is going to stop that. but that's not going to stop them, 'cause the bible said so
Also that the proof of evolution is literally present in our own bodies and most species in the form of vestigial features lmao. Big fan of god deciding to toss an organ in which its only known function is occasionally exploding and killing us
" The more I laugh at your position the more correct I am" is one of the most bafflingly effective tactics I have ever seen. It's so off-putting and aggravating and yet it seems to work.
25:30 You know which societies are the most loving and caring? The ones that believe that universal healthcare is a right. Is this lady also concerned that America doesn't believe in that?
It’s fun to dunk on cringey atheists but damn when I remember that people like this actually exist it makes me so grateful we have people like Dawkins who go out of their way to expose stupidity
This woman be like "Hey man, you need to prove that your view is valid to me based on my own criteria and working within an arbitrary frame that I set up that a-priori rules out your viewpoint. Haha can't do it? Well looks like I win again!"
9:06 You know…Why IS it that only the scientific community gets to have a say on evolution?? And, for that matter, why is it that only the molecular gastronomy community has a say on radical preparation of cuisine?? Why is it that only the practitioners of the Alexander Technique get to give master classes on the Alexander Technique? Why is it that a community of people who STUDY AND ARE EXPERTS IN A SPECIFIC FIELD GET TO TALK ABOUT THAT FIELD??!! HUH I WONDER WHY THAT MIGHT BE!!!!! HEY, I’M A PROFESSIONAL MUSICIAN, WHY IS IT THAT I DON’T GET TO TALK TO THE HOSPICE NURSING COMMUNITY ABOUT EUTHANASIA??!! I WANT TO PLAY TOO!!! The absurdity of it. GAWD.
The look on her face when she laughs is the embodiment of: I'm not listening. You can see it in her eyes. It is incredibly frustrating to watch on a video; I can only imagine how much it would make my blood boil in person.
Damn, can't believe you can just upload episodes of The Office on TH-cam in this copyright climate. Weird that they gave Dwight and Angela so much screen time together in this one, they usually never talk.
"we're being silenced by evolutionists" she said to the scientist interviewing her
" silenced " in this context for them means 'we don't have the lone voice', the same way religious 'freedom' only applies to their religion.
"we're being silenced by scientists" said the woman being given, by a scientist, a platform to talk
Her smile and calm tone doesn't hide her ire for this man. She's not showing much respect at all. Especially when she started dealing veiled insults, unprovoked.
She is infuriating. Her tone, her smile, the head tilt she does as if she inquisitive but is actually snobbish, her choice of words. Can’t stand people like her.
For real. She probably went home after this and trashed her entire room in a fit of rage.
Those little "mmm"s of hers are chock full of disdain.
She's only really capable of contradiction and any other point she makes is shallower.
This lady is the human incarnation of that meme of the guy sobbing angrily behind the smug mask
Lmao this is the most perfect description I have heard of her.
Dawkins: "fossils are real"
Lady: "YOURE AGGRESSIVE."
Lady: "Fossils are white... privilege."
Don't forget "SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE"
@@auntiegarfunkel They keep repeating that because they aren't smart and/or willing to actually understand the evidence, it's so frustrating.
Just like you could bring a flat earther to space in a ship and they just say it's CGI or some dumb shit...
*Creationist personal trainer:* Sure, you can take a step or two, but running a marathon? Impossible
Reverse psychology! The doubt the personal trainer held has motivated the runner to run the entire marathon. Like when my parents told me not to look at porn, works every time
“I hate this because I’ve been hurt by someone like this” Adam just summed up my entire childhood growing up in a private Christian school. I’ve met so many people just like her
It’s so annoying and condescending. They only care about people because it’s useful to them, they don’t care about people for the sake of it. So many times I see special needs kids get cared for by religious people mostly to use as a prop at Sunday school. It’s gross.
same here, just one more year and im outta there
@@LonzosSprayPainting you can do it!
@@LonzosSprayPaintingwe're rooting for you, friend. Don't let their ignorance defeat you ❤
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." -Upton Sinclair
Right-wing “geek” TH-camrs in a nutshell.
@@ajzeg01 guy I don't like is guilty of that! How is not enjoying corporate slop equate to willfully misunderstanding? Really a stretch, champ
ajzeg01 Yeah I used to watch a few of those types. Not anymore fortunately
@@ajzeg01 any grifter fundie will fall into this. Right wing, left wing, MLM scammer, religious nut. If they're personally and financially identified with an emotional belief, it's near impossible to change their mind.
@@skyrimisforthenords8312 Holy projection, batman!
it's so exhausting dealing with these kinds of people, they literally wear you down mentally so when you walk away in exasperation they can interpret that as winning the argument
Childish tactics from a childish mindset.
“I made you mad enough to not care about this debate with my ignorance and arrogance so clearly that means you have no arguments left” is the most pervasive fallacy online and amongst these kinds of (abusive) people.
Hard to win a debate when facts don't matter whatsoever.
@@JohnSmith-yd5wq Faith is exactly that, a believe in something even in the presence of facts. These "debates" achieve shit, both parties declare a win. It's to the point I'm not sure which is side shows more intelligence, arguing against science in the name of a God or arguing against a person of faith with any amount of facts.
