Dr. Tour EXPOSES the False Science Behind Origin of Life Research
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 มิ.ย. 2024
- #abiogenesis #originoflife #evolution
00:00 Cold Open
00:25 Introduction
02:20 Dr. Tour's Presentation
55:53 Q&A
Departing from scientific consensus, Dr. Tour challenges the findings of origin of life studies and the surrounding media hype. This talk was presented by @RatioChristiOrg at @riceuniversity.
Don't miss out! Watch Addressing Abiogenesis, Season 2:
Ep 1: • Professor Dave's “Expe...
Ep 2: • Dr. Tour DISSECTS Chem...
Ep 3: • Dr. Tour BURSTS Oil Bu...
Ep 4: • Drowning the Religion ...
Ep 5: • Dr. Tour EXPOSES Troll...
Ep 6: • Dr. Tour UNMASKS Doubl...
Ep 7: • Dr. Tour MINES Data on...
Ep 8: • Dr. Tour SHINES LIGHT ...
Episode 9 premieres soon! SUBSCRIBE so you'll be notified!
====
Support us in creating more content across our different media platforms.
Visit jesusandscience.org/#Support to learn more.
====
Check out all our episodes:
Addressing Abiogenesis, Season 2
• Addressing Abiogenesis...
Addressing Abiogenesis, Season 1
• Addressing Abiogenesis...
God bless.
~
jesusandscience.org
Dr Tour's Personal Website - jmtour.com
Twitter - / drjamestour
Facebook - / drjamestour
LinkedIn - / drjamestour
Instagram - / drjamestour
Snapchat - / drjamestour
WeChat - @drjamestour - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
Hah! Pretty telling that you didn't make anyone in the audience aware of my two-part response demolishing your pathetic series, eh Jimbo? We can't have anyone catching on to your tired script of lies, right? By all means, continue to enjoy your place as the laughing stock of the scientific community. For anyone who wants to actually learn about origin of life research, since James doesn't actually know anything about the field, give this a gander: th-cam.com/video/ghJGnMwRHCs/w-d-xo.html
Sorry we missed this note. We are happy to give your channel a plug Daverino! Jim mentioned your first video, as well as your two-part series at the start of his lecture at 3:23 and 4:28. Maybe hit play on his lecture again because you seemed to have missed it. 🤷 Also, could you do us a favor and tell your audience to join us on December 5th, when Dr Tour will begin addressing your analysis? 😉 Thanks!
👉 th-cam.com/video/4rwPi1miWu4/w-d-xo.html 👈
We have pinned your comment for your convenience.
PS
Keep an eye on your inbox for a special invitation heading your way soon. 😉
@@DrJamesTour Hey bud! By all means, keep humiliating yourself and I'll keep responding in kind. It's actually a great opportunity for science communication on my part. And yeah, he "mentioned" it to play the martyr, but didn't actually respond to any of it. That's why he's attacking "my experts" instead of addressing the 50+ publications that prove him wrong. It's really pathetic. Keep digging that hole, Jim!
@@ProfessorDaveExplains please don’t stop exposing this fraud.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains did I miss the part when somebody already claimed the 10 Million dollar prize for the Origin of Life Challenge and Evolution 2.0? I know that Prof. Lee Cronin said he was interested (he was recorded saying that in a video, I know because you used an extract of it in one of your videos). Or did somebody answered the mystery but the aforementioned prize was a scam? What about the Nobel Prize? That definitely was awarded already for answering one of the greatest mysteries of nature.
@@DrJamesTour Is that a royal "we" or what? Looking forward to Tour refuting peer reviewed scientific papers. It's gonna be a blast! 🤭
"You've got to read the paper; you can't just read the title. These people can't be trusted." I agree with that assessment.
Do you also agree with all the lies James has put out which have continuously been exposed by Professor Dave? 😂😆
@@rikardotsamsiyu I don't know about those.
@@rikardotsamsiyu professor Dave can’t even explain chloroquine resistance in the organism that causes malaria .
How about you pm professor Dave and set up a dialogue between professor tour and professor Dave
I bet you that professor Dave will
Never accept doing this ;)
@@tdzenda you don’t know about those because even professor Dave’s fellow chemists won’t touch his videos because they are full of errors . Professor Dave needs to be a student in professor tours classroom so James tour can teach him how to do actual chemistry 😂
@@rikardotsamsiyu rikard how about you explain one simple question from even me .
Tell me rikard how does neo Darwinian evolution explain chloroquine resistance in the organism that causes malaria .
Neither you nor professor Dave can answer this because even the atheist Darwinist evolutionary biologists who are more knowledgeable then the non PhD professor Dave Farina can answer this
Coke on rikard , you started this by your response. The problem with people like you is that you can only look at one side of the debate and you completely ignore the other side .
And then when someone like me has researched the other sides responses you are completely clueless like a deer in the head lights .
It’s people like you that caused me to doubt my own atheism and eventually brought me back to belief in God
Thank you so much rikard
Big hug for you for everything you’ve done in my life 😂
I knew this was going to be epic the moment he said, "I am locked and loaded." He did not disappoint. Tour de force.
Nah he was talking rubbish
@@dannylad1600 I had a discussion with an atheist that was really deep into science and “science”. The first thing he told me is “the moon isn’t a planet” and I was like damn 😂
He is speaking facts. Even the title is facts and I don’t need to hear evidence to know it
... Tour de force; excellent.
James has that toughness; we're gonna need him in this crazy post enlightenment civilisation of ours.
Kind regards Kim
@@dannylad1600 brainwashed much?
@@thomaspaul5989 that doesnt make any sense.
The funny thing with Dr Tour’s work is that NOONE in any scientific field has dared to challenge him in anything he has affirmed regarding the sillines of abiogenesis and the whole Darwinian myth. I love Dr Tour for his courage and knowledge, more importantly for his love for Jesus.
Why would you want to waste your time challenging James Tour about his opinions?! What good would that do? What truth would come out of a debate over opinions?
To me it seems opinion are irrelevant and research that establishes facts, is what's required.
For instance: If James Tour want to theorize that "God did it!" can he verify that god actually exists? This would seem like a necessary prerequisite before James Tour's theory could be considered seriously.
@@gladishilton1943 The fact you are here proves GOD exists! Unless YOU can prove that you are here through a different means other than GOD or you can prove you don't exist! LOL
@@gladishilton1943 Dr Tour isn’t interested in opinions and, only marginally intelligent people (such as yourself obviously) would put the “God did it” clause into his lecture (when he never once said it). I guess atheists like you, just never get tired of being wrong.
@@inconnu4961 "The fact that you are here proves God" - Rubbish! That is just an empty assertion. Unless YOU can prove god exists you can't give him the credit for creating Life. So, how are you going to do that - prove your god exists?
People have been searching for over 2000 years for proof of your god, and like proof for every other god, they're still completely empty handed.
Ha, Ha!
@@patrickian8843 James Tour never discusses his theory that "God did it!" because scientifically he cannot even make a start to verify anything about it. His theory is a fairy tale.
Good for Dr. Tour in exposing the false prophets in our midst.
Science has no prophets.
@@hammalammadingdong6244 They are all false prophets.
@@djo-dji6018 - all prophets are false as far as I can tell.
But science doesn’t commit that error because science doesn’t proceed as a result of prophesy.
@@hammalammadingdong6244 Science is full of prophets, but they all are fake prophets, of course.
@@stevepaige7557 - I don't think you understand what science is or what prophesy is.
I have promoted Dr James Tour since the first time I heard him. He is a brilliant man of God. He needs to be heard by all.
I am God.
@@visancosmin8991
Make a Ribosome.
Better yet, come back from the dead.
Then I might believe and listen to you.
@@nathanielalderson9111 You are also God. We are all one and the same God/"I am" dreaming infinite dreams.
@@visancosmin8991 I've seen you comment this same comment around a few places. And you are an intelligent person, I'll give you that.
But you are neither God, and nor am I.
God is a Person that you are ignoring, or claiming His title incorrectly.
I advise humbleness, not the arrogance to state "I am God." It is a short step off that particular pier.
