That's fair, because a vast majority aren't even listening to your responses. They're just waiting to speak to further assert lies. No reason to treat a liar with respect.
Hey Peterson, does it help extra to subscribe to Patreon and watch your videos here? As in, do you only get revenue at patreon from the subscription, regardless of number of views?
Eric "don't make me angry, you wouldn't like me when I'm angry" Peterson, is on a par with Kracatony, you two should do a colab, I'd love too see the pair of you tearing some of these bozos a new one!
"Being related doesn't mean we come from monkeys" "We know that, but evolution never claimed we did, that's a huge misconception" "But we didn't come from monkeys" "We know, we never said that." "But you don't listen, we never came from monkeys" I swear, you were way too patient with this dude
I belive we do in fact come from monkeys. In the same way that we are part of the Ape category, apes are part of the Monkey category. So, in conclusion, humans are apes, apes are monkeys, therefore we are monkeys.
I had to almost headbutt an otherwise cool guy to get him out of the 18th century idea that hypothesis upgraded into theory and then into laws... It's like the history of the scientific method is explained up to Newton and then abruptly stopped before reaching Darwin... And don't even begin with the last part, the peer reviewing, an actually rather old idea (17th century) but that had to wait the 20th century to be fully implemented in the process. Not only science is rather badly taught, the very history of the discipline is swept under the rug. I understand 2020 better. :(
Eric did great here. The explanations were brilliant and the outburst completely justified. The guest was obviously extremely ignorant and proud. Once he understood he was wrong - I definitely think he did - he just became the most dishonest interlocutor ever.
4:44 these guys are like “I’ve never read about nor even given much thought to these ideas, but I’m confident I can go into a debate with someone who debates these issues every day and THEY will be the one that looks foolish” 😂
Facts. Atheist content is largely just dunking on super ignorant and obviously religiously-indoctrinated people, that disprove their own statements, almost as simply as breathing. It's essentially just simple content meant to make you think. THINK!
2:46 I wish I could be a fly in the wall in his brain. I just wanted to know what he heard, how his brain processed what he heard to get to the response that he just gave. This is so fascinating. You can explain it to them and then only a few moments later they forget the whole explanation that they just heard.
It's the cognitive dissonance syndrome, they are confronted with the fact they hold two totally opposing views at the same time . He has to accept we are genetically related to everything and then deny that means we were not created, but evolved, as everything else is. That is why he simply cannot make the obvious conclusion when presented with the evidence. Agree with everything Peterson says until the last step because of his belief, dismissing the evidence he agreed with up till then.
The correct response to "this is what evolution/science says" from a science denier is "You don't know what evolution/science says. You have been repeatedly corrected by someone who does and continue to refuse to take that correction. Please admit that you have been wrong about what science/evolution says AT EVERY POINT and accept correction from those who clearly know what they're talking about when YOU do not.. " We would LOVE to see someone do this as their big THING!
Everytime with the “evolution is just a theory” For the dim dims that repeat this, a scientific theory is a collection of facts and evidence used to explain an observed phenomenon. A scientific theory is the highest accolade that science can give
He told him this and he still kept saying it. He doesn't listen, doesn't care, doesn't understand. He's a human with a brain that can't think beyond instinct.
We should stop letting those types of people use scientific explanations for anything. Just like how we need to stop letting flat earthers use Google earth in their evidence. If they want to dismiss science that proves evolution then we get to claim we prayed about it and God says it's true.
Don't stop there, nothing new has been said from theistic side for centuries. The list of arguments for a god is a lot shorter than most realise. I've been at this for like 12 years now, daily, I've never seen anything that isn't on the list. Iron chariots had them all written down, but I don't know if that site is still active.
