It was fun. He is worse, give credit where credit is earned : he has been told that Sanford understood statistics. He has been told creationnists had a theory too. And he trusted that. You identified correctly : he is a gullible dumbass that lied. Humans are naturally inclined to see agency where there is not.
I have watched enough of these debates to recognize that it's not the answers that are important to maintaining their beliefs. Rather, it's the mystery that sustains their beliefs. In the absence of facts, anything you can imagine becomes a plausible explanation.
Yes. It's the god of the gaps fallacy. Also they do their best to not understand things and stay scientifically illiterate so they can shoehorn their theism into already explainable natural phenomena. They "confirm" their beliefs by cherry picking some datum out of context and/or only from sources that already hold their same ideologies (confirmation bias). Normally this people don't know how to think critically and/or are so extremely brainwashed that they can't apply the same logic and critical thinking abilities that they apply at their day to day life to their belief system. It's a sad phenomenon, also infuriating and disappointing.
As a friend recently said to me. He is a Geologist. I thought that he might be interested in Abiogenesis Hypotheses involving mineral cells in the pores of either Pumice or Alkaline Deep Sea Vents. He was upset as I was taking away the mystery of life.
I love how all these people seem to actually believe that things like genome comparison is just something that is done once, by one person, and then all of 'science' just accepts it as fact. Bonus points to this guy for thinking that panspermia somehow precludes evolution
@@noodle_tax So you suggest that both sides are equally wrong in that? While one side starts all of his comments misrepresenting and lying about stuff, the other should just sit there and watch? I get the idea behind letting someone propose their idea freely, but when that turns out to be bullshit that misinforms the people watching, you can't let that slide.
This dude's basic idea is we should suspend belief of evolution because it may one day be found to be untrue. Doesn't lead with that, oh no just mumbles and whines through the whole debate.. gold just gold
@@celiand2618 For sure, I think that the fact that he was not willing to lead with this argument but instead obfuscate until it was dragged out of him tells me he knows at it's core it is a weak premise and weak conclusion
Weird how I never had an inclination of a creator growing up, even when introduced with the idea and and going to church with friends etc. My friends mom was shocked when I said I don't think I believe in God when I was around 5.
@@Jo-JoandTaffy It s a reference to games with player stats, specifically Fallout in this case. "SPECIAL" is an acronym standing for the primary statistics in the system: Strength, Perception, Endurance, Charisma, Intelligence, Agility and Luck." But it is present in all kind of nerdy games probably had it origins with the likes of DnD.
I did a Creationist playthrough of Fallout 4. When the TV announced the bombs were falling, I knew I was fine because there was nothing about it in the bible. Then I homeschooled Shaun, and with the rest of the time left, we all hopped in the car and I took the family for a n- **gets nuked** so anyway, I played the rest of the game as a ghoul.
Huzzah! A particularly well done episode PP. I really enjoyed how you kept the thread going about the Earth orbiting the sun, then added further examples and absolutely laser focused on his hypocrisy regarding the stupid “faith in science” nonsense. You should save those bits for a “best of PP” vid. Congrats.
Oh man in the end when he goes for the “personal” insults is just gold, he is so pathetic, you got to talk to dumb dumb again, he reminds of my brother 😂
26:10 "Do you subscribe to abiogenesis: the theory that we came from animals in the what-hur" Not even close to what abiogenesis is. That -41 intelligence was a bit very generous.
Abby O'Jennisys told me one day about how _"God, you're stupid"_ is not an ad hominem, it's an insult. And it just so happens that insults are not logical fallacies, sometimes they're not even insults, they're just observations.
what is truth. i love the definiton that Paulogia uses, basically "how well someting supports reality" which can put truth on a scale. Peterson debates people, is true. Peterson Debates people about science, religion and conspiracies, is more true.
These theistic fantasists always whine on and on about science, because they know that they must avoid the discussion about their ridiculous and childish theology at all cost.