@@nathanielalderson9111 You don't understand what God is. You put no effort into obtaining that understanding. You just mindlessly adopted the memes that you found around in your culture.
You are an amazing and passionate man Dr. Tour! I pray for you and that your message of the truth about the origin of life and your "unspoken" truth about God is heard and realized by everyone who hears it. God bless you!
Proud of you Dr. Tour. Fighting the good fight. To God be the Glory! Amen 🕎✝️
EXPLAIN WHAT HE MEANS IN SCIENTIFIC TERMS THEN DUMB IT DOWN FOR THE AUDIENCE THEN. LAUGHING STOCK
Why is lying about the current state of scientific literature to mislead his followers the good fight? I thought lying was a sin
@@Ab_Def_ For born-again christians it's OK to lie if it's in a 'good cause'.
Davey Forina is a certified Fraud holding yourself up as a so-called "Professor" when you only have a bachelor's degree and couldn't bother to get an education... You couldn't ties Dr. Tour's shoe-laces.
/Repudiate pretenders like Davey Forina
Misinformation...
I love listening to Dr. Tour
I love his enthusiasm
He's not a very good public speaker and that "enthusiasm" sounds more like a "hissy fit"
Funny. I think he is a wonderful public speaker. You are obviously a poor listener. Guys like you probably consider the empty, stammering fool Barack Maobama to be a great orator.
Being “enthusiastic” doesn’t mean that what he’s saying is accurate. Which he isn’t.
So, what specifically did he say that is not accurate? A time stamp of his inaccuracy would be helpful. I am relatively new to the topic, but a my background in chemical engr have led me to question the same issues that Dr tour is questioning. Just exploring alternatives.
@@wade5941 You will receive either a niggling or silent response from this dude. He is a hater and propagandist, in all likelihood.
I love this! As a Rice alum.... I am very proud of Dr. Tour!
Nobody has shown a method to make the homochiral versions of lipids, amino acids, nucleotides or carbohydrates in a prebiotically relevant manner.
Chemists purchase chemicals in high purity and yield from chemical companies. Chemists Arrange those chemicals in a specific order under a set of carefully controlled devised conditions Using designed sequencing machines and templates.
@@galileog8945 In biology, 19 of the 20 natural amino acids are homochiral ,..he is quite right.
@@galileog8945 He speaks of homochiral amino acids at 52.45 , clearly printed ...
Nobody has shown a method to make the homochiral versions of lipids, amino acids, nucleotides or carbohydrates in a prebiotically relevant manner.
Chemists purchase chemicals in high purity and yield from chemical companies, Which Extract them from pre-existing biological sources. Chemists Arrange those chemicals in a specific order under a set of carefully controlled devised conditions Using Designed pipettes, designed synthesizer machines, Activating agents, templates. Etc
@@tonymaurice4157
Why are you repeating yourself?
Your a Tour Ď force. Keeping science real. Well done. Hope to see you someday.
Tour de farce more like
I've seen several of your videos, and I think this is the best. From a retired synthetic Organic Chemist (pharmaceutical industry).
Fantastic. Another chemist who doesn’t know anything about abiogenesis chiming in. You got us
I studied biology, organic chemistry and engineering so reading science papers while not easy is doable for me if interesting.
People at the University where my astronomy club sometimes has talks were all really excited some amino acid carbohydrates were discovered on Ruygu, a CI chondrite asteroid that was sampled and returned to Earth by the Japanese Hayabusa 2 probe mission.
Without going into details a few science journals went a little overboard, but to show the difference in how science and the media work in Japan it was kept pretty low key instead of giant headlines of the "they've found proof of life on a meteor" we get from our own credulous science media/pop media that people eat up. Yes I used meteor wrong on purpose.
B.s.
Experiments to produce the building blocks of life always begin with unnaturally pure, concentrated reagents. These are purchased from laboratory supply shops and produced through sophisticated, intelligently designed processes. And From pre-existing donor cells
Dr.Tour 🏆
I did not see any "they've found proof of life on a meteor" articles. Were these in newspapers?
@Gary Hurd We can give chemists in optimal lab environments every life friendly Ingredient and it still doesn't self assemble into anything close to a "primitive cell"
The atheist community has nothing but hope and wishful thinking for the Abiogenesis fantasy!
@@GaryHurd science journals. if you look to newspapers for your science education you won't learn much at all. much of that will be wrong also.
Given the high complexity of chemistry I find it so amazing how biological organisms can function so well for so long.
God is great
I am God.
@@H0neyBear I am God.
@@H0neyBear are you serious?, look around you!
@@H0neyBear You dont see any of those. All that you ever see is your own consciousness. And consciousness is God knowing itself.
@@H0neyBear We are all the same "I am". And the proposition "I am"/"I exist" is logically always true. Therefore we are eternal. The fact that we are eternal and we are all the same "I am", it means we are all one and the same God.
“YOU DON’T HAVE RIBOSE”
😂 Someone should make Meme or T-shirt out of that statement. Dr James Tour is correct, the scientific community nowadays is more interested in finding funding than real scientific discoveries. It’s a shame.
Start here;
Springsteen G, Joyce GF.
2004 "Selective derivatization and sequestration of ribose from a prebiotic mix"
J Am Chem Soc. 2004 Aug 11;126(31):9578-83
Ricardo, A., Carrigan, M. A., Olcott, A. N., Benner, S. A.
2004 "Borate Minerals Stabilize Ribose" Science January 9; 303: 196 (in Brevia)
Banfalvi, G., 2006. Why ribose was selected as the sugar component of nucleic acids. DNA and cell biology, 25(3), pp.189-196.
Vázquez-Mayagoitia Á, Horton SR, Sumpter BG, Šponer J, Šponer JE, Fuentes-Cabrera M.
2011 "On the stabilization of ribose by silicate minerals" Astrobiology. 2011 Mar;11(2):115-21.
Let's take up a fund for billboards.
Not even close Professor Dave has debunked all of Tour’s claims look up his videos on TH-cam.
Dr Tour has openly stated that he doesn't believe RNA could have formed prebiotically. He calls it "a bunch of nonsense". We now know that not only was it possible to form prebiotically, but even that it could form in rocks... friggin' ROCKS (like borate). He doesn't want to accept this, because it means he would have to modify his understanding of the subject, which violates his religion. The irony of the whole thing is that he could simply accept the idea that some have that his god created the world this way, but he instead chooses to reject reality. It's really quite disheartening, ngl, because if I wanted to know something about nanocars, Dr Tour is probably one of the first people I'd go to on the subject. And no, he is NOT correct that science nowadays is more interested in finding funding than real scientific discoveries... that's just a way of connecting emotionally with the suggestible layperson. If you were actually a scientist operating inside of the scientific community, you'd know this... but you're not, and are thus just repeating this point as an argument from authority.
A shame and a SHAM
Dr Tour is the real deal. He actually talked to me for 30 minutes on Zoom about his conversion. He will do that with anyone, much respect. Also, he is a humble man, one of the smartest guys in the world, lots of money, but is as real as a good friend.
Well said!
Humble and amazing, like our Lord Jesus the Saviour.
actually he's a fraud who misrepresents science to further creationist propaganda.
Professor Dave Explains.
He’s a messianic Jew isn’t he ? My best friend is a messianic Jew .
Certain people like Dr Tour are the quintessential teacher. You can feel his passion or grit for the truth, and you see the truth in his word. Sound familiar…
My favorite quote: "I just spent a 40 year career doing this and we're further away [from finding the answers] than when I began." Who's going to fund that???
Get em’ Tour
Good one.
Expose all of these cheaters.
Best of luck
That was absolutely amazing! Thank you so much! 🙏
you better pray that Tour ever will find the thruth and stops deceiving people.
I have never been so intrigued while feeling so stupid at the same time. I love to listen to you teach. Your enthusiasm is captivating. As I listen to your words I am only more and more enthralled by the glory of our God, and His immense power.
Feelings of stupidity are direct result of religious dogma. Try spirituality instead.
@@candui7278 Your “spirituality” is an empty bucket.
The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them.