Scientific Theory "A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can, in accordance with the scientific method, be repeatedly tested, using a predefined protocol of observations and experiments. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and are a comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. It is important to note that the definition of a "scientific theory" (often ambiguously contracted to "theory" for the sake of brevity, including in this page) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from the common vernacular usage of the word "theory". In everyday non-scientific speech, "theory" can imply that something is an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, conjecture, idea, or, hypothesis; such a usage is the opposite of the word "theory" in science. These different usages are comparable to the differing, and often opposing, usages of the term "prediction" in science versus "prediction" in vernacular speech, denoting a mere hope. Both scientific laws and scientific theories are produced from the scientific method through the formation and testing of hypotheses, and can predict the behavior of the natural world. Both are typically well-supported by observations and/or experimental evidence. However, scientific laws are descriptive accounts of how nature will behave under certain conditions. Scientific theories are broader in scope, and give overarching explanations of how nature works and why it exhibits certain characteristics. Theories are supported by evidence from many different sources, and may contain one or several laws. A common misconception is that scientific theories are rudimentary ideas that will eventually graduate into scientific laws when enough data and evidence have been accumulated. A theory does not change into a scientific law with the accumulation of new or better evidence. A theory will always remain a theory; a law will always remain a law. Both theories and laws could potentially be falsified by countervailing evidence. Theories and laws are also distinct from hypotheses. Unlike hypotheses, *theories and laws may be simply referred to as scientific fact.* However, in science, theories are different from facts even when they are well supported. For example, *evolution is both a theory and a fact."* -Wiki^
I think he was trying to claim that people being "related" actually means that they are made from the same materials using the "same" blueprint. He was trying to deny the need for shared ancestry, the implication being that it's intelligent design by a creator.
13:38 that's called deterministic. There are factors in the environment that cause mutations. Where mutation will happen is random. Why it happens is not random
I encountered someone doing the exact same thing in a youtube comment. He kept repeating that related isnt the same as descending from that organism. I continued telling him until the very end that no one is claiming that. Im not sure how they are so confused about the meaning of the word "related".
I had that with someone getting phlogiston concept from the philosophers reinterpreted, in his mind, as the phlogistic theory to put it in the field of science and who dubbed what was a natural philosopher (a term that was also applied later on by Newton on himself) as a scientist. All that because he could not process that around the 19th century, natural sciences divorced from natural philosophy and began to revise all its premices (process still going on). I had to call him a dishonnest mockery of a human being to make him stop strawmaning, equivocating, commiting anachronisms and basically doing rhetorics... Awful, it could have been a very interesting discussion. We never got to discuss if there was any validity behind the metaphysical idea of ontological principles. I end up not even being sure that the example of phlogiston as a case of a failure of hierarchical ontological principle.
@@celiand2618 I'm not big on philosophy, so you lost me there but I'll probably read up on it. I couldn't even get the guy I was talking to understand that humans are categorically 'apes'. Despite the fact that he accepted evolution, he kept making the claim that we evolved out of the clade.
@@garrettbrown775 For humans being apes, just take Aron Ra's speech where he simply quote what makes an ape an ape... And his "so far, I've been describing people" line. Because when you give the definition of the ape clade, you ARE describing people.
Also... "evolving out of the clade" would be a violation of the law of monophyly... We are very derived, sure... So what ? The feet of proconsul were closer in shape to ours than to chimps'. They are as derived as we are, considering they took the "back to the tree" route. We got biiiig brains, they got super prehensile feet, neither present in proconsul.
I’m confused where the disconnect is. You don’t come from your cousin. You come from your grandparents. But you’re related to your cousin through that common ancestor. But you’re not your cousin, and you’re not your grandparents. Why is this simple concept so fucking difficult for these people to understand?
This dude employs common tactics of "debate" to appear reasonable and honest but is actually approaching the discussion with the intent to hide his beliefs, answers every question dishonestly, changes opinions halfway through, contradicts himself just to try to obfuscate the point. All this is because he knows that his argument is weak, but the idea isn't to prove the strength of his argument its to try to discredit and frustrate his interlocutor. By being a dishonest interlocutor who's "being reasonable" and frustrating and angering his opponents he is able to strawman by proxy, the reasoned logical argument is defeated by their own emotions. People who do this are only worthy of derision, this kind of behavior should not be welcome is arenas if discussion.
I'd also point out that every human being starts out as two separate cells, which fuse into a unicellular life form. At that stage you wouldn't be able to tell a human from an alleycat without taking it apart..
Even one of the largest apologists organizations, Answers in Genesis, has articles stating people need to stop using the argument. They are one of the largest science denying organizations and even they know the argument makes them look bad.
19:45 "unbelievable" literally made me laugh out loud. I can't believe he forced Peterson to defend a straw man point after fully explaining the point to then use Peterson's point as a gotcha 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣💀
This guy is trolling you man. He's a very sophisticated troll. Took me a little bit to catch on to him. When he reversed his point he revealed himself.