You can't debate someone who isn't motivated by truth, they won't measure evidence. All these people want is to feel that they're right and the smart one in the room
The most insane and hypocritical part of this video to me is the fact that she keeps asking for physical evidence, when one of the biggest pillars to most religions (and consequently creationism) is "believing without seeing"
"A skeptic is one who has read many books and is still in doubt, a fundamentalist is one who has read one book and is convinced it holds the truth"
Where/ who is this quote from?
@@Unnlikable I can't remember to be sure, and I might be paraphrasing a bit, let me try and find it quickly.
Edit: Looking it up, it's possible it's a negative derivation of "hominem unius libri" (" the man of a single book") (or sometimes said "hominem unius libri tomeo" ["I fear the man of a single book"]) made by a friar Thomas Aquinas. Originally the phrase was meant to mean "all you need is a single book", however further citings have come to derive the opposite. Of course I may have missed a more obvious derivation, but the meaning still holds true.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_unius_libri
@@warfan1302 Oh wow thank you. I guess I could've looked it up haha
The true believers usually haven't read their book either. They hear one of a couple dozen short excerpts once a week from their village shaman and consider that adequate.
It’s hilarious how she treats science like a religion. These people are delusional. You can’t reason with someone that far gone.
Edit: it’s also hilarious how she keeps asking for physical evidence when their whole faith is “believing is seeing.” Besides, there’s so much evidence for evolution that it’s hard to debate against. Another thing that gets to me about creationist is that they only believe that the Christian creation myth is the only real story and all other stories/creation myths are never mentioned, never happened, or were misinterpreted from the Christian myth. She talks about loving your fellow man but she and her lot straight up ignore or disrespect other people, bulldozing down their words with their bs.
The problem is we have atheists that treat atheism like a religion; becoming zealots that push their ideologies on others.
Pro choice leftys - "I'm going to shout you down and not listen to anything you say if your viewpoint differs in anyway from mine... antifa and BLM forever; my body my choice!!"
Ok, so the things she doesn't want are:
- Things imposed down your throat
- Points of view that lead to aggressive societies that use these views to lead others into genocide
- Places that don't allow differing points of view and will force their way into people's personal life
- Facts without solid evidence behind it to be thought to children
I have never seen a christian project so hard everything that is wrong with modern day christianity as she did, like, every single point. How can one person be so awfully unselfaware
One could say the same thing about 99.9% of pro choice advocates also
@@Soyuz2578 Nope, all they want is for women to be left alone. Nobody is forcing you to get an abortion, all attempts at force are coming from the anti-abortion side.
It's a pretty epic self-report about your moral compass if the only way you can and would treat humans with dignity is if you believe your own deity made them. Whereas I treat people with respect because they are sentient beings capable of experiencing suffering.
They think they have empathy because GoD and if you take GoD out then suddenly empathy will disappear and we'll all be killing each other and babies
What if someone didn't experience suffering?
I really love this comment.
@@Ya_Mum1984 I would err on the side of caution.
sometimes it feels like the only thing stopping religious people from going out and fulfilling their twisted fantasies is that they literally think an invisible man is judging them.
this is really hard to watch. it boils down to
person1: *gives a well formed argument*
person2: "but there's no evidence for that"
person1: *gives evidenve*
person2: "why do you want to convince people of your opinion so badly?"
You forgot one exchange.
person1: *could your unfalsifiable beliefs be so malignant that my questioning is percieved as a personal attack?*
person2: "INDECENTY1!!1! YOU WANT TO FORCE YOUR BELIEFS ON ME!!! THROUGH PERSONAL ATTACKS! ALSO HERE'S A LATIN PHRASE I CLEARLY DONT UNDERSTAND."
literally a moral orel character
as someone who has dealt with hyper-religious people who don't believe in evolution/science in general in my day-to-day life every day, I will always appreciate this type of content no matter how much I see westerners complain about "Reddit neckbeard atheists" on the internet.
Yeah, if calling atheists names and attacking their character is the only thing those types of people have to say in response to criticism of their religion, then I think that goes to show just how weak their ideology, epistemology and belief systems really are.
The religious people who complain about atheists all the time are just insecure about their faith and don’t like hearing arguments against their belief system. This woman is insane though. The way she speaks and her body language is quite interesting. I’d like to know what she thought about Richard before this interview. As in, why would she agree to do this interview or debate if she is completely unwilling to listen to anything he has to say. Perhaps she thought people listening to this conversation would side with her? Delusional.
People have shit on atheists for their anti-theism, but just look at the religious beliefs of some of the people in power and how it informs their decision and policy making. Can you really say the current shitshow in America would be the same in a secular world?
I hate internet atheists 100x more than any creationists. Pseudo-intellectual blowhards.
@@dylan351321 That or she thought she'd "win" the argument and "prove" Dawkins is a moron. I've seen that as well.
"Go to a museum!"
"Now that I'm cornered and unable to respond, I'd rather go back and look at the philosophies that have grown out of evolutionism"
If you make your point nice and long-winded, people will forget about your previous point. Convenient!
Gish Gallup, rocket powered goal posts, and a complete lack of good faith will win every argument!
Who has conversations with others just to 'win,' 'gotcha,' and completely ignore your interlocutor while you think of your next point without considering what they've just said?