It’s a blatant joke that the first way to brainwash someone is to tell them they are being brainwashed.
Same as this tool presenting lies to you.
@@stevepaige7557 I reference the Gospel itself
John 21:24 "This is the disciple[whom Jesus loved/ Lazarus] which testifieth of these things, AND WROTE THESE THINGS: and we[Apostles] know that his testimony is true."
John 11:5
Now Jesus LOVED Martha, and her sister, and LAZARUS
John 11:3
Therefore his sisters sent unto him{Jesus], saying, Lord, behold, HE[Lazarus] WHOM THOU LOVEST is sick..
John11:36 Then said the Jews, Behold how he[Jesus] LOVED him[Lazarus]!
I was fortunate enough to have watched the 13 part series as Dr Tour was releasing it . I'm a construction worker with no background in chemistry , biology or OoL , but James described everything in such a way that made it easy to understand . I have so much respect for him as a scientist and a man of God !
You are exactly the target James Tour aims for an easy hit.
@@GaryHurd - If you think James Tour is a snake oil salesman, you need to look up his resume.
You're the one who bought something. You bought the origin of life garbage that keeps grant money coming to these lying researchers.
@@GaryHurd You mean life appeared through abiogenesis ?
Check out Professor Dave on James Tours dishonesty
@@dustinellerbe4125 Are you for real ? An youtuber knowing better than a scientist ?
Amazing as always DR. Tour. Keep calling out the lies and speaking the scientific truth!
That's funny.
Please let me know when he starts speaking truth about abiogenesis because as of right now, nothing but lies pour out of his mouth on the subject.
An extremist evangelic… speaking the truth…😂😂
@@desiderata8811 The part I find the most funny is the thumbnail... "You've been deceived!" Brainwashing 101. The easiest way to deceive people is to tell them that they've already been deceived... so they are nice and receptive to your brand of deceit. It's shockingly effective, but to those of us who can see through this façade, it's just obnoxious.
He thinks we got here by magic.
Over the last 8 years I've been looking into both sides and continuing to improve my grasp of understanding it all. Because I didn't really have much going on in life & I enjoyed the hunt for truth. I learned how to argue from both sides & pick apart everything I say with a shift on perspective. The point I'm getting at here is that It all comes down to both positions being a matter of faith & perspective. I spent a lot of time thinking about what I should believe & the answer It came down to was as simple as realising, only one side offered me hope. Where as the other side would have me believe and hope in nothing. At some point over this last year it would seem I have become a Christian again and I may even be going back to church tomorrow with a friend for the first time in over 25 years. Have you ever seen the optical illusion of the spinning ballerina? So many people can only see it spinning one way, either to the left or to the right, but some people can also shift their perspective & control what direction they see it spinning. That's what all of this is. An optical illusion that's fun and interesting to look at & learn about, but ultimately a distraction that's meant to keep you distracted from God. None of it means anything without finding faith & hope through Him. Only took me about 40 years to figure it out.
What a load of ass gravy.
So you choose hope above truth?
That, is the what we need to center in on, Samuel. This will help center the goal for us. "10 My goal is to know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship... Philippians 3
Satan does not want us to know God. He knows that "
But we all, with uncovered face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." 2 Corinthians 3
Seek to know Him more.
@@fukpoeslaw3613 No, he chose the side that offers (assumptions + hope) instead of the side that offers (assumptions + childish insults) 🤡
You will be in our prayers, fellow Christian, stand tall in Christ though the heavens fall. Stand tall.
Personally I believe in Creation and I believe in Intelligent Design. Now, regardless of my personal position and belief. I have to say, this Professor had me laughing on so many levels! This is one of the few videos on the origins of life and organic chemistry that I've seen that is actually both educational and entertaining to say the least.
Creation AND intelligent design…?
Isn’t the later basically a Deist approach (ie a-Bliblical), whereas as Biiblical Creation requires acceptance of Young Earth - ie what orthodox Christianity subscribed to until the Lyell-Darwin heresy took root, which rapidly led to eugenics and the worst forms of racism. By their fruit… etc!
He had you laughing about what exactly? What is so laughable, we have to know.
@@brokula1312 how he points out the half truths to the research papers designed to keep the grant money coming while pretending they have made great advances.
@@brokula1312 He's a schizophrenic, they'll laugh at anything.
Excellent work. It deserves a wide distribution and much discussion.
Yes, you're correct.
But, Dr. Tour refuses to publish papers in peer reviewed journals, or engage in debate with the extremely vast number of scientists who oppose his views.
He only publishes books funded by Apologetic Institutions, so he is basically a cheering section of ONE, in the scientific world.
He's only confortable to con lay people, who do not have enough scientific knowledge to disagree with him.
@@vincentc.mercandetti9917 or he is very aware of how unethical they and their financiers are along with the controlled media, corrupt governments, and the money powers that have taken over the medical field, the banks, the research institutions etc. A persona has to be retarded if you are oblivious to the immense corruption that has spread its slimy fingers into everything mainstream.
@@vincentc.mercandetti9917 Vincent sounds like your from the religion of atheism .
I’m a itty of 1 how about we dialogue on science and I show how science is leaning in the direction of 2 huge assertions made in the Bible .
Are you secure enough in your religion of atheism to have a science based discussion with me ?
Topic : soul and the afterlife
Second of all dr tour wouldn’t be able to get any of this stuff that he talked about passed through peer reviewed because we are currently living in a paradigm of methodological materialism and they would never pass papers in this part of hard science such as chemistry that goes against their sacred paradigm
Ps : I’m a former atheist who came back to Christianity through science logic and reason .
Ready for a dialogue
Wink wink
@@angelbrother1238 Atheism is not a religion, so you're off to a bad start.
What are your two science based assertions?
I can use the laugh.
And you're not gay (are you?), why are you winking at me?
@@vincentc.mercandetti9917 oh and Vince T can you please bring 5 more atheists with you onto this thread :(
This won’t be fair
Typical atheist mind . I should know , I used to be an atheist until this amazing miracle happened to me making it impossible for me to stay an atheist anymore after 4 years of atheism
WaTch this folks ;)
Good stuff! Never get tired of listening to Dr Tour.
Right!
@@JessicaSunlight ..or what you have been indoctrinated into believing what is true. How many papers has Dr. Tour submitted for peer review to the scientific community?
@@casparuskruger4807
Tour is well published in synthetic chemistry. His obsessive falsehoods about abiogenesis stem from his youthful conversion experience. This is how he maintains the notion that there is a scientific basis for religion.
@@GaryHurd -- And exactly what conclusion has science settled on that explains abiogenesis?
@@GaryHurd And what is the truthhood about abiogenesis ?
Fascinating presentation. Thank you. So clearly we don’t know how life commenced. Assuming a ‘God of the gaps’ is the answer in still unacceptable. The inability to discover this is no evidence for a God. Indeed, there is no evidence for a God.
Thank you Dr. Tour for your unyielding faith in God and truth. When they come after you instead of your work, it speaks volumes...👊👊
Lawrence krauss - “We are fearfully and wonderfully made by nothing”
Richard Dawkins - “ We are Fearfully and wonderfully made by Alliens”
OOL researcher - “ We are Fearfully and wonderfully made by billion year old Soup”
King David - “ We are Fearfully and wonderfully made by God”
I think this is Dr Tour's clearest, most cohesive presentation to date. The shenanigans of the OoL in no small part have lead to the current distrust of science and scientists who claim - we know, we have the answer, and are found wanting. Blaming the media for megaphoning such hype as science fact, further destroys their credibility.
There are no "shenanigans" in abiogenesis research, only morons in the media who have about as much scientific understanding as a head of cabbage who like to make up bullshit for sensationalism. This has NOTHING to do with the scientists themselves. The only scientists who think they have all the answers are the ones who try to promote completely idiotic claims about things they have no clue about, such as Pierre-Marie Robitaille thinking he's an astrophysicist, literally everyone at the Discovery Institute thinking they know the first thing about ANY science at all, and yeah, even Dr Tour thinking he knows about abiogenesis, when he's proven repeatedly that he knows nothing on the subject and apparently likes it that way. The lies he tells are so transparent to anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of the field that it's frankly embarrassing. He needs to knock it off, as he is literally part of the problem with anti-science bias. But... all these lies sit well with people who don't care about reality but just want to hear stories that confirm their biases, so it's a pretty profitable venture for him... and so many fall for it, just like they fall for the delusions of absolute muppets like Matt Powell and Ray Comfort.