This is a test. Had this been an actual demonstration of Creationism, you would have been compelled to take it into consideration. It's just comical how I can readily grant throwing the consensus model out the door, and then, the apologist just squirms as they cannot show the evidence for their model at all.
12:32 I’m confused by what he’s claiming Eric mixed up. He said it like a dozen times and wouldn’t give up. He seems to be trying to get him to saying something that matches his misunderstanding of evolution because it’s key to his argument, but I still can’t figure out what argument he was trying to make… 😅
I'm in the process of applying for teaching positions in physics and one school I applied for was a Christian school. I looked up their curriculum today and they teach YEC. Not responding to them if they reach out.
See, the thing about Theory.. I never did find out why they dropped _Of A Dead Man_ from the band name. I should go look that up (I did, nothing exciting).
I think the basic problem is somethi g else. Mendel it is thought in schools with 2 or at max three different possibolities. In reality this nearly never happens, normaly 30 to 60 different genes inzeract and every combination gives a possible result. So you dont have two values but more gradual results and the bugs can become darker or lighter in coloration. So two different random mutations in different genes can mutate and there are more gradual changes rhT simply add up.. These mechanisms are often enough not really understood.
I sooooo much hate the word "theory" at this point. It is NEVER used correctly, NEVER EVER, EVER by any opponent of any science field. It is ALWAYS the colloquial understanding (guess/hunch), and I'm just so over it. And then people NEVER accept that they are using it wrong when that is pointed out, either. Hate it.
He was actually doing pretty well up until those last few minutes. ID supporters/evolution deniers can bring up some interesting thinkers (not saying they’re right/good), but then in the last few minutes he basically admitted his cousins were his parents…which 😒
i dont know what nebulas requirements are but could you get on there? paying 5 a month for all the creators i want to support would quickly reach multiple hundreds
The creators on Nebula have entire teams producing TV-quality videos. They have editors, script writers, artists, and more. I just rely on my wits and use iMovie.
I think I am going to try saying: Your religion believes that 500 years ago a giant eagle gave birth to a man who could fly, and if we believe in him, we will grow wings and be able to go to Valhalla. This is what happens when you let an ignoramus define terms.
Way I deal with this is to assert that evolution is as much a fact as heliocentricity. Evolutionary theory is a scientific explanation of what drives it and how it happens.
"I don't have a cousin climbing trees and eating bananas." Well good sir I am sorry your family encourages neither healthy outdoor activities nor diets. Also banana trees are not trees. But bananas are a great example on how accelerated selection (aka artificial selection) can speed up the change of the frequency in a population of otherwise randomly appearing mutations. For his family's activities, cherry picking maybe ?
So the caller asks if humans were ever unicellular and ironically that's exactly how we start off during conception. Anyway, for any theists reading this comment that don't accept evolutionary theory, people colloquially use the term theory to mean an untested, perhaps even assumed, explanation of the relevant facts. In science, theory means the same thing EXCEPT that it is rigorously tested. Scientists from everywhere perform their own tests and repeat the tests of others in order to poke holes in the theory being proposed until they can't. Evolutionary theory explains the facts in regards to biological evolution. In the same way that atomic theory or gravitational theory explains their relative facts. No theory is airtight and is always subject to revision, however this does not necessarily mean that the entire theory will be thrown out.
But don't you know Eric, that you are in fact talking to an Elitist "muslim" Ubermensch, AKA a person who knows everything better and is better than everyone... Pure logic. I mean, it even says 'Elitist "muslim" Ubermensch'. Therefore they are automatically better.
"What does it mean to be related?" "We share genetics" (ding ding, huzzah, a surprisingly good answer) A little later "Well, i am also related to a rock because we are both on the planet" (gnid gnid, taking back those dings) You gotta be really reaching if you think you're genetically related to a rock
Genetically gonna be difficult, but chemically, definitely. Now if that's the standard, needing salt and iron makes the personn a rock. That's Hovind level of refusing to understand.
You're going to see Angry Peterson in the next few videos. I was not having it with my guests during this live stream.
Best Peterson
That's fair, because a vast majority aren't even listening to your responses. They're just waiting to speak to further assert lies. No reason to treat a liar with respect.
Hey Peterson, does it help extra to subscribe to Patreon and watch your videos here? As in, do you only get revenue at patreon from the subscription, regardless of number of views?
@@ChickenHunter08 Patreon revenue is ONLY from subscriptions... there are no ads there, so video views don't matter one bit.