Really, I'm of the belief that if you can't steelman the the "opposition," you've got no business discussing anything with them at all.
Like 3 times
“It would be a very unpleasant right wing society”
“I don’t know about right wing”
Idk if that’s funnier than how she mispronounced basically every word over 2 syllables but it’s close 😂😂
I interpreted that has her being like "shhh, you're not supposed to associate Christians with the right, that's a secret!"
Back in the early 2000's, I was talking to a girl online who came from a very religious family. She told me that she'd never met an atheist like me that was a good person, and that it shocked her.
Like... what kindof life do you have to have lived, for that to happen?
She likely had never met one, but had only heard stories of them
Jeez that makes me feel bad for these people. They’re so isolated and are taught that anyone outside their bubble is bad and wrong. What kind of life is that?
It can work both ways. I live in part of the world where religion is a private matter, and I never met an "out" Christian like in the States until I got to college. So my image of fervent Christians was gathered from televangelists and Chick Tracts.
A life in a country where 95% of the population are religious and 99% of the population are cunts.
That's basically the whole western hemisphere.
The trauma from Jurassic Park really set Dr. Ellie Sattler down a dark path.
how dare you sir laura dern is a cinematic treasure
Yes but I don't see what this video has to do with Admiral Tumblr from _Star Wars: The Last Fuck Given._
"My religious freedom is to tell other people what they can and cannot do" seems to be the whole basis for religion with most people.
Creationist will often backtrack from changing species to a term they made up called "kinds" they'll say you'll never see a dog evolve into another kind. Of course they won't acknowledge that some dinosaurs evolved into birds (which are still dinosaurs)
Yeah, they use the word "kind" all the time, but the definition always seems very vague.
Good luck getting a consistent definition of kind that doesn't shift around when it's convenient.
The whole "kinds" thing is so vague too, because a kind can be whatever you want. It can be a species, or a genus, or even a *kingdom* . For example, they'll call dogs a kind, but they'll also call bacteria a kind.
The worst example of this argument was when Ray Comfort argued that a bacteria would have to become an animal to prove a change of kinds. It makes no sense and that's the point, it's just used to further confuse people who don't understand evolution.
and that crocodiles and alligators are descendants of dinosaurs
From what I've seen they use kinds to describe all dogs but also all breeds of dog are their own kind, depending on the speaker.
"Show me the bones"
"Look at the fossils"
*HAHAHA YOU FOOL YOU CANNOT CENSOR ME*
There is a ton of projecting going on here. She accuses him off being aggressive when she is. She accuses him of having no evidence when she has none. She says science text books rely on illustrations when her book of fairy tales can't even do that, etc.
YMS doing this kind of content is nothing short of a dream
It's like going back to vintage TH-cam from the 2000s and early 2010s.
@@krissuyx Back when it was still kept together before social justice and radical right thinking entered the scene, and before The Amazing Atheist went off the deep end
@@Trynt33 yeah it was social justice that ruined everything, and not the nascent right-wing bullshit popping up in the skeptic community
This is what starting with a conclusion and then finding evidence to support it looks like. She is incapable of changing her mind, or even imagining it.
The general theory behind Protestant Christianity is based entirely on the concept of “faith”. Because you _MUST_ have faith, ie blind belief, God intentionally provides absolutely zero evidence in the real world that the Bible is true and that Christianity is real. That’s what these Christians arguing against evolution have wrong, that there is a way for them to prove earthly theories wrong. Applying logic to the Bible is exactly the opposite of what the Bible tells you to do.
God its driving me insane to hear her repeat herself over and over and over no matter what he asks
She has an internal script, whenever the convo goes off script; she malfunctions and just repeats like a broken record - as if Dawkins just didn't hear the point or something. My dad does this even with mundane topics, it's quite funny to hear him go in a circle if he doesn't get to finish his script.
It"s like she has alzheimer's disease and is forgetting what they just talked about every 5 minutes
Sounds like cult behavior to me.
I wish more people took the threat of religion against humanity more seriously in public discourse.
I applaud Adum for talking about this stuff.
You’re an idiot for even giving this shit the time of day. I was into these debates when I was 16, then I moved on. It's like watching serious debates about the existence of Santa, kinda pathetic. Pick a harder target, cause this is just a circle-jerk for wannabe intellectuals.
Now I don't think religion is really all bad, and mind you this is coming from an atheist who holds everything connected to it with distaste. Most of all it wouldn't have been so prevalent in human society if it didn't have a positive effect . And it did have at least one good thing that I can think of, it was an easy and simple way for people to form their morality ,now that wasn't always effective, and it was sometimes twisted to something disgusting ,but it did work most of the time.I think the main problem here and in general with religion today is that we are not really dealing with normal religious people, but instead with a bunch of fanatics ,who instead of using their beliefs as a vague guideline to live their lives by they consider them absolute law.
@@АлександърДюлгеров-г1с
I don’t know maybe I’ve listen to too much Christopher Hitchens because I do take the view that God Is Not Great: That Religion Poisons Everything.
All the good it seems to do can be done by secular means, more effectively.
Though it has its moments of virtue - there’s a reason why fundamentalists are considered by everyone else to be some of the most confused, unnecessarily evil people around.