100% agreed and the problem is they don’t seem to care if the public trusts them or not which is even more disturbing
@@angelbrother1238 Science is not public opinion. It doesn't give a fuck whether you approve or not.
@@MarilynMonRover I’d say definitionally that would be true. In reality and practice, not so much.
@@TheTykus The issue is that Tour doesn't want anyone going into OoL research so he actively discourages them by spinning this web of lies and misrepresentations to make it seem like nonsense. Smart people, however, can see through his foolishness. I can't think of any reason outside of his faith why he would want to do this, but I guess his faith is reason enough... which is ironic, considering honesty is supposed to be a hallmark of his faith in the first place, and here he is, lying like a rug. The preservation of his faith clearly means more to him than the principles of his faith. It's rather disheartening to see.
Thank God for Dr. James Tour!
42:58 TODO list for fabricating a cell... What a nice video giving the viewer such a wide overview. I have yet to see your other longer videos, but I am so looking forward to! Just stumbled randomly upon your channel on this video and instantly subscribed. Top notch content, thank you.
"Top notch" 🤣
- The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them.
@@termination9353 Sir, this is a Wendy's.
Did nature spontaneously fabricate a modern cell out of nowhere? No, it didn't. This "to-do list" is utter bullshit.
Super interesting and informative. I've watched all your videos in the two seasons. Subsequently unsubscribed from "the other guy" after the insight I got from your lectures. I am a simple guy with more questions than answers and life is way too complex to be answered in the foolish manner some text books want us to believe. Thanks for making the effort to bring clarity. We need more voices like yours.
we're living in the age of scientism bud, spacetime isn't fundamental to physics, quantum mechanics isn't fundamental to reality. nothing can explain consciousness...... and 'scientists' still think the grand canyon wasn't formed by lightning lol it's like the pseudoscientists and scientists switched places once government and corporate interests got to strong in science.
Sorry to hear that you've been decieved by James. He's a lying scammer that thoroughly misrepresents origin of life research. I recommend you do some independent research on the topic instead of listening to this idiot.
GreatUncleBuck
I can't say I've had the... _"""""pleasure"""""_ of having subbed to Tour, but it feels like I'm in the opposite boat. Care to elaborate on how these "lectures" carry more insight than Dave's educational content? If you're not a trained chemist, these videos claims shouldn't be important nor insightful, as it's terribly difficult to follow much of the important bits or the papers without at least _a _*_basic_* understanding of chemistry (More than what *I* got from two semesters of Chemistry and the vaguely baseline level playlist on Dave's channel).
@@ivoryas1696I would like it to be dumbed down into Laypeople terms personally. It looks a lot like an in house debate. My grade 12 chemistry class doesn't help me here.
From what he said at the beginning, to paraphrase "molecules don't move toward life unless acted on by organic material". This sounds to me like something else I heard about Electricity. Electricity is chaotic unless utilized by something that can harness and direct it, like a toaster oven. Similarly, it sounds like he's saying molecules are mindless and only do what you need them to do when directed by information. The prebiotic molecule had no such direction, so they would constantly fall apart after accidently assembling themselves....this is granting they could actually form by accident.
@@Lambdamale. Electricity isn't "chaotic", that doesn't really make sense as a way of describing it. Magnetic fields and lightning and electromagnetic phenomena all existed and functioned just fine well before we figured out how to make interesting things that use electromagnetism. We just used the properties of charged molecules to do cool things, those properties existed regardless of how we used them.
Molecules are mindless, but they are not directionless. Matter has combinatorial properties, which means that completely independent of any human interaction at all, chemistry happens and matter interacts and combines in various ways, "directed" by the laws of physics. The "direction" of a prebiotic molecule, is that if conditions are such that some chemical reaction can occur, it occurs. That's all chemistry is. When humans do chemistry, we aren't imbuing the matter with some "essence" or "substance" that we call information, we're just creating the conditions that allow for a particular chemical reaction to happen. If the same conditions were created naturally somewhere else, the same chemistry would occur whether or not a human was there to facilitate it.
Information also isn't a "thing" in the normal sense. It's a thing insofar as it's a concept that we have in our brains, but "information" is just a word we use to describe a pattern or sequence of things. The matter *is* the information. Molecules exist, and they exist in a specific geometry and composition of atoms, and that specific geometry and those specific atoms allow for chemical reactions with other specific molecules to happen. In the case of DNA, the strands aren't imbued with some particular material "information" that lets them work. DNA strands are a pattern of base pairs, that RNA reads and then acts on based on the pattern. That's it.
Great talk! Very informative. Thanks again!! :)
I am now in my early 60's and the time of my undergraduate years is long past. I still very much have an interest in many different areas of scientific investigation. What disturbs me most about today is that so many of those who teach in the higher education environments have fallen into the trap of having the students only focus on the current consensus or popularly held views (theories and models) in the various scientific fields as if those theories and models were the "truth". In fact, a discussion that I had with one such university educator (nuclear physics) showed me that students looking at alternative theories and models were to be discouraged from their investigations. It saddened me that such an attitude was shown, but I have found that this attitude is much more common than I ever expected.
My undergraduate studies were in electrical engineering and computer science and we were always encouraged to remember that all of the theories and models we used were only applicable within certain quite narrow situations. Change those basic conditions and those theories and models would fail. It was only in later years that I came across George Box's statement of "all models are wrong, but some are useful" and at that point realised that this was the fundamental position that we were being taught. I have extended that saying as "all of our theories and models are wrong, but can be useful in various places". Interestingly, I did come across a set of physics writings in which the author actually described his work as being useful for calculation but do not expect reality to match that model.
1956...it was a different planet for my parents. Today, kids are portrayed as a burden...no worth, pain in the ass, etc. Its very sad to see my grandchildrens situation.
United we once stood, a proud people, divided we have fallen, flush with our own shames. By design. Evil deceiving evil, as it is written.
Ps. Love the "all models are wrong too"! My 9th grade shop teacher used to say it all the time (:
Consciousness is all there is.
@@visancosmin8991 wait tll you have kids. Kinda makes you look beyond your own belly button.
@@dannymccarty344 What ?
@@visancosmin8991 consciousness, dude.! More to life than just you.
What a presentation!! Dr Tour is a force beyond normal .... Love his lectures! One of the greatest scientific minds on the planet ...and a great man of God ..blessing to you Dr Tour from Nottingham, England!!
Even if you want to to believe there was supernatural agency involved; how do you suggest scientists go about learning these processes and mechanisms that created life? The only data is natural and the only tools are chemistry and physics. I have not seen Mr Tour inject god into any of HIS scientific papers because that would be unscientific and irrational.
@YYY MMM I take it you believe in the pre-biotic pond scum argument?
@YYY MMM We are waiting for your published paper where you can prove everything he said is baseless and rubbish, your comments mean absolutely nothing unless you prove him wrong . BTW can you please show us how many articles you have written at least and your patents you've registered ®️?
@@believerbyknowledge Does he not have to prove it right first?
@@macmac1022 either way , I hear not a solid scientific argument from YYY MMMM to back his opinion.
Thank you for posting this great lecture. I'm very glad there's people of good faith out there that understand all of this and can benefit from Dr James ample scientific knowledge and wisdom.
When it comes to his field of expertise, we can learn much. After all, he's pretty much the main figurehead when it comes to nanocars. I can't think of anymore more qualified to speak on the subject. However....... when it comes to abiogenesis, he is absolutely ignorant as hell and likes it that way, as do his followers. You can't learn a damn thing about abiogenesis from him.
@@MarilynMonRover - Gee, he's not an expert on what some other people (right now) imagine might have happened . .