Eric "don't make me angry, you wouldn't like me when I'm angry" Peterson, is on a par with Kracatony, you two should do a colab, I'd love too see the pair of you tearing some of these bozos a new one!
"Being related doesn't mean we come from monkeys"
"We know that, but evolution never claimed we did, that's a huge misconception"
"But we didn't come from monkeys"
"We know, we never said that."
"But you don't listen, we never came from monkeys"
I swear, you were way too patient with this dude
I belive we do in fact come from monkeys. In the same way that we are part of the Ape category, apes are part of the Monkey category. So, in conclusion, humans are apes, apes are monkeys, therefore we are monkeys.
I love the "running out of dialogue options" joke. Calling him an NPC without calling him an NPC. So funny 😂
This is pure comedy gold
This is what you get when your entire science education comes from kent hovind VHS tapes 🤷
And the tracking needed adjustment.
Forgive me , Sir, but Dr Kent Hovind was a Betamax guy…. God’s chosen standard 🙄🤣
"Are you related to your brother? "
"Yes"
"Does that mean your brother turned into you at some point? "
Lisrening to this guy makes me think that if face palming was an automtic reaction my head would have been turned into jelly hours ago.
Caller thinks, among other ridiculous things, natural selection means the organism selects its own genes.
And he's definitely related to rocks.
God I hate mud fossil crap
100% only true thing he said all night lol
I blame TierZoo
24:42 the moment Erik's brain turned off for a few seconds. Poor guy
I was looking for something to kill myself with, but I didn't see anything
@@planetpeterson2824this the funniest thing I have ever read.
7:20 "I'm not getting it."
"I know."
Theory is just a theory when I want it too
I had to almost headbutt an otherwise cool guy to get him out of the 18th century idea that hypothesis upgraded into theory and then into laws... It's like the history of the scientific method is explained up to Newton and then abruptly stopped before reaching Darwin... And don't even begin with the last part, the peer reviewing, an actually rather old idea (17th century) but that had to wait the 20th century to be fully implemented in the process.
Not only science is rather badly taught, the very history of the discipline is swept under the rug.
I understand 2020 better. :(
I have a suspicion he may well be descended from his cousins
His older brother
must be his father.
For he kissed her,
his own sister..
His brother is his father and his sister is his mother.
25:12 The table slam and the frustration ridden "WWWHHY!" is so relatable 😂
Eric did great here. The explanations were brilliant and the outburst completely justified.
The guest was obviously extremely ignorant and proud. Once he understood he was wrong - I definitely think he did - he just became the most dishonest interlocutor ever.
BLITZ'S voice was a pleasant surprise
Blitz is always a nice addition to any conversation!
4:44 these guys are like “I’ve never read about nor even given much thought to these ideas, but I’m confident I can go into a debate with someone who debates these issues every day and THEY will be the one that looks foolish” 😂
I hate that I love this content so much
it's like these callers don't even listen, it's embarrassing
They
don't.
That's the whole point of Atheists videos. To expose their dishonesty.
Facts. Atheist content is largely just dunking on super ignorant and obviously religiously-indoctrinated people, that disprove their own statements, almost as simply as breathing. It's essentially just simple content meant to make you think. THINK!
Why call it 'atheist videos?'
It isn't just god claims that are debunked.
The whole atheist label just doesn't cut it.
Rational secularism maybe?
2:46 I wish I could be a fly in the wall in his brain. I just wanted to know what he heard, how his brain processed what he heard to get to the response that he just gave. This is so fascinating. You can explain it to them and then only a few moments later they forget the whole explanation that they just heard.
It's the cognitive dissonance syndrome, they are confronted with the fact they hold two totally opposing views at the same time . He has to accept we are genetically related to everything and then deny that means we were not created, but evolved, as everything else is. That is why he simply cannot make the obvious conclusion when presented with the evidence. Agree with everything Peterson says until the last step because of his belief, dismissing the evidence he agreed with up till then.
Their sheer ignorance is shocking
The correct response to "this is what evolution/science says" from a science denier is
"You don't know what evolution/science says. You have been repeatedly corrected by someone who does and continue to refuse to take that correction. Please admit that you have been wrong about what science/evolution says AT EVERY POINT and accept correction from those who clearly know what they're talking about when YOU do not.. "
We would LOVE to see someone do this as their big THING!