The fundamental texts of the most powerful monotheisms are themselves the twisted and poisonous aspect of the religions.
The fact that it had some benefit in the past doesn’t mean it’s good for the present or future.
I don’t even think it was necessary for the past because stoicism and humanism existed before Christianity took over the world.
That’s really what stifled human progress prior to the enlightenment. IMO.
Why do I get the feeling on forums your tag was "Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings".
@@knotlock I mostly agree with you here, although I have one clarification to make and one thing to add.
When talking about merits ,I was more focused on the micro aspect of religion, or how it affects an individual in his daily life . While you are right ,this is a really minuscule part of the whole picture, I still think it important and meaningful today.
Also in general I think we are having less religion problems and more human problems. Religion is just one of many systems that we as humans found ways to abuse for our benefit, and the results speak for themselves .
"Why are you so aggressive?"
*meanwhile, she is avoiding questions and acting very rude and passive aggressive*
I remember being infuriated by this about a decade ago, I wonder if it'll be more tolerable with Adum's commentary.
Narrator: It wasn't.
Oh how I tried
Nah, it isn't.
It is though
"Show me the evidence"
"It's in museums, you ever look in a museum?"
"Why are you so aggressive"
Coming from someone in a Catholic School we were NEVER taught the theory of evolution in class, every year we got to any chapter that brought it or sex education up was ripped from our textbooks. Luckily my parents are open minded enough that they taught me about both subjects, whether or not my classmates got the same luxury I can't say
As someone who loves paleontology and studies quite a bit as a hobby I feel like a soyboy screaming alone
i just admire and adore adum's frustration to the fake laugh thing and how dishonest it is. I mean like,, i relate to it. this sheer urge for manipulative people to refuse self reflection, to be in good faith even just A LITTLE BIT. it's so vile, and it transforms into such ugly actions.i will always appreciate how good faith adum is.
This is what happens when an unstoppable fact collides against an inmovable mindset.
btw this lady is against gay marriage. so much for the old "being a creationist makes the world a better place because we accept and respect each other more"
If this was a mockumentary I would think she's trying too hard to look evil, comically so.
But wow, she does reminds me of some people I've encountered, horrifying if forced to deal with.
And religious people are relying on material evidence to be convinced of anything, lol opposed to mainly -THE BOOK-
Also that laugh is folding me up inside, holy shit.
"Are you by chance emotional about the evolution?"
*Condescending laughter*
14:11 I'm religious and this is the thing that I try to really stress when talking to creationists. If you really believe in an "intelligent creator," it makes sense that he'd create evolution. It's like if a software designer could invent a self-updating patch, instead of having to manually do it every time there was a bug in the program.
I've thought this as well. If there is a higher, omniscient, all powerful God wouldn't it be understandable that said God dumbed down the workings of the universe in a way we would understand thousands of years ago? Because we were not in a place to even fathom the intricacies and massive amounts of time that went into the formation of our world.
I'm about as atheist as I can be, but I also find creations funny and exactly that way. On one hand they want to call God all powerful, and on the other hand there painting him out to be the tiniest possible God. Especially the young earth ones who also happened to be flat earthers? You ask them "could your God have made an entire universe with planets orbiting stars inside galaxies and stuff?" And they say yeah he could have, But then they start talking about the firmament and how Earth is only a few thousand years old. Brain rot. They worship the weakest version of their god.
It's as they say. The science could be the how instead of the why.
The problem with that idea is it presupposes God is neither omniscient nor omnipotent, thus rendering God not a god at all. If God is a god, God should be able to make evolution happen through direct influence.
Actually why would a intelligent creator need evolution at all? That sounds more like rationalization on your part.
"Scientists who don't believe in evolution are censored out"
Is she talking about people publishing creationist papers and having them shot down through peer review? Because if that's the case, I would hope they're not just freely putting that stuff out there. I would HOPE there's more of a screening process than just some random dude walking up, writing a bunch of unproven biblical scripture in a paper, and then having it thrown out there next to, like, actual cancer research and theoretical physics papers and stuff, like it's just as verified.
Shes literally saying this while also complaining about a fraud someone tried to pull in the 20s, there SHOULD be a buffer for what scientists put out there as a genuine fact. The only problem this lady has is that the buffer should only exist when it DOESN'T stop her unfounded belief from being spread. She'd be fine with literally anything else being """censored""".
Nah, that stuff isn't freely put out, they're smart enough to put a pricetag on it and sell it to Christians. Ken Ham sells all of his "research" as DVDs and books.
Sounds like the sort of thing flat-earthers would say. Being "censored" by the scientific community and all.
@@danieldsantiagorodriguez4955 Legit. Any group that has to rely on anti-intellectualism to actually make its arguments, like anything that argues from intuition and tradition, such as religion, will always eventually have to go into conspiracy bullshit because they'll eventually have to argue with actual facts and proven research.
@@danieldsantiagorodriguez4955 "Censored" for them is "I cant just spout my bs with no pushback and pretend it's just a valid as actual science"
These people are so insufferable!
Like, he's telling you where to look and where and how much research has been done and you're rejecting it!
I swear this got me so heated. I can't with people like her.