So, I guess that proves he's not God ; )
@@johnknight3529 Of course he's not God. I'm God.
@@MarilynMonRover - Take a number ; )
@@MarilynMonRover
No I’m Spartacus.
It's humbling to know that even in this day and age, we don't know what life IS.
Life is consciousness, is God knowing itself, what else ?
@@visancosmin8991 Oh, Visan, I understand that life is a gift from God, but as Dr. Tour mentioned, when a living thing ceases to live, what is it that was lost? The life force isn't physical, something that we can replace. Even Dr. Tour, brilliant as he is, doesn't know what life IS, or how to create it. I'm in awe of God's majesty!
@@warrenpope749 What is lost is consciousness. That's why a chemical solution to the origin of life is impossible. Those chemicals didn't come together by the laws of chemistry, they were brought together by consciousness. That's why they fail to replicate life in laboratory, because they only mess with chemicals, but they cannot invoke consciousness to enter those chemicals to organize them.
@@warrenpope749 Consciousness is lost.
@@cosminvisan520 Consciousness is lost every time we fall asleep.
When your ultimate goal is the almighty dollar it’s not that hard to be willfully blind. The problem is that there will be a day of reckoning.
Thank you Dr Tour for being that light on a hill. Maranatha.
Thanks for your bold stand Dr. Tour.
Please don’t let the secularists make you leave God out of the argument. God bless you and your work! 🙏🏼✝️ 🧪 🧬
I am God.
@@visancosmin8991
Thanks for the reply. I don’t get too many chances to talk with you directly. How did you create the universe? Thanks 🙏🏼
@@shipwright6122 You are also God. We are all one and the same God/"I am" dreaming infinite dreams.
@@visancosmin8991
I am definitely not God. Thank God. 🙏🏼 I thought I was for many years. Didn’t work out so good
@@shipwright6122 You dont understand what God is.
Here's a scientist who never even wanted to become one, but turned out to be one of the most brilliant and influential scientific mind of our time. Talking about God-ordained purpose. Respect.
Complete nonsense. I wish there had been a REAL scientist up there telling him the truth.
@@casparuskruger4807 you mean the athiest fantasy they NEED to be real. That's exactly what many have said.
@@casparuskruger4807 he is a real scientist not some academic elite spreading their far left ideology.
Until your god decides to stop hiding,@@freegeorgia4808, Atheists don't need to fantasize about anything.
@@freegeorgia4808 --Do you honestly think the global scientific community's main objection is to try as many ways to prove there is no God as they can?
My hero brother! Thank you for telling it like it is and God Bless You!
Brilliant, comprehensive and crystal clear. Hats off.
We love you Dr.Tour!!!!! Glory to God for putting people like yourself in education to show us truth that leads to understanding!!! Thank you good and noble sir, you rock.
The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them.
@@termination9353 Interestingly, the RE Legion of man as presented has caused more strife and death in this realm than almost any other source of mind control imposed on that which is life=life.
Too many love “believing” in shit outside of their state conscious awareness.
It is astounding that people believe all this stuff that has zero evidence in our living experience and all based on fantasies of his story and NOT the Mystery= My Story = Mastery that is the you you have come to KNOW.
All truth is found within. Trust in the you that you are; that which is life. Thx. D
@@rtanidean4931 "“believing” in shit outside of their state conscious awareness." - But I don't believe "shit" outside my conscious awareness. Awakening people to "shit" outside of their awareness is what I'm doing here. I don't see how anything you just said can help me in that endeavor. I didn't come here asking you where truth is to be found. I came here TELLING you where truth is to be found. I use my own mind and teach people to use theirs. Not like you who merely parrot the "mystery = my story = mastery" conceptual summersault gibberish you learned that was dreamed up in someone else's mind.
@@termination9353 Wow. You took my comment completely out of context! I was absolutely agreeing with you and then I added my own bit of experience. There was no critical view in what you commented initially or my response to freely comment. No judgments, just expansion of view. There’s no mandate presented to anyone. Humbly suggest all to trust what you claim to know, or not, no matter to me. Take care all.
@@karabool6411
But god never “comes in “ creationists just make claims that he did it when they don’t have a scrap of evidence that any deity exists .
The argument about RNA breaking down easily is actually in favour of abiogenesis. If the process that is producing it takes that material to produce more then what you get is a massively high cycle rate which is prefect for evolution. We're quite slow. Simpler things like insects tend to have lifecycles much shorter. When you scale all the way down to the lifecycles of chemicals and in chemical reactions, particularly cyclical ones, the lifetimes are unbelievable fast, milliseconds even.
People should not be believing that scientists have created life in the laboratory in that way. That is a problem where science has become a religion.
It is a law of life, that the ones with money and power always win. Except when you succeed in waking the public up to the malevolence inflicted upon them by the power holders. Because the public is always the most powerful of all. And I thank the creator, that in this day and age, the public can be so easily reached by means like youtube, and that the competent and honest truth-seekers have been given such a fighting hand. The truth will out!
Reminds me of "We don't need farms. We buy our meat from the supermarket."
That is the most succinct summary of the flaws in OOL research today 👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿
Dr. Tour, oh how I appreciate you and your love for our Lord Jesus Christ. All my life, i had a heart for Israel and His people especially those whom I went to high school with. I still evangelize to them daily because it is our duty to testify always. If isn't done, He will make it fully known during the tribulations.
Jesus is just a story.
@@stevepaige7557 Prove Jesus existed!
@@visancosmin8991 Jesus is the most historically written about figure even from his enemies. You're not being objective in your assessment about Him.
@@pigzcanfly444 Show me the evidence.
@@cosminvisan520 show you the evidence that you are contingent? You should have no problem deducting that you are the product of something else that derived you. Show you the evidence for Christianity? I can point you to several inter and extrabiblical sources that hint to the veracity of the scriptures and to the life that Jesus lived, His death by crucifixion and resurrection which were all prophesied hundreds of years prior. I can even show you how the gospel was actually found to be within the phonetic meaning of each of the first 10 patriarchs in the book of genesis when you write them out in order. It really just depends on your willingness to delve into the information.
Greatest quote at 46:26, "Would you say this to his face ... I already have." Boom! No one is left standing.
I first saw Dr tour on "one for Israel" TH-cam channel. Amazing testimony of God's grace.
As a biologist I admire you!!!!!!
Nobody has shown a method to make the homochiral versions of lipids, amino acids, nucleotides or carbohydrates in a prebiotically relevant manner.
Chemists purchase chemicals in high purity and yield from chemical companies. Chemists Arrange those chemicals in a specific order under a set of carefully controlled devised conditions Using designed sequencing machines and templates.
@@tonymaurice4157 : OK. but we do know a great deal about how biology functions naturally and we got to the information you described through scientific research. As we look back to earlier end earlier processes; at what point do you say "Stop! Supernatural intervention happened right there." how do you test for that? So even if it is supernatural, we'd have to do the same research to know how and when. That would win a Nobel Prize for sure. If you don't care or it doesn't matter then there is no point making scientific arguments. Science is about learning what we don't know, not making excuses for not looking.
@LR Vogt More hope and wishful thinking and no environment has ever demonstrated abiogenesis!
Proto-cells are not life-like, the requisite ribosomes mRNA, enzymes and reagents were purchased from a chemical company or extracted from a pre-existing living system. Then added to the medium and permitted to diffuse into the manmade capsules.
@@tonymaurice4157 : No one has demonstrated supernatural intervention even exists or is even possible but you just really want to believe it so you do.
Everything known has been learned from actual data using chemistry and physics. You wouldn't know what ribosomes mRNA, enzymes and reagents are without those scientists.
@LR Vogt It takes intelligent chemists to produce very limited chains of genetic information and they have to extract and copy it from pre-existing biological sources using designed equipment and templates... It's never forming just "Naturally"
Keep believing in your chemical fantasy that has never had any evidence! World of denial and wishful thinking👍
Love your work James Tour.
May God keep you protected in these days as you battle. " you were made for a time such as these"
I am God.
i consider myself atheist. but im certainly not dismissive of factual data that someone presents as he’s doing. doesnt suddenly mean a god exists. either way, i never realized how flawed this model was. really good information to have.