Everytime with the “evolution is just a theory”
For the dim dims that repeat this, a scientific theory is a collection of facts and evidence used to explain an observed phenomenon.
A scientific theory is the highest accolade that science can give
Exactly.
He told him this and he still kept saying it. He doesn't listen, doesn't care, doesn't understand. He's a human with a brain that can't think beyond instinct.
That phrase alone is enough to establish they don't have a good grasp on the subject.
We should stop letting those types of people use scientific explanations for anything. Just like how we need to stop letting flat earthers use Google earth in their evidence. If they want to dismiss science that proves evolution then we get to claim we prayed about it and God says it's true.
Don't stop there, nothing new has been said from theistic side for centuries.
The list of arguments for a god is a lot shorter than most realise.
I've been at this for like 12 years now, daily, I've never seen anything that isn't on the list.
Iron chariots had them all written down, but I don't know if that site is still active.
Scientific Theory
"A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can, in accordance with the scientific method, be repeatedly tested, using a predefined protocol of observations and experiments. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and are a comprehensive form of scientific knowledge.
It is important to note that the definition of a "scientific theory" (often ambiguously contracted to "theory" for the sake of brevity, including in this page) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from the common vernacular usage of the word "theory". In everyday non-scientific speech, "theory" can imply that something is an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, conjecture, idea, or, hypothesis; such a usage is the opposite of the word "theory" in science. These different usages are comparable to the differing, and often opposing, usages of the term "prediction" in science versus "prediction" in vernacular speech, denoting a mere hope.
Both scientific laws and scientific theories are produced from the scientific method through the formation and testing of hypotheses, and can predict the behavior of the natural world. Both are typically well-supported by observations and/or experimental evidence. However, scientific laws are descriptive accounts of how nature will behave under certain conditions. Scientific theories are broader in scope, and give overarching explanations of how nature works and why it exhibits certain characteristics. Theories are supported by evidence from many different sources, and may contain one or several laws.
A common misconception is that scientific theories are rudimentary ideas that will eventually graduate into scientific laws when enough data and evidence have been accumulated. A theory does not change into a scientific law with the accumulation of new or better evidence. A theory will always remain a theory; a law will always remain a law. Both theories and laws could potentially be falsified by countervailing evidence.
Theories and laws are also distinct from hypotheses. Unlike hypotheses, *theories and laws may be simply referred to as scientific fact.* However, in science, theories are different from facts even when they are well supported. For example, *evolution is both a theory and a fact."*
-Wiki^
I think he was trying to claim that people being "related" actually means that they are made from the same materials using the "same" blueprint.
He was trying to deny the need for shared ancestry, the implication being that it's intelligent design by a creator.
Jeeeeeesus, that was rough.. 🤦♂️
13:38 that's called deterministic. There are factors in the environment that cause mutations. Where mutation will happen is random. Why it happens is not random
I encountered someone doing the exact same thing in a youtube comment. He kept repeating that related isnt the same as descending from that organism. I continued telling him until the very end that no one is claiming that. Im not sure how they are so confused about the meaning of the word "related".
I had that with someone getting phlogiston concept from the philosophers reinterpreted, in his mind, as the phlogistic theory to put it in the field of science and who dubbed what was a natural philosopher (a term that was also applied later on by Newton on himself) as a scientist. All that because he could not process that around the 19th century, natural sciences divorced from natural philosophy and began to revise all its premices (process still going on).
I had to call him a dishonnest mockery of a human being to make him stop strawmaning, equivocating, commiting anachronisms and basically doing rhetorics... Awful, it could have been a very interesting discussion.
We never got to discuss if there was any validity behind the metaphysical idea of ontological principles.
I end up not even being sure that the example of phlogiston as a case of a failure of hierarchical ontological principle.
For humans and chimps at least I often at least manage to explain that the gramps of humans and chimps is called a proconsul.
@@celiand2618 I'm not big on philosophy, so you lost me there but I'll probably read up on it. I couldn't even get the guy I was talking to understand that humans are categorically 'apes'. Despite the fact that he accepted evolution, he kept making the claim that we evolved out of the clade.
@@garrettbrown775 For humans being apes, just take Aron Ra's speech where he simply quote what makes an ape an ape... And his "so far, I've been describing people" line.
Because when you give the definition of the ape clade, you ARE describing people.