Both of my kids are deaf and never have believed in a creator. I never taught them about god and they never had the chance to learn about it from others. They are both secular.
At 15:08, the guy talked about using mRNA strands from a chimp pancreas cells, and Peterson misheard him and thought the guy said mitochondrial DNA. But I have NO idea how pancreas mRNA would have anything to do with what he's saying. It is clear that he doesn't know what he's talking about.
I love how quickly he gave up on “evolution has been debunked” and went to “predisposed to believe in god” as soon as he got fact checked to his face. That was the funniest part of the video.
Even if it were true that “humans have a disposition toward believing in supernatural things (God, fairies, djinn, leprechauns, dragons, etc.)”, it has absolutely nothing to do with being true. Might as well be a study, “most humans are gullible” when it’s already fairly obvious. If we were back in time, this guy would be arguing emphatically that the sun goes around the earth, or that slaves need to stay slaves cause they’re inferior. In a couple hundred years, he will be one of those people that future people can’t believe actually existed.
I can't observe fish evolving into humans for the same reasons that I can't observe Maximilian I's wife giving birth to Franz Ferdinand. 1 - It completely ignores the time scale involved and generations between. 2 - Everyone involved is long dead. On top of which, the reason they demand it conflates repeating the process of evolution (which is easy, since it's ongoing), with repeating a specific example of evolution (which is impossible). Just like I can cook dinner every night, but I can never cook the exact same pizza I had last night again, at best only a similar pizza.
can we have a bit at the start that says who they are and what their background is please? I'd like to see how many debaters are highly educated with backed up points/opinion and how many are just some guy that thinks they have a point to make because they've seen a conspiracy theory or read 2 scholar papers.
We can't go back in time to observe god's supposed creation. In fact, unlike with evolution, there's nothing that gives any indication that all the plants and animals appeared in a few days.
Native Americans/First Nations do have Creation Myths often involving clay and differing between Tribes much in the same way as Mesopotamian Creations Myths vary (E.g. The Garden of Eden & Dilmun.) In a different vein I have come across a Native American (I have forgotten which Tribe) of the Universe in a state of Creation from Darkness. The latter reminds me more of Daoism which Richard Dawkins classes as Philosophy. I would also add that we still have the social structure of Chimps which respond to the Alpha male. So worshipping Gods, Film Stars or Trump maybe isn't surprising. (Note: Bonobos are Matriarchal but have a better all year round supply of fruit so less reason to fight where male Chimps will go to war to protect a precious wild fig tree. Humans are always fighting over resources.)
2:39 Sure, scientific ideas have changed over the centuries as new information is discovered (maybe y’all should take a page from that playbook, no?). But what I’m certain has never happened is discovering that something made up 2000 years ago in a tent was accurate. Hahahahaha holy shit his black baby schtick is fucking awesome 🤣😭
The caller doesn’t know about population genetics. That field is heavily mathematic and supports evolutionary theory superbly. It even has its own rules and laws.
People who call out being triggered, angry, or using foul language as if it automatically makes them right or a winner, aren't in the debate, argument, or discussion for anything other than performing. The couldn't care less about the actual data and conversation.
I’d just say to Theists I’m not talking circular arguments about the Universe. I’m only talking about the Supernatural Fairytales in religious books that you believe in. In fact the conversation would be over right from the beginning, I’d just say do you believe the Universe and everything in it was ‘created’ in SIX!!!!! days? When they answer yes to that question that will be the end of conversation. You can’t possibly have a decent conversation with someone who believes that.