This is what integrity is all about. It is so welcome, even in science. Consensus science is not. Thanks Dr Tour. God bless.
Integrity? After being torn apart with real evidence by professor Dave. You have to be kidding
@@gtbriggs6614 lmao real evidence? apparently you dont know what logical fallacies are lol
@@DraceAI 50+ cited papers proving Tour’s claims invalid, cherry picked and all to build his little strawman. Farina ain’t the one apologising to Nobel laureates for blatant misrepresentation.
Do you think if Tour had even one valid point, the whole scientific community would be backpedaling like crazy? It’s business as usual if you hadn’t realised.
@@gtbriggs6614 Did you know Dave is NOT a professor.
@@KelliAnnWinkler that’s right, he has his masters in chemistry, he has taught chemistry. Tour really has no better qualifications, he specialises in nano technology and graphene development.
Difference between the two is one uses real science backed up by peer reviewed papers (and puts them in the description so you can check his work) and the other quote mines papers because he knows his congregations won’t check. Farina did check the presentations made by Tour and used the aforementioned papers to prove Tour very much wrong.
Love TOUR’s energy, keep at it and don’t cut any slack here, keep exposing and bringing these FRAUDS to the LIGHT
Your streams are missed, Rebekah.
Jimmy IS the fraud, Rebekah. I agree with Otangelo, bring your streams back, they were comedy gold.
@@reasonandsciencecatsboardcom Your arguments are hilarious! I have NEVER seen intelligence design nor create ANYTHING. It’s always been biological hands that do it so, even if your arguments weren’t just arguments from ignorance/incredulity, the conclusion would have to be that a MATERIAL being with intelligence caused abiogenesis, not just intelligence by itself.
Can you cite even ONE example of mere THOUGHT producing code? Has a factory ever been THOUGHT into existence or was it done by MATERIAL HANDS? Can you cite ANYTHING material that we’d BOTH agree was created by merely thinking?
@@reasonandsciencecatsboardcom You can’t have your cake and eat it too. If you want to say intelligence was required, you have to say a material body is required.
@@AsixA6 We know by NDEs that disembodied minds can exist. There are many science papers confirming this. We do not know of nonintelligent mechanisms being able to instantiate code, instructional information, hardware, information transmission systems, integrated complex machine, assembly lines, and self-replicating factories. This is an argument of knowledge, not ignorance. The ignorance is all yours.
I've been learning a lot from you Dr. Tour, and God bless you for being "straight up", I appreciate your transparency.
Yep, he is transparent alright, if you look closely at his connection to Discovery Institute, signing of anti-Darwin petition and all the half truths and outright lies he stoops to. PhD Liar for Jesus.
What in particular have you learned?
@@GaryHurd
How about your abiogenesis fairytale for one.
@@thomasjane4167
James Tour depends on the ignorance of his audience. That is advanced by their wish to be deceived.
My reading recommendations on the origin of life for people without college chemistry, are;
Hazen, RM 2005 "Gen-e-sis" Washington DC: Joseph Henry Press
Deamer, David W. 2011 “First Life: Discovering the Connections between Stars, Cells, and How Life Began” University of California Press.
They are a bit dated, but are readable for people without much background study.
Since you have had a good background, First year college; Introduction to Chemistry, Second year; Organic Chemistry and at least one biochem or genetics course see;
Deamer, David W. 2019 "Assembling Life: How can life begin on Earth and other habitable planets?" Oxford University Press.
Hazen, RM 2019 "Symphony in C: Carbon and the Evolution of (Almost) Everything" Norton and Co.
Note: Bob Hazen thinks his 2019 book can be read by non-scientists. I doubt it.
Nick Lane 2015 "The Vital Question" W. W. Norton & Company
@@GaryHurd
Your opinion is noted. And that's all it is...dismissed.
What a wonderful, entertaining and eye-opening lecture! OoL is not alone in masquerading "marketing" as science... I'm afraid so many scientists are more into marketing their teams for funding than actually doing honest research. Dr Tour's passion for actual honest science is such a relief!
It's all about money And boyhood fantasies.
Has he figured out how we got here by a magic spell?
@TheAllBlue why would you say that?
@@allenanderson5297 Experiments to produce the building blocks of life always begin with unnaturally pure, concentrated reagents. These are purchased from laboratory supply shops and produced through sophisticated, intelligently designed processes
So I’m betting you just blindly believe everything he says. This individual has never published works worth a dot. Being peer reviewed is the way in which any paper has ever become anything. Consensus among peers is what gives published work worth.
Thank God the truth is being revealed!
One of your best, although very quick explanation.
Fantastic! Powerful!... This man - (because of the God-inspired focus of his life) - is a FORCE to be reckoned with in the scientific community!
Yeah, if anything, the point at which he focuses on god is the end of science.
@@tomyossarian7681 Anytime somebody is so closed minded that they are not willing to look at all possibilities, is the end of science.
@@ferratilis Sure - so I recon you can demonstrate that a "god" is a possible explanation. Please go ahead and do so.
@@tomyossarian7681
There is one particular God, that claims that He is outside Time and Space, that He created Time, Space and the Universe with all the planets and stars and all the Laws that govern it all.
He created the Earth and designed all the life forms and encoded all the information for life in a 4 base code known as DNA
Humans write a binary code and they screw that one up too.
Design demands a designer, Laws a lawgiver, and coding an Inteligent being that wrote that code.
It's clear that all this points to the one God that claims to have done it all, and His name is Jesus Christ.
That's NOT the simplest cell. That's the simplest cell they could come up with at the time. The simplest cell does not need DNA. This is a case of them trying to reverse the process and do it backwards only not all processes are bidirectional so at some point you hit a wall doing it like this. Doing it from the bottom up some initial RNA can do it, typically in a chemical soup consisting of nothing fancy, things all around in the solar system, some water, ammonia, co2, etc, not much else other than some trace elements, causing a catalytic cascade which is self perpetuating chemical reaction liable to make more of the said catalyst in the first place. Models of early life and abiogenesis aren't orderly processes. They're incredible messy. The first cells have a very high defect rate and are incredibly approximate. Early cell walls pull in the material needed and reproduction is achieved by basically swelling up and bursting, free floating again but that's how the early components started to begin with. What people also discount is the small scale this occurs on. Chemical life is tiny. It is like having a trillion times more Earths for these processes to occur across. There's also a semantic issue here. That's the simplest cell because of their definition of a cell as what we see today which is post the evolution of cells into a highly viable cell which we see today. When I played the rest what I just heard said wasn't smart. That's an abuse of language and you've undermined yourself with that.
@@stevepaige7557 If you look at experiments on RNA then you'll see that it has some chemical activity and the shortest sequences for catalysing some self replication are very little. As for arguments about it breaking down too quickly, they seem to all be based on the simple assumption that if it breaks down very quickly then that's too fast for anything else to happen. Well, it breaks down quickly from our perspective because at that level things in general happen quickly to the point that it's not actually happening quickly, certainly not immediately. A huge risk was taken with the mRNA vaccines because of this. Most people, even scientists working with RNA fall into these traps. There's a risk of recombination with other RNA pathogens, albeit it a small one but scientists ignored it under the notion that RNA breaks down too quickly for anything to happen, only if that were true it would break down too quickly to get into the cell and then end up creating spike proteins, the antigen to trigger the immune system. I like half of what this guy is doing, scientists deserve to be talked to like this a lot of the time as they are arrogant lying pricks most of the time. However, he is also sometimes undermining himself and over doing it. Some of his religious angle is incorrect and he should be angry at scientists for saying they're better but he's not entirely better either. On top of this there are processes that can stablise RNA. When we consider optimal candidates for abiogenesis, the primordial soup idea is a dumbed down story for kids just like stories in genesis that should not be interpreted as literal but instead giving a simplified explanation to people. If you do believe in God, do you think he would instead make a good for everyone that's a trillion pages long having to explain everything when if we weren't meant to figure things out for ourselves we would have been created filled with all this knowledge that is routinely discovered instead. The soup concept isn't entirely invalid though. Soups does also naturally occur on Earth. It's part of the water cycle. Stuff gets dissolved. When water evaporates it can get quite concentrated. In such cases with enough diversity of elements, compounds, chemicals and some processes driving chemical assembly RNA would have the opportunity to interact with that and bind with other stuff. Today people ignore RNA is often protected wrapped around or hugging a little protein or something like that. The mass duplication, reproduction and redundancy strategy alone is a work around for lack of persistence. Most of this is actually just quite basic science. The main reason abiogenesis has to be figured out piecemeal, including figuring out something plausible as to how it happened on Earth is because we don't have a giant petridish the size of the planet or something like that nor much data on what the planet was like back then which was radically different. I've done some work in areas related to this. Advances are being made instead in some areas in mathematics and simulations on computer. There are still enormous gaps but there's nothing in science that says this couldn't happen. The question is how. This process is no different to any other. We might find one way to make something or how something can be made but it's inefficient. Over time we improve and make it more inefficient. This is constantly being done in science and the trajectory is one in which we should land well with in the required parameters for being efficient enough to explain abiogenesis on early Earth.