Also... "evolving out of the clade" would be a violation of the law of monophyly... We are very derived, sure... So what ? The feet of proconsul were closer in shape to ours than to chimps'. They are as derived as we are, considering they took the "back to the tree" route. We got biiiig brains, they got super prehensile feet, neither present in proconsul.
I’m confused where the disconnect is. You don’t come from your cousin. You come from your grandparents. But you’re related to your cousin through that common ancestor. But you’re not your cousin, and you’re not your grandparents. Why is this simple concept so fucking difficult for these people to understand?
It doesn't matter, the guy isn't capable of thinking beyond instinct.
It is simple to understand, it's just they don't want to.
lack of critical thinking
Cognitive dissonance that stems from theism. They’re mind won’t allow them to accept it.
This dude employs common tactics of "debate" to appear reasonable and honest but is actually approaching the discussion with the intent to hide his beliefs, answers every question dishonestly, changes opinions halfway through, contradicts himself just to try to obfuscate the point. All this is because he knows that his argument is weak, but the idea isn't to prove the strength of his argument its to try to discredit and frustrate his interlocutor. By being a dishonest interlocutor who's "being reasonable" and frustrating and angering his opponents he is able to strawman by proxy, the reasoned logical argument is defeated by their own emotions.
People who do this are only worthy of derision, this kind of behavior should not be welcome is arenas if discussion.
The last time I saw my grandfather he said "Gravity is only a theory!" And then he jumped off the roof. Never saw him again after that.
Did he float away?
"evolution still remains a theory" "atomic theory" "IT'S NOT THE SAME" how do people not get it
"Were we as humans unicellular?"
Welllllll, when a mommy and a daddy love each other VERY much...
I'd also point out that every human being starts out as two separate cells, which fuse into a unicellular life form. At that stage you wouldn't be able to tell a human from an alleycat without taking it apart..
Even one of the largest apologists organizations, Answers in Genesis, has articles stating people need to stop using the argument. They are one of the largest science denying organizations and even they know the argument makes them look bad.
Which one? The “just a theory” argument?
19:45 "unbelievable" literally made me laugh out loud. I can't believe he forced Peterson to defend a straw man point after fully explaining the point to then use Peterson's point as a gotcha 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣💀
The anger was justified in my opinion everybody saying chill should try talkin to idiots for extended periods of time 😂
18:24 LOLOLOL
This guy is trolling you man. He's a very sophisticated troll. Took me a little bit to catch on to him. When he reversed his point he revealed himself.
Im related to my sister, we dont look alike and one is not from the other. But we are related... Unless i was adopted and that makes sense sometimes.
FE Dora was definitely adopted.
@@ottomaddoxx5360 we surely aren't related 😉
This is a test. Had this been an actual demonstration of Creationism, you would have been compelled to take it into consideration.
It's just comical how I can readily grant throwing the consensus model out the door, and then, the apologist just squirms as they cannot show the evidence for their model at all.
"Mutations are not random."
Wow! I believe in Jesus now.
That thumbnail belongs in a museum
‘ 💥 GOD DAMN IT’ 😭😭
The moment a theist says "Evolution is a theory" you should ask them to learn how Science works and save yourself half an hour of your life.
.
LOLZ
Next level tactics. Reverse carded your ass 😂 a few times. Your neighbors probably have questions for you too haha
We all felt the anger you displayed in this video. Angry Peterson speaks for all of us.
9:00 hes talking about evolution and language barrier aside hes basically correct
12:32 I’m confused by what he’s claiming Eric mixed up. He said it like a dozen times and wouldn’t give up. He seems to be trying to get him to saying something that matches his misunderstanding of evolution because it’s key to his argument, but I still can’t figure out what argument he was trying to make… 😅
This was a troll and you stepped in his trap. LOL
Every human was "unicellular organism" at some point. It's called Zygote.
There was no need to ask this guy if he had cousins. It's clear they gave birth to him.
I'm in the process of applying for teaching positions in physics and one school I applied for was a Christian school. I looked up their curriculum today and they teach YEC. Not responding to them if they reach out.
dad plz ur scaring me
Holy shit, I think the wind in the head of this guy was the reason for the hurricanes
See, the thing about Theory..
I never did find out why they dropped _Of A Dead Man_ from the band name. I should go look that up (I did, nothing exciting).
If I understand evolution badly enough maybe then it won't be real. ~ npc guy.
Yes, you were one cell big once.
Literal brainrot from that guy. No wonder you got pissed off.