I really gotta say, I really see absolutely no circumstance where name calling is justified. Not only is it impractical because it just makes people get defensive causing them to shutdown and be far less likely to understand you, which then prevents growth; but It’s also dangerous because you don’t know where that person is in their life. Name calling could seriously harm their mental health in ways you can’t imagine. We’re so used to growing up in a culture that values justice and the bad guy “getting what they deserve.” But does anyone really deserve anything? Are we not just a product of our circumstances? And if so, isn’t this like getting mad at a car for having faulty breaks? Sure, it seems to make sense to blame the car superficially but they did not choose to have their parts built the way they are. I think we seriously need to reconsider how we engage with people. The way we’ve been doing it has been spreading nothing but misery and hate, all whilst solving nothing.
This guy is such a weasel. Tried to take the high road of "Well, *I'm* not the one flinging insults." then tried with that emasculating garbage about low T and the kids going back to fish. So every point he tried to make failed and he misunderstood nearly everything while dismissing things with "Okay, cool." I really don't like that study he was referencing about innate belief. Humans like answers, even when they aren't great. I doubt it's a belief in supernatural but more of that inclination to want to know. He'd probably also conveniently ignore that, while many people believe in a god, there are many and the one an individual subscribes to is largely determined by their location at birth. If there was one perfect being, how could a message get so convoluted and confused that we'd have thousands of god concepts instead of one? "Don't interrupt me." I think I would have disconnected there, pretty early on. He has the kind of attitude that could make a pacifist want to slap him.
Btw the terms for truth you were referring to in the beginning are Analytic truth (1+1=2) and synthetic truth (theory of evolution best represents reality)
Wait, are you saying that it's not possible *now* to see the earth orbiting the sun, or that it would *never* be possible. I'm just thinking if we had a starship in the future, we could take that ship out to a distance where it could observe the earth orbiting the sun.
So, to convince this guy evolution is true, we would somehow have to present a complete, uninterrupted fossil record from first living cell to a human. Meanwhile all he needs to believe in creationism is the Bible.
Makes ridiculous claim then says "if I link you an article would you accept it?" If I link you an article that says that you're King Arthur and also that you're Marylin Monroe would you accept it? Notwithstanding that you don't just accept articles, let's not worry about articles which don't exist.
@metal_pipe9764 And thats false, because we define numbers based on Set Theory. So saying 1+1 = 10 is the same as saying the bachelor is married, at least in the sense that you are definitionally incorrect.
These guys love to appeal to peer reviewed studies when they can cherry pick a couple of quotes from abstracts they never read but simultaneously throw away 99% of the published studies on the topic
"the fossil record is dubious" - "that's a conspiracy" - "Funny how everything that doesn't fit your worldview is a conspiracy" 💀
"religion is a set of man made...Oh no!"
That was the moment guest realised he frecked up.
Freudian slip, I think. What a maroon!
He really made a frick up
"Oh, no, I mean not that, not that."
“A religion is a set of man made…” [17:35] One correct statement.
He really fucked up when he said that bit out loud didn't he.
"You're a fucking genius, you idiot." LoL, I'm funny
Funny, yes, but looks aren't everything! 🤣
You're awesome!
Do more.
It was fun.
He is worse, give credit where credit is earned : he has been told that Sanford understood statistics. He has been told creationnists had a theory too.
And he trusted that.
You identified correctly : he is a gullible dumbass that lied.
Humans are naturally inclined to see agency where there is not.
It needs to be a shirt!
The audible glee in his voice says he's a lying troll.
I have watched enough of these debates to recognize that it's not the answers that are important to maintaining their beliefs. Rather, it's the mystery that sustains their beliefs. In the absence of facts, anything you can imagine becomes a plausible explanation.
Yes. It's the god of the gaps fallacy. Also they do their best to not understand things and stay scientifically illiterate so they can shoehorn their theism into already explainable natural phenomena.
They "confirm" their beliefs by cherry picking some datum out of context and/or only from sources that already hold their same ideologies (confirmation bias).
Normally this people don't know how to think critically and/or are so extremely brainwashed that they can't apply the same logic and critical thinking abilities that they apply at their day to day life to their belief system.
It's a sad phenomenon, also infuriating and disappointing.