Show me ...
@@watchman2001 That's quite a difficult request though I would suggest for some example of something analogous that you look at the evolution of computing.
It's not all the same but when it comes to DNA and what purpose that provides it's extremely similar to a hard drive.
RNA is usually what is actually processed equivalent to RAM in some respects while DNA is a persistent storage extension that's largely inert beyond that purpose.
There is a semantics issue in respect to the meaning of cell. The definition you use may artificially exclude simpler forms, by definition.
However, even in that case there are simpler kinds of cells in terms of self contained units where they might instead of having their own walls and being mobile exist in a porous substrate as effective cells. This is a little like the microbial equivalent of hermit crabs or cave men.
Cells today are well developed and often quite bulky with a lot of extras you don't strictly need. If we go back to the evolution of computers there were always hardware extensions and often still are such as graphics cards.
You can strip down much of that and just have a simply CPU with not much more. The CPU can usually do everything the graphics card can or do enough but just not as quickly. If you pull out bits and pieces of some old computers you could often take out quite a lot before they no longer work at all. This is still often fairly applicable today.
Similarly, if you look at modern cells today you can often strip things down to an absolute minimum. However, you're still working with what you have. You're not necessarily changing anything.
You might still be leaving in the equivalent of a CPU that is highly advanced, you're not simplifying that.
Those are stabilized parts of a stabilized system where as life prior was sure to be increasingly more unstable the further you go back.
You can conceive or various less stable and complete systems with the problem being you don't know which one it would be with that approach compared to stripping down what we actually have. Essentially, the stripping down method is like going back as far as possible in the historical record. When it comes to prehistory you reach a barrier where you can't rewind further back, it's at the beginning of the tape since records began. The footage prior is lost.
The modern cell has a structure consisting of a container, usually inside a kind of little bag. Little balloons. Earlier cells could have taken other forms including those that are more of a solid structure.
There were likely many different forms of cell or unit until things settled on the arrangement we see today. Earlier cells are likely to have been much more incoherent, that is, less self contained and probably quite often in a sense naked within their medium.
Insisting on a cell being defined by major components seen today is a misunderstanding of evolution that is somewhat common.
Today a computer might be defined by a set of components which might include a case. Computers don't often strictly need that. Just the term cell causes frustration here as it often implies the need for a case.
If I become a millionaire, I must make sure everyone hears of your work
I really enjoyed your interactions with professor Dave.
👌👌👌👌Thank you so much dr james tour sir for this amazing real scientific talk exposing the fake abiogenesis research❤️❤️🙏🙏
Tour offers no real science at all. He's a fraud
When did this presentation happen?
Great Work Dr.Tour 😇🙏🏻😇. Always Enjoy listening 🎧🎶🎧. To Dr.Tour 🙏🏻😇🙏🏻❤️🙏🏻
Thank you Dr James Tour. You show what a scientist actually does. And I can also see why fakes need to fake it to get the respect without the brilliance and thoroughness and the diligence. May CreatorGod continue to use you in your science and in your character of integrity and commitment and creativity. Respect.
I am God.
Yay real science! Yay ancient goat herder superstition! Pick one please.
He thinks we got here by magic.
@@allenanderson5297 We actually did got here by magic. How else you appear out of nothing ?
@@cosminvisan520 through quantum fluctuations
Excellent! Thanks for all you do. Truth and integrity is so refreshing.
Yes, truth and integrity are so vital in this day of dishonesty and tripe. Someone please let me know when Dr Tour displays even a shred of either honesty or integrity when it comes to abiogenesis research.
@@MarilynMonRover What exactly did he say that was not true?
@@Amanda-if1wn The first fifteen seconds of he video is the first demonstrable example of him being full of nonsense, talking shit about a field he doesn't understand. It just gets worse from there. Fifteen seconds. Unbelievable.
@WDFT He starts out with a completely idiotic misrepresentation of abiogenesis by stating that something slithers out of the primordial soup. *LITERALLY NO ONE IN THE FIELD THINKS THIS.* This blatant lie is told within the first fifteen seconds of the video. It is absolutely astounding that more people don't call him out for his bullshit.
@@MarilynMonRover in other words Marilyn can’t even comprehend what he said 😂
"I was just minding my own business...not anymore". They poked the wrong bear. This man knows that life has no chance of forming on its own out in a puddle somewhere. He also knows that nobody can prove that it can, not even close. They only have the "belief" that it can happen. Exposing their lies to the public is awesome. They just don't like the truth being revealed that they haven't a clue.
You go dr tour teach his work is inspiring he's trying to teach he for truth and against error
37:39 Wow! This is stunning. Thanks for teaching us, Dr. Tour.
- The Gospel of Jesus was originally one book, written by Lazarus in consultation with the Apostles [John 21:24] and published soon after Jesus left them on their own. The religion was hijacked by Rome, the Gospel was broken up scrambled adulterated into a bunch of competing narratives. Later four of those adulterated gospels were canonized with falsely ascribed authorship and a Gnosticism cover-story. It was the finding of an original Gospel of Jesus scroll in Jerusalem that gained the Knights Templar power over the Church and their eventual undoing when the church finally retaliated against them.
Tour is awesome. He will lead us in the right directions. Young minds will begin to brainstorm in far different ways. No waste of money, no lies about what works and what doesn't.
"I have written 5 papers. People simply ignore them. That's why I go to the masses. "
Is there a way to get the presentation slide for this video so I can make a shortened version of it? Maybe 20 minutes or so?
praise God for dr. James Tour
Tour cuts through the bull with precision, just by using their own work is enough but he goes deeper just to show in no way shape or form are they even remotely close to the origin of life.
There was no origin of life. Consciousness is eternal.
Dr. Tour, thank you most profoundly. I tuned off from the question of the origin of life because I perceived instinctively that the science behind it was clearly false. You have provided the basis for that instinct. For me for anyone to convince me that they know how life originated they have to convince me how prebiotic atoms formed from electrons, protons and neutrons, where these subatomic components of atoms came from and then how these atoms formed into molecules; molecules form compounds (amino acids, carbohydrates, lipids and ribonucleic acids and deoxyribonucleic acids). They have to show or tell me how information coded in the DNA came into existence. Information most likely convey intelligence. Science is based on facts and not on consensus. Consensus in science makes science dubious.
Amen! Go go go sir! We are with you
Dear Professor Tour - GOD is using powerfully in bold and fearless manner … to our LORD YESHUA be the praise forevermore ✌️✝️
I am God.
Can you tell us how everything got here through a magic spell?
No, they can't. But they seem to believe that if you attack science enough, magic will be the only other alternative.
What they don't seem to realize is that even if abiogenesis is completely falsified today and evolution disproved tomorrow, it still won't demonstrate their claims of supernatural intervention by anything, let alone by their favorite god.
Just because X = 0 that doesn't mean Y=1.
Now, if you are a creationist reading this, please think about this question; When, in the entire history of the world, has there ever been a phenomenon that was better explained by magical intervention than by natural processes? I can't think of any. I doubt the origin of life will be the exception.