You're gonna love people like Kent Hovind, Ken Ham and Ray Comfort then :)
[Condescending "Hahahaha"]
@@alan62036 ken ham is the worst holy fuck
Dogs and Wolves aren't different species. The domestic dog as we know it is still categorized as a subspecies of gray wolf (Canis lupus), the scientific name for domestic dogs is actually a combination of the species and subspecies epithet: Canis lupus familiaris. Their genomes are extremely similar.
Yeah, it will take a while longer for them to completely separate
That's true, but if you showed a Grey Wolf, a Chihuahua, and a Great Dane to an alien and told them they were the same species, they probably wouldn't believe you.
@@therosrex5488
That’s thanks to us selectively breeding. We literally created dogs.
@@Moony1568 Well, yes. We have pushed breeds of dogs in different directions through artificial selection. It's basically accelerated evolution selecting for specific factors.
Thank you.
"Where is the evidence??? All they have are drawings!!"
Ma'am, you believe in an invisible being based on scribbles in a book. I don't like being one of those people who says "LUL UR GOD DOESN'T EXIST I DON'T SEE HIM!!!" because it's unnecessary, but the hypocrisy is crazy.
Also I agree with Adum, her face and mannerisms are infuriating.
She keeps bringing up illustrations as if there's photographs of Jesus.
@@BwooHuraca hey, some Turkish monk found a stained napkin, don't-cha-know! That's physical evidence that Jesus looked just like Cesare Borgia!
I literally can't finish this video lol, this lady is too much
Nothing short of an actual living Pokémon would convince her that evolution is real.
Not even that would work, we basically have that with animals like the platypus and echidna, mammals that literally lay eggs like fucking pokemon
ironically if evolution like in pokemon happened that would contradict the currently accepted evolution
How she just refuses to accept the evidence is infuriating. If it was me, I would have stopped that debate sheet 5 minutes. Dawkins has the patients of a saint.
I agree with you, but I love the irony of your last sentence.
The reason moths and other insects follow our artificial light is actually pretty neat. Insects have used the moon to successfully navigate for millions of years without a hitch. "If I fly, and the moon is in this part of my vision, then I know I will be going straight if I keep the moon in the same location."
Then humans came along and made local artificial lights, and now this rule of thumb doesn't work as well anymore. Because as soon as the moth start flying, the "moon" will start moving as well. So, to keep the "moon" in the same location in their vision, the moth spirals ever inwards until it hits the light.
That's pretty neat, wonder if they will eventually evolve to counter this effect.
@@greengarnish1711 Quite possibly. Surprisingly complicated behaviour can arise with remarkably simple rules of thumb. The insect wouldn't need to understand the difference between artificial light and the moon. Just like we don't need to do actual calculus in real time as we watch and predict the perfect time to hit a ball with a bat. Having big brains is costly in terms of resources, after all. If a rule of thumb is effective enough at solving a problem, that's plenty good enough. That's why optical/audio illusions are effective at tricking our brain: the illusions show in what cases our rules of thumb differ from objective reality.
I always wonder how these people explain the appendix a part of our body we don't need or use but at one point did. Clearly there was some kind of evolution there and its only a short time in the grand timeline of it all
Some of them explain it as being degeneracy from the fall of humankind due to original sin. Others explain it as the appendix performing any kind of small physiological function and that this is what it was designed for all along.
ackshully, the appendix is still pretty useful to us since it contains a lot of immune cells. obviously you can live without one, but these days a doctor won't just yoink it out on a whim now that there's research showing how people with an intact appendix recover from illness more quickly than those who had an appendectomy. i feel like a better comparison might be wisdom teeth: we needed them back when we were hunter-gatherers chewing on basically everything for sustenance, but now that we're spoiled with soft, cooked foods, they just crowd our mouths and make us miserable.
@@b.collins2656 Also creationists: My TV isn't broken, because it's not a TV! It's a coffee table and that's what it was designed to be all along!
@@smaakjeks Easy when people can just make shit up I guess lol
@@bobjones2959 Yup
A lot of people will just throw logic right out the window if someone's offering them a simple explanation that satisfies their emotional needs. As long as they can feel good within themselves and their tribe they don't care what's true.
Biggest proof against evolution: the Boss Baby
i think the fact she believes “evolutionists” say mammals evolved from *birds* is… Telling.
I know, right? Not sure where this perception came from
She’s just performing for the camera. There’s no conversation going on, she doesn’t care at all what he’s saying. She just imagined a highlight reel that would frame her as the smart Christian lady, and forces her own planned talking points. Too bad they they kept it unedited. Her cringy performance betrays her.
Being trapped in this woman's mind is a curse I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy
He did an interview somewhere with an archbishop, and it's interesting, because you'd think that would be a very hostile conversation, but both seemed to be reasonable, and listen to understand, rather than to respond. Meanwhile, this lady is so condescending and rude, and almost cuts him off constantly to interject a pre-loaded response.
If you want so much goddamn evidence for evolution, then I'm gonna need HARD evidence for God
Lacking self-awareness is probably my least favorite characteristic of myself.
That's quite self-aware of you.
Why does she smile like a Wallace & Gromit character
When she started talking about DNA, was she implying that only humans have unique DNA markers between individuals?
You're thinking too deeply about it. She just knows DNA is unique enough to convict people in court. That's her entire understanding.