🔥
Bro is spitting with this comment
As a friend recently said to me. He is a Geologist. I thought that he might be interested in Abiogenesis Hypotheses involving mineral cells in the pores of either Pumice or Alkaline Deep Sea Vents. He was upset as I was taking away the mystery of life.
"You're wrong because I'm going against your beliefs!"
No you're wrong because you've been proven wrong.
I love how all these people seem to actually believe that things like genome comparison is just something that is done once, by one person, and then all of 'science' just accepts it as fact.
Bonus points to this guy for thinking that panspermia somehow precludes evolution
This guy's argumentation:
Intuition fallacy + Appeal to nature + False equivalence + Non sequitur
There's a shed load of personal incredulity mixed in too
And a large pinch of stoooopid!!😂
Love how the accent becomes stronger as this guy gets angrier.
The fact he starts yapping halfway through your reply proves he 100% unwilling to discuss like an adult.
Atheism/evolution/big bang cosmology/naturalism/secular humanism are religions/cults. Get over it
I don't think he's an adult.
Well okay he might be on paper
@@WetDoggo hes a fokin kid bruv
They both interrupted each other
@@noodle_tax So you suggest that both sides are equally wrong in that? While one side starts all of his comments misrepresenting and lying about stuff, the other should just sit there and watch? I get the idea behind letting someone propose their idea freely, but when that turns out to be bullshit that misinforms the people watching, you can't let that slide.
"Ok cool ok cool ok cool" my man just doesnt want to shut up 😂
OK cool
“a lying liar who lies” utterly destroyed me. This needs to be your “I’ll be back”, get it into every convo at least once.
This dude's basic idea is we should suspend belief of evolution because it may one day be found to be untrue. Doesn't lead with that, oh no just mumbles and whines through the whole debate.. gold just gold
And yet, he believes in a deity.
Hypothesis : he has not identified the paradox.
@@celiand2618 For sure, I think that the fact that he was not willing to lead with this argument but instead obfuscate until it was dragged out of him tells me he knows at it's core it is a weak premise and weak conclusion
Gravity may not be truuuuuueeeeee.....
Oh he's so smug and stupid
Sounds like every religious person and flerf i've ever listened to..
Weird how I never had an inclination of a creator growing up, even when introduced with the idea and and going to church with friends etc. My friends mom was shocked when I said I don't think I believe in God when I was around 5.
Yet another classic "Argument from Ignorance" here, folks!
Loved the thumbnail. Spot on.
What is the thumbnail referencing. I have been seeing that thumbs-up guy all over the place lately.
@@Jo-JoandTaffythe Fallout game series. Just become trending atm due to the successful Amazon prime tv series based on Fallout
@@Matt13556it's a shockingly good show!
@@Jo-JoandTaffy It s a reference to games with player stats, specifically Fallout in this case.
"SPECIAL" is an acronym standing for the primary statistics in the system: Strength, Perception, Endurance, Charisma, Intelligence, Agility and Luck."
But it is present in all kind of nerdy games probably had it origins with the likes of DnD.
@@dorankuthe origin actually lies in GERPS, which predates DND a good bit
Asks a question.
‘Don’t interrupt me!’
Did that guy even read the paper? 22:11
I did a Creationist playthrough of Fallout 4.
When the TV announced the bombs were falling, I knew I was fine because there was nothing about it in the bible. Then I homeschooled Shaun, and with the rest of the time left, we all hopped in the car and I took the family for a n- **gets nuked** so anyway, I played the rest of the game as a ghoul.
Incidentally, many ghouls make videos on TH-cam calling themselves "apologists."
Huzzah! A particularly well done episode PP. I really enjoyed how you kept the thread going about the Earth orbiting the sun, then added further examples and absolutely laser focused on his hypocrisy regarding the stupid “faith in science” nonsense. You should save those bits for a “best of PP” vid. Congrats.