@@hammalammadingdong6244 right
@@allenanderson5297 Telic processes are not magic
@@sombodysdad your sky daddy is magical
@@allenanderson5297 The fact that you can use the internet is magical.
Cool. When are you planning on publishing your OoL research in a peer-reviewed journal?
How about you ?
@@cosminvisan520 - It's not my field. Is it yours?
@@hammalammadingdong6244 Then if it is not your field, why do you comment about it ?
@@cosminvisan520 - Looks like you’ve got dozens of comments here. Is it your field?
This is a comment section. I’m making comments. So are you.
But to my original point - if Tour is so confident about his conclusions regarding OoL, why doesn’t he publish them in a peer reviewed journal?
How many peer-reviewed papers how you actually read on this matter? Zero, right?
An eye-opener, Dr. James Tour. Thank you again for trumpeting the Status Que of OoL research. I'm in awe of the complexity and even more of the fact that I exist in a living breathing body that functions so phenomenally well, without me even thinking about it 😊
TOUR 👑👑
There is no problem with legitimate scientific inquiry of any kind. The problem is with scientists that grossly exaggerate their findings and progress. We need more people like Dr Tour in more areas of science.
I actually think he needs to break it down for us peasants. As a layperson I relate more with analogies than hard data.
I didn’t even know how much I owe you for Graphene; thank you. I can only imagine how much Graphene will continue you to improve all of our lives. I’m only using it currently as my favorite wax product for my cars and guitars. I don’t mean to minimize Graphene and the way I’m using it. It has really improved my work ; Thank you.
Dave, this man is a chemist, probably one of the leading in his field as well as he works in the field, in the lab, doing synthesis...he knows this stuff better than nearly anyone else on the planet. Ive watched at least 20 of his lectures (apart from this topic) and he's 100% solid on his facts, completely honest if he doesnt know (which maybe happened once...), he's brilliant and an inspiration to any chemist; maybe if you truly watched and listened you'd learn something.
How do I know he's so on point? Because im also a chemist. Im not on his level, but ive a MS in chemical engineering with a minor in biochemistry and polymers (and probably an IQ of several people blindly following you put together), and ive worked in R&D for years. How much lab synthesis or chemistry based new technology have you developed Dave? How dare you call me a mindless, uneducated sheep...Id give my life's savings to debate you and show you how mindless I am, but I know you dont debate anyone who actually knows what theyre talking about. Ive watched your vids and love some of them, but these are garbage; full of unscientific wishful thinking.
I sound agrivated because i am. You obviously are completely clueless about this level of chemistry personally, just posting slides you find online, only skimming the surface of a world you know nothing about and spreading misinformation and straight up untrue statements as if they were proven well known things. Just regurgitating the ridiculously untrue hype in this area to millions who dont know better; the same way origin of life researchers has to you and sadly all of you bite hook and sinker. The real problem though is your attitude as if your an untouchable genius and how you rudely insult and attack people presenting truth about evidense against this fairy tale of yours. Thats not conduct of an intellectual, but a spoiled child with his fingers in his ears humming loudly ignoring the truth someone is trying to tell them.
Saying it happened is easy, SHOW ME HOW!!! Respond to my comment under your pinned one with so many responces, i ask one simple question. Maybe you shouldve stuck to debunking flat earthers, those were funny to watch. Im afraid youre in over your head here my man, very much so.
he was equally fallacious against the flat earthers... dave clearly suffers from NPD, he just wants to find an outlet for his dissorder...
Whoa! Here, we see what Dr Tour deals with. This author is exposed by his vitriol, his blind devotion to what Dr Tour eloquently demonstrates in this presentation. The fear this author makes clear is deep. He must deny. Sad..very.
Is this reply meant for 'Professor Dave Explains'? You'd better reply to his pinned comment, then.
I'm neither religious or a chemist, I don't know Professor Dave or Doctor James, I was just baited by the video title, I have many interests, and after watching the whole thing, I found the arguments contained here very credible.
This looks like a good example of what Daniel Schmactenberger discusses in the War on Sensemaking, that is, how our information ecology is fundamentally broken.
This is a real man with integrity! God bless him.
@@derhafi integrity is having a strong ethical principle, like being honest.
Praise the LORD for I am fearfully and wonderfully made!
Great video! I can't wait for Dr Tour to respond to Mr Dave's 2-part video. Where for the first part Mr Dave rants on about autocatalysis for almost the whole video as if its some magic concept which solves everything.
Thank you, Dr Tour. Since stumbling across your videos, I have been avidly going through everything you have produced. Not finished, by a long chalk, as I am in awe of, and extremely grateful for, your prolific and clearly presented output. As a follower of Christ, I can see you are truly a good and faithful servant. God bless all your endeavours, especially helpful to those of us who are challenged in the Maths/Sciences disciplines. You help me to see God's hand at work in His creation so much more vividly. Thank you.
More than 60 years ago when I was a child my grandfather said to me (more than once) "Most of the lies they tell you aren't true" 😁
Amazing how much the subject of origins of life has in common with germ theory versus terrain theory. My respect for consensus science continues to decline. I admire scientists like James Tour who are not afraid to challenge the theories that I was educated to believe.
Thank you so much Dr James. I took biochem in 2020 as part of my medical course and ever since then I have this itch about chirality and spontaneous life formation, as in, it's just too much coincidence. Your class shed light on so many other problems I just disregarded in my academic years before converting to Catholicism. Keep doing what you do, I'll share with as many people as I possibly can.
Hard to depict evolution as "spontaneous" when it took billions of years to make us.
@@PaulDormody Back than environment was specially assisted to build what we see today ,complexity is a small issue if you have the capabilities ...
@@rovidius2006 the problem is that science hasn’t even come close to showing it has the capabilities to do it
The odds don’t support it
@@angelbrother1238 says who?
You? The science denier? 🤣 the irony
@@FlyingSpaghettiJesus Has it been done yet? if it COULD be done dont you think someone outside of Hollywood would have done it by now? He is not a science-denier just because he wont share your BS with you! Wow, for being SO smart you people do engage in constant Ad hominems, dont you! Asking challenging questions to people who have a strong motive to lie and the propensity to do it is NOT denying science!
You've opened my eyes to a whole new conundrum regarding the complexities of our universe. If it isn't from intelligent design of Creator than how is it even possible? So glad I found your channel.
Arguments from ignorance are logically invalid.
@@hammalammadingdong6244 you calling yourself out?
@@ronniebuchanan6575 how would that work, since I’m not making an argument?
"Arguments from ignorance are logically invalid." That is an argument dummy.@@hammalammadingdong6244
I'm confused? My field of study in college, 30 years ago, was biochemistry. When was the term "consensus" added to the "Scientific Method"?
It wasn't. Scientific consensus refers to a state of affairs when the gathered body of evidence is sufficiently compelling (as established through the Scientific Method) that the Scientific community has little wiggle room to think anything else and has to therefore agree on a particular conclusion - for example : General Relatively, Evolution, Big Bang Cosmology, Quantum Mechanics .....
@@gladishilton1943 Thank you. You have just added "consensus" to the scientific method. With the scientific method, I'll put it in simple laymen terms, it "is" or it "ain't" and if it's an "ain't" having a consensus doesn't make it an "is". There is only three outcomes in science discovery. A theory can be proven or "True" and can't be falsified. Disproved in which the theory has been falsified. Or, there is insufficient data to determine if the theory is True or False and hence remains a theory. A consensus cannot make a theory True. It is still a best guess. Just like the examples you have given. The biggest problem I have especially with the examples you have given is when this "scientific community" holds fast to their "consensus'" even as new evidence, data, contradicts their consensus and they will still hold fast to their dogma and thus it becomes an "ism" and not science.
With climate change
@@gladishilton1943 What you described is how things should be but often are not.
@@djo-dji6018 Often? I doubt it.
Rarely, perhaps.
Wow. Thank you for this great argument and explaination!
Thank you.
Grew up on this theory, always bit doubtful......❤️
Really excellent! Love the passion!