She reminds me of a Bigfoot believer. The burden is on others to provide proof she is wrong, so absence of evidence is her evidence.
Doesn't matter what the belief is. Without context or examples, there's no reason to respect someone's conclusion.
religious people are statistically way more violent than non-religious people. Turns out when you believe you were made by a loving cre-a-TOR that tells you the ones who dont think like you are inherently evil you kinda nullify all that love and kindness she talking about
As a Christian or self aware one-
I always never understood why people thought of evolution as wrong or bad:
I mean Jesus was birthed by Mary, so it would make sense that the animals or at least the many others had to come some were right?
And for the violent religious one, its either that they are fanatics or been abused by someone they know. And so they had been brainwashed in a way to think everyone who is wrong is a sinner.
Wait how does it tell you that about people who don’t think like you
Exactly, like for example the reign of terror after the french revolution.... oh wait, they weren't religious, anyway Mao's cultural revolution... no this one wasn't religious as well. Lenin and Stalin purges are good examples... DAMN IT!
@@Clipzilla42 I sorta botches the message or asking a question that doesn't fit what i said.
But essentially people can be stupid or arrogant and could be hard to reason with.
So it's either best to ignore them or give them a reality check somehow
EDIT: wait I just notifications I thought you were replying to me sorry
Source?
**in his documentary with her talking about her beliefs**
"Stop censoring me"
I really appreciate the work you put into these Salamancer
Her permanent condescending tone sends me into rage. Whew. That's certainly a talent
Well, all talents don’t need to be useful I suppose…
I will never get over how religious folk can't comprehend non-religious folk's ability to not be constantly robbing and murdering each other. Also, young-earth creationists seem to have teamed up with the flat-earthers, so that's hilarious.
Looking it up, the law they broke when they were 'sent to jail for 6 months for just praying' was that they were violating a restraining order.
And they couldn't argue that they weren't aware, because part of their 'just praying' was taking a physically printed copy of the restraining order and tearing it up in public.
Edit: I probably should've finished the whole video before making this comment tbh
She is like an npc that wasn’t programmed to finish conversations
For some one who claims they need all this evidence. I see a stark lack of evidence in regard to the big beard man in the sky…
She believes that because it's written in a book, it must be true
You don't get it, she specifies many times that "evolutionists" can't come up with the evidence that *she's* looking for. And the evidence that she's looking for is whatever she wants it to be. I've had creationists tell me that the evidence is this warm feeling they get when they pray, or the connection they feel with God. So literally nothing verifiable and therefore nothing substantial or worthwhile. Meanwhile fossils don't count because obviously God put them there to test us.
When I went to school they taught us that when it rained god was spitting on you and that he invented the tv because he created the materials that humans used to make the TVs… and even as a eight year old i called their bull
It hurts to live alongside these people. Talk about carrying them through life.
Ah yes, I love textbooks where instead of using illustrations and drawings to show the evolution between horses and whales, they instead jam 7 whales, 14 horses, and 45 skeletons into the textbook. They're really hard to carry to class though.
I don’t believe in evolutions. You trying to sell me the idea that a horse gave birth to a fuckn whale? Idiots the lot of em
@@jesserochon3103 You're trying to tell me that a functioning human gave birth to someone who would ask that question?
@@4dragons632 how the fuck does a whale give birth birth to a horse bro.
@@jesserochon3103 Find me any non creationist who has ever said it should. If it ever did that would be proof of magic.
What frustrates me is that there are religious people who have come to the conclusion they have through research and thought. It's not impossible to find a Christian who can give good arguments for their beliefs. The problem is that they are very rare, and almost all Christians fall into the "the Bible said it so it must be true" mentality.
Oh my god I know exactly what you mean about her patronising laughing to signify superiority and confidence in her winning the argument. I hate it. I’ve dealt with people like that too, horrible ones.
"There are only drawings and pictures"
kinda like a religious figure or two i could think of
Lol what countries is she constantly referring to when she says that countries of athiests are barbaric and cruel and religious counties are all caring and great??
I looked it up and some countries with the most amount of athiests are places like Japan and Sweden, so is she saying Japan and Sweden are terrible places to live in, in comparison to America?
Did she just.... Assume all third world countries are athiest?
The Soviet Union and Imperial Japan replaced God with the State
I wonder what she's say if someone brought up Saudi Arabia which has state-sponsored Wahhabism and Iran which is a literal theocracy. I guess they're barbaric too because it's the wrong religion.
The Spanish who were a devoutly Christian state but also committed mass genocide of native Americans and started the Atlantic slave trade under Columbus? Probably some other nonsense excuse. That's all you ever get from these people because they aren't interested in what's real.
@@reyjonhsmith So her thinking's also stuck in the 1940s too
@@Trynt33 the red scare kinda melted alot of old people's brains
@@NegaRenGenX2gay2lift Agreed
i love how she keeps claiming that people who believe in evolution practice “dangerous philosophies” like the crusades or the holocaust never happened.
Let's also keep in mind most wars are started over a difference in ideology which in most cases includes a difference in religious beliefs
The Holocaust, though it was enabled by the passivity of German Christians, was not based on orthodox Christian belief, as can be clearly seen in the Vatican's response to the persecution of the Jewish people during the Nazi era. The notion that the Crusades, which were a completely justified response to an imminent military threat to medieval Christendom, can be ascribed to religious fundamentalism is incredible. It is a pity that such basic historical knowledge is lacking in modern education.