Oh man in the end when he goes for the “personal” insults is just gold, he is so pathetic, you got to talk to dumb dumb again, he reminds of my brother 😂
26:10 "Do you subscribe to abiogenesis: the theory that we came from animals in the what-hur"
Not even close to what abiogenesis is. That -41 intelligence was a bit very generous.
He took 17 Daddy-Os
@@BaronVonQuiply been a while since I played, New Vegas is my favorite. Didn't play anything after it though.
As someone who wasn't raised with religion, I never had the inclination to believe in a God or creator.
As someone who was raised with spirituality I quickly kicked it at/around 6 because I realized it was nonsense.
Abby O'Jennisys told me one day about how _"God, you're stupid"_ is not an ad hominem, it's an insult.
And it just so happens that insults are not logical fallacies, sometimes they're not even insults, they're just observations.
What a sensitive little princess 😂. Love the rage quit at the end.
"The thing is, you're not willing to accept idiotic lies"
Another one bites the dust. You DESTROYED that dude, Eric. 😂😂😂😂
This guy gives SPECIAL a whole different meaning.
As a kid I was running in my back yard when I tripped, looked back, and discovered nearly 8 gallons of religion under a tree.
I didn't even know it came in liquid form. But wow! 8 gallons!
@@Farce13 Y'know I saw Bill the other day, and he's doing great
what is truth. i love the definiton that Paulogia uses, basically "how well someting supports reality" which can put truth on a scale. Peterson debates people, is true. Peterson Debates people about science, religion and conspiracies, is more true.
These theistic fantasists always whine on and on about science, because they know that they must avoid the discussion about their ridiculous and childish theology at all cost.
This caller, classic example of someone whose parents should of had the balls to say "no" to them.
Both of my kids are deaf and never have believed in a creator. I never taught them about god and they never had the chance to learn about it from others. They are both secular.
At 15:08, the guy talked about using mRNA strands from a chimp pancreas cells, and Peterson misheard him and thought the guy said mitochondrial DNA.
But I have NO idea how pancreas mRNA would have anything to do with what he's saying. It is clear that he doesn't know what he's talking about.
“You’re dumb” I love it !!
Love the freudian slip at 17:34
I think that guy might be a masochist that enjoyed getting humiliated.
This guy is hiding so far behind Brandolini's law, the light of reason simply cannot reach him.
28:50 Nah, I checked this morning.
Traps were empty again.
This guy isnt in the field of calling people failures. He is a conspiracy theorist and a pdf file
How do these people exist?
Why does he tell him to hit space when searching for something?!
And looking at the 2nd part of the study it's that people tend to believe in a soul, not a creator.
I believe in a Soul, it's the capital of South Korea.
I always love how they confuse abiogenesis with evolution 😂
It would be awesome if it were possible to do negative stats in games, to spend more points somewhere else 😂
I've tried something along that line on the programming side, eg, shields with ATK stats and offensive magic that can heal, etc
I love how quickly he gave up on “evolution has been debunked” and went to “predisposed to believe in god” as soon as he got fact checked to his face. That was the funniest part of the video.
He thought "lying liar who lies" demonstrated a lack of vocabulary? Guess he doesn't know who Al Franken is.
You cannot win from doctor Banjo.
"You can go to jolly pirate donuts and take a 2 hour shit for all I care!" God what a throwback
17:33 oops, was that a bit of honesty poking through, Mr Apologist?
How can we prove it? “Prove it”
I also love how he calls Peterson an antitheist, despite the fact that Peterson is an Agnostic Atheist only. Lol
Even if it were true that “humans have a disposition toward believing in supernatural things (God, fairies, djinn, leprechauns, dragons, etc.)”, it has absolutely nothing to do with being true. Might as well be a study, “most humans are gullible” when it’s already fairly obvious.
If we were back in time, this guy would be arguing emphatically that the sun goes around the earth, or that slaves need to stay slaves cause they’re inferior. In a couple hundred years, he will be one of those people that future people can’t believe actually existed.