@@jojotoofor9eight766 Most wars are fought in the Early Modern and Modern Eras because of nationalism, not religion, religion being an excuse for conflict. In Western Europe this can be seen from the later thirteenth century.
@@hilairebelloc3368 ok but the brass tacks of it is that a group of religious people were persecuted and brutally executed because of their beliefs. i’m in no way implying that the holocaust or the crusades were done based on any orthodox christain (or any religious) belief. i’m not an atheist and i have nothing but respect for well-meaning and kind hearted religious people, but any type of text is subject to interpretation. while religious beliefs are not inherently dangerous, it isn’t any more or any less dangerous than any other belief system, the crusades/holocaust were the 2 most obvious examples of this.
@@jakesmith9438 This completely sidesteps the fact that the Crusades were not in fact an act of religious persecution. The Crusaders allied with certain Islamic states and vice-versa; later on, they tried allying with (and converting) the Mongols (some of whom, it should be noted, were Nestorian Christians). And considering the fact that the Catholic Church interprets its religious text chiefly by its magisterium, guided by the ancient tradition, it does not fall under the charge of being guided by individual interpretation, which, while you did not explicitly state this, implied as much.
Whoever operated the camera is the unsung hero. Doing laps around the room with sweeping cinematic shots to make two people standing in place more interesting.
I remember my Christian dad saying "if we evolved from apes then why are there still apes?" like it was some gotcha. ??? Like... the same reason there are still wolves while there are dogs? Wildcats and housecats? My dad was not very smart. Or rather he was, but his Christianity shut him down to critical thinking, which was just so sad to see.
As an aside, I'm just gonna say the ONLY people I've been abused throughout my life by are Christians. My father and stepmother, a babysitter who literally got her kids (my friends at the time) to lock me in a dark room for hours listening to nothing but revelation gospel and how non-believers go to hell. I'm very curious how this insufferable know-it-all woman would react to that. Dogma breeds shitty people, too. Maybe the shittiest. Deal with it.
Edit: My mother was also a teacher and several religious families pulled their kids from her science class because it taught evolution. Almost all the poor kids even told the parents they wanted to learn just so they knew both sides. But noooo, no religious people are biased.
Imagine you had a hand carved wooden statue of a dog. That was once a block of wood. That block of wood had an uncountable amount of individual scrapings with a knife, each changing the shape of the block slightly. No one scraping was responsible for making it look like a dog, but after all is done it looks like a dog...
How is the concept of evolution so hard to understand for these people? This lady is asking for that one scrape where it looked like a block of wood then afterwards looked like a dog and assumes that if you can't find it the original block of wood never existed.
The fake laugh is not to signify "winning" as much as it is to suppress one's own emotions becuase to them "not losing" is about control. If she were actually gloating, the laugh would be the slightest bit convincing. This woman has no answers and feels threatened by those who do.
It's also an attempt to make Dawkins rage out, along with the stupid expressions and googly eyes. Demonic behavior.
i admire richard's patience. i would not have the same level of calmness talking to this woman
Hyper-religious people always talk with an almost cartoonishly intense smile on their faces at all times, it's not pleasant or endearing, it's kind of just disturbing
"Critical factories". This lady has the oversweet singsong voice people get when they speak too much to Sunday School classes, and other people who can't answer back.
Next time someone says: where is the evidence?, ask them what SPECIFIC evidence would convince you -- and don't let them evade or change the subject.
The problem is she will inevitably say something amazingly dumb like “show me the bones!”
A statement like that provides you with the barebones of an argument *in her mind* so she’s given you an in-road for “honest debate.” Once you engage that question with another question (which you naturally would, since there is 0 context to what she means), she’ll then shame YOU for evading the question.
You can’t win, PERIOD. You always have to play defensive strategies and even when you look objectively correct to most people, the highlight reels made after the fact that are shared by the fundamentalist Christian Right wing are far more important to them feeling validated in their non-position than their actual performances in debates.
@@BradsGonnaPlay Stupid people respond to stupid tactics. To her "show me the bones!" ask "what bones?" Repeat as necessary and do not budge. Ever.
The problem is letting her slide away to topics without thrashing out even one. If she says bones, we're sticking to bones, whether the interview is five minutes or a half an hour.
Dude, even just Dog breeding shows some level of evolution. A few years ago Pugs actually had snouts, but because of inbreeding to try and get a specific aesthetic, they completely mutated into a different dog, and that fucked them up. Now people are breeding Pugs to try and fix their little squished snout, and that's a pretty recent thing, which I feel like it's a good example o evolution. Sure, it's being assisted by humans, but it's still a kind of evolution, right?
o yeah ? then why are there still wolves and wild dogs huh ?
get owned , evolutionist !
Evolution is commonly agreed to be based on at least 4 variables. Mutation, e.g. random changes in the gene pool that happen between generations, Selection: an outside force, either in a specific ecological niche or competition between species, giving certain individuals a higher chance of reproduction, gene drift, random natural disasters effecting the gene pool, and migration, the exchange of individuals and genes between different populations. For you dog breeding example Mutation would take place in meiosis and fertilization, selection happens through the breeders, allowing dogs with specific noses to reproduce, migration would be transporting your pug to a different location, because his genes are needed there and gene drift would be accidents happening to your dog at home or while traveling. While this is a rather narrow example and evolution usually happens on a much larger scale, I just find the principles of evolution so fun and easy to apply, that I couldn't help but rant about your example.
TL, DR: Dog breeding is an example for evolution.
I was dumbfounded when she said “show me any of these between stages” and i’m like “we’ve found like twenty??”
This gives me PTSD
The "Micro Evolution" bullshit comes down to this.
"No it's literally impossible to go from California to New York traveling at 1 mile per hour. It's just too slow, you can't make it that far at that speed. Sure you can go small distances from point A to B, but you can't go cross-country, I just can't believe that, it makes no sense"
That's what they sound like to me
I calculated it and that would take approximately 120 days. Not really important, just a fun fact since this comment made me think about it haha
Snakes are a fantastic example of evolution:
The Crawl Kay Boa is found on a small island with that very name living mostly within mangrove swamps on Birds as they migrate, this means that they eat very rarely causing them not naturally grow far smaller than most other species of boa. These "Dwarf" type boas, of which there are many, get taken in as pets. As their owners begin to feet them more frequently, the subsequent generations of these more domestic snakes begin to grow larger losing their "dwarf" characteristic. (My facts might be slightly off, i'm not a herpetologist )
There are lots of animals in general that prove evolution. Dogs, like Adam said are a good example. Polar bears used to be brown bears, but obviously the white fur mutation would survive better in the arctic. Mudskippers obviously are fantastic, too, it's literally a fish crawling on land. Coming back to your example, there's a type of snake that still has little nubs where there used to be legs. Evolution is everywhere, you really have to turn a blind eye to not see it.
@@corvusastrum2982 yeh. I think this snake one is cool because we unintentionally changed it over such a short space of time.
Also some snakes still have their legs in the form of tiny bones that don't do anything, not just little nubs
36:00 somewhat off topic- I’d actually love it if schools taught the Flying Spaghetti Monster in mythology classes. It’d be a great way to contrast stories with anti-stories, and how useful they both are for cultures.
I have never seen a clearer example of gaslighting than every sentence that comes out of this woman’s mouth.
This is highly entertaining…and incredibly frustrating.
She wants an animorph preserved in amber mid tf
Here is the thing:
Every religious person I ever talked with has forced the conversation and bricked against aguments.
Every scientific person I ever talked with was always interested in mutually exchanging and playing with ideas and most important: honest listening.
This was the weirdest episode of the Office.
most creationists just kind of forget that species is a very ambiguous spectrum, as most things are in biological classifications. humans are still going to be closely related to chimp families and no semantic barrier is going to stop that. but that's not going to stop them, 'cause the bible said so
not seconds from posting this.... "micro-evolutions"
Also that the proof of evolution is literally present in our own bodies and most species in the form of vestigial features lmao. Big fan of god deciding to toss an organ in which its only known function is occasionally exploding and killing us
" The more I laugh at your position the more correct I am" is one of the most bafflingly effective tactics I have ever seen. It's so off-putting and aggravating and yet it seems to work.
25:30 You know which societies are the most loving and caring? The ones that believe that universal healthcare is a right. Is this lady also concerned that America doesn't believe in that?
"Water off a ducks back" is an appropriate comparison for this lady, but I feel bad for comparing ducks to her.
how about birdbrain
It’s fun to dunk on cringey atheists but damn when I remember that people like this actually exist it makes me so grateful we have people like Dawkins who go out of their way to expose stupidity
remember when they threw a shit fit at him for saying it was okay to invite girls in elevators into your room for coffee?
This woman be like "Hey man, you need to prove that your view is valid to me based on my own criteria and working within an arbitrary frame that I set up that a-priori rules out your viewpoint. Haha can't do it? Well looks like I win again!"
I like how this interview is filmed like an episode of the office
9:06 You know…Why IS it that only the scientific community gets to have a say on evolution??
And, for that matter, why is it that only the molecular gastronomy community has a say on radical preparation of cuisine??
Why is it that only the practitioners of the Alexander Technique get to give master classes on the Alexander Technique?
Why is it that a community of people who STUDY AND ARE EXPERTS IN A SPECIFIC FIELD GET TO TALK ABOUT THAT FIELD??!!
HUH I WONDER WHY THAT MIGHT BE!!!!!
HEY, I’M A PROFESSIONAL MUSICIAN, WHY IS IT THAT I DON’T GET TO TALK TO THE HOSPICE NURSING COMMUNITY ABOUT EUTHANASIA??!! I WANT TO PLAY TOO!!!
The absurdity of it. GAWD.
You see, the issue is that you actually thought this through, and they definitely didn't
The look on her face when she laughs is the embodiment of: I'm not listening. You can see it in her eyes. It is incredibly frustrating to watch on a video; I can only imagine how much it would make my blood boil in person.
Damn, can't believe you can just upload episodes of The Office on TH-cam in this copyright climate.
Weird that they gave Dwight and Angela so much screen time together in this one, they usually never talk.
I just continued the office and realized my fatal mistake.