That fake alpha male persona is such a joke.
11:57
The faith crowd needs a preponderance of evidence for anything scientific 🙄
I can't observe fish evolving into humans for the same reasons that I can't observe Maximilian I's wife giving birth to Franz Ferdinand.
1 - It completely ignores the time scale involved and generations between.
2 - Everyone involved is long dead.
On top of which, the reason they demand it conflates repeating the process of evolution (which is easy, since it's ongoing), with repeating a specific example of evolution (which is impossible). Just like I can cook dinner every night, but I can never cook the exact same pizza I had last night again, at best only a similar pizza.
When he mentioned that children apparently are inclined to believe in a creator, I think Dan mclelan made a video about that and how incorrect it is
can we have a bit at the start that says who they are and what their background is please? I'd like to see how many debaters are highly educated with backed up points/opinion and how many are just some guy that thinks they have a point to make because they've seen a conspiracy theory or read 2 scholar papers.
I love when they rage quit
9:00 if you start measuring inches from Peterson's foot upward, but dont conclude, it stands to reason that he is infinitely tall!
Evolution is the single most validated science on the planet. Period.
We can't go back in time to observe god's supposed creation. In fact, unlike with evolution, there's nothing that gives any indication that all the plants and animals appeared in a few days.
Native Americans/First Nations do have Creation Myths often involving clay and differing between Tribes much in the same way as Mesopotamian Creations Myths vary (E.g. The Garden of Eden & Dilmun.) In a different vein I have come across a Native American (I have forgotten which Tribe) of the Universe in a state of Creation from Darkness. The latter reminds me more of Daoism which Richard Dawkins classes as Philosophy. I would also add that we still have the social structure of Chimps which respond to the Alpha male. So worshipping Gods, Film Stars or Trump maybe isn't surprising. (Note: Bonobos are Matriarchal but have a better all year round supply of fruit so less reason to fight where male Chimps will go to war to protect a precious wild fig tree. Humans are always fighting over resources.)
2:39 Sure, scientific ideas have changed over the centuries as new information is discovered (maybe y’all should take a page from that playbook, no?). But what I’m certain has never happened is discovering that something made up 2000 years ago in a tent was accurate.
Hahahahaha holy shit his black baby schtick is fucking awesome 🤣😭
This guest gives me the vibe that he lives his entire life talking out of his ass like Ace Ventura.
The caller doesn’t know about population genetics. That field is heavily mathematic and supports evolutionary theory superbly. It even has its own rules and laws.
People who call out being triggered, angry, or using foul language as if it automatically makes them right or a winner, aren't in the debate, argument, or discussion for anything other than performing. The couldn't care less about the actual data and conversation.
I’d just say to Theists I’m not talking circular arguments about the Universe. I’m only talking about the Supernatural Fairytales in religious books that you believe in. In fact the conversation would be over right from the beginning, I’d just say do you believe the Universe and everything in it was ‘created’ in SIX!!!!! days? When they answer yes to that question that will be the end of conversation. You can’t possibly have a decent conversation with someone who believes that.
So cool
I really gotta say, I really see absolutely no circumstance where name calling is justified.
Not only is it impractical because it just makes people get defensive causing them to shutdown and be far less likely to understand you, which then prevents growth; but It’s also dangerous because you don’t know where that person is in their life.
Name calling could seriously harm their mental health in ways you can’t imagine.
We’re so used to growing up in a culture that values justice and the bad guy “getting what they deserve.”
But does anyone really deserve anything?
Are we not just a product of our circumstances? And if so, isn’t this like getting mad at a car for having faulty breaks?
Sure, it seems to make sense to blame the car superficially but they did not choose to have their parts built the way they are.
I think we seriously need to reconsider how we engage with people. The way we’ve been doing it has been spreading nothing but misery and hate, all whilst solving nothing.
That got uncomfortably racist lmao
I enjoy watching your videos but I honestly don’t know how you do it without going insane dealing with these muppets constantly.
This guy is such a weasel. Tried to take the high road of "Well, *I'm* not the one flinging insults." then tried with that emasculating garbage about low T and the kids going back to fish. So every point he tried to make failed and he misunderstood nearly everything while dismissing things with "Okay, cool."
I really don't like that study he was referencing about innate belief. Humans like answers, even when they aren't great. I doubt it's a belief in supernatural but more of that inclination to want to know. He'd probably also conveniently ignore that, while many people believe in a god, there are many and the one an individual subscribes to is largely determined by their location at birth.
If there was one perfect being, how could a message get so convoluted and confused that we'd have thousands of god concepts instead of one?
"Don't interrupt me." I think I would have disconnected there, pretty early on. He has the kind of attitude that could make a pacifist want to slap him.
Btw the terms for truth you were referring to in the beginning are Analytic truth (1+1=2) and synthetic truth (theory of evolution best represents reality)
Thank you!
Wait, are you saying that it's not possible *now* to see the earth orbiting the sun, or that it would *never* be possible. I'm just thinking if we had a starship in the future, we could take that ship out to a distance where it could observe the earth orbiting the sun.
Listening to talk not to hear
13:40
Genetics hasn't shown that humans are related to other life forms.
I bet he didnt even have 160 PHDs
All models are wrong. Some of them are useful.
It's true, I asked Christie Brinkley what Pi was and she said 3.15
Many of them are beautiful too, especially the underwear ones.
Next video that ends in an insult you should do a hard cut right before the final word. And also make a montage video of your insults 😅
This guy's problem is that he's a little too "open minded".
So, to convince this guy evolution is true, we would somehow have to present a complete, uninterrupted fossil record from first living cell to a human.
Meanwhile all he needs to believe in creationism is the Bible.
Did he mention the bible or anything? He sounds like a Muslim to me.
I like that this smart arse american pronounced Naledi properly😅
Comment for the algorithm.
That was a shitty way to start my Tuesday.
Makes ridiculous claim then says "if I link you an article would you accept it?"
If I link you an article that says that you're King Arthur and also that you're Marylin Monroe would you accept it?
Notwithstanding that you don't just accept articles, let's not worry about articles which don't exist.
Peterson, I think the stats you gave him were too high. He agrees, coolcoolright?
1+1 =2 is true in the exact same way a married bachelor is false; definitionally.
1+1 =10
@metal_pipe9764 And thats false, because we define numbers based on Set Theory.
So saying 1+1 = 10 is the same as saying the bachelor is married, at least in the sense that you are definitionally incorrect.
@@GTNover it's apparently correct in binary.
@metal_pipe9764 Yes, "in binary" which literally operates under a different set of definitions. It operates with a base 2 instead of a base 10.
Is this guy a f ing Sacha Baron Cohen character or what?
Well, he admited that he lied. Its a start and a some progres
Okay cool, (I didn't listen and don't care)
And you are wrong....
.....God is Science is God is Science is God is Science is God is Science is God is Science is God is Science....
Hail Spanky🇵🇸💙🙂☯️
"look at you using swear words"
Is he 12?
Ok cool.
i can also just hit the right arrow and skip adds bro,
Come on though guys, what about jesus?😂😂😂😂
These guys love to appeal to peer reviewed studies when they can cherry pick a couple of quotes from abstracts they never read but simultaneously throw away 99% of the published studies on the topic
I would think that 1 + 1 = 2 definitionally true under a base 10 system. Because 1 + 1 does not equal 2 if you are talking about binary.
Dam, 1+1 =10
28:57 🤣 Way to out yourself Mr Apologist. Only betas talk about testosterone levels.
dude just keeps sayin "Nuh uh" as his arguments😅😅😅😅😅😅