I think the basic problem is somethi g else. Mendel it is thought in schools with 2 or at max three different possibolities. In reality this nearly never happens, normaly 30 to 60 different genes inzeract and every combination gives a possible result. So you dont have two values but more gradual results and the bugs can become darker or lighter in coloration. So two different random mutations in different genes can mutate and there are more gradual changes rhT simply add up.. These mechanisms are often enough not really understood.
*_Friendship!_*
“I’m related to a rock”
Yeah… you both have the same amount of brain cells…
Eric, did you saw the documantation about how the Neandethal might be extinct? On „Curiosity“! Verry fascinating!
"did" "saw"
You didn't major in English, did you?
A Dutch person.
The tactic is to assign you an indefensible belief and demand you defent it.
It's not proper science denial if you don't spend ages trying to argue semantics of specific words that don't really make any difference to the topic
I sooooo much hate the word "theory" at this point. It is NEVER used correctly, NEVER EVER, EVER by any opponent of any science field. It is ALWAYS the colloquial understanding (guess/hunch), and I'm just so over it. And then people NEVER accept that they are using it wrong when that is pointed out, either. Hate it.
Wow, painful
There's nothing eternal, and I'm not even a nihilist
8:06 Who is generalizing now? 😂 He wants so bad to get his talking points out.
He was actually doing pretty well up until those last few minutes.
ID supporters/evolution deniers can bring up some interesting thinkers (not saying they’re right/good), but then in the last few minutes he basically admitted his cousins were his parents…which 😒
He did beat you clearly at the end there.
I think he is really related to that rock he mentioned..
i dont know what nebulas requirements are but could you get on there? paying 5 a month for all the creators i want to support would quickly reach multiple hundreds
The creators on Nebula have entire teams producing TV-quality videos. They have editors, script writers, artists, and more. I just rely on my wits and use iMovie.
and we love u for it ♡
I think that as well
I think I am going to try saying: Your religion believes that 500 years ago a giant eagle gave birth to a man who could fly, and if we believe in him, we will grow wings and be able to go to Valhalla.
This is what happens when you let an ignoramus define terms.
And that 6th commandment of yours, the one that you can’t have chocolate….
Stupid is a s Stupid does......
I was at this livestream🤘
What the hell is happening. He doesn't understand or just doesn't want to.
"Evolution is random, that is a problem"
"No it isn't"
"Evolution is not random, that is a problem"
Ok, he is trolling.
Way I deal with this is to assert that evolution is as much a fact as heliocentricity. Evolutionary theory is a scientific explanation of what drives it and how it happens.
Is the revenue you get from TH-cam Premium subscribers also reduced by TH-cam?
The dishonesty of religious people are expected
"I don't have a cousin climbing trees and eating bananas."
Well good sir I am sorry your family encourages neither healthy outdoor activities nor diets. Also banana trees are not trees. But bananas are a great example on how accelerated selection (aka artificial selection) can speed up the change of the frequency in a population of otherwise randomly appearing mutations.
For his family's activities, cherry picking maybe ?
I believe in evolution, it makes sense to me everything is special, living or not, and their relation to hydrogen and or carbon
I LOVE U
7:39 why the fuck do they need other ppl to play make believe too??
The guy wasn't smart enough to have an intelligent conversation, let alone have one about scientific subjects like evolution.
Excellent trolling.
8:10
A "theory" is not a fact, like how a fire truck is not a fire...
So the caller asks if humans were ever unicellular and ironically that's exactly how we start off during conception.
Anyway, for any theists reading this comment that don't accept evolutionary theory, people colloquially use the term theory to mean an untested, perhaps even assumed, explanation of the relevant facts. In science, theory means the same thing EXCEPT that it is rigorously tested. Scientists from everywhere perform their own tests and repeat the tests of others in order to poke holes in the theory being proposed until they can't.
Evolutionary theory explains the facts in regards to biological evolution. In the same way that atomic theory or gravitational theory explains their relative facts. No theory is airtight and is always subject to revision, however this does not necessarily mean that the entire theory will be thrown out.
It's frustrating listening to people like this arguing in bad faith over things they don't understand and stubbornly don't want to.
evolution is not a theory; the theory of evolution is a theory. all theory begins with a fact. theory attempts to explain the fact.
KEvron
Damn theists commercials
Derp!
But don't you know Eric, that you are in fact talking to an Elitist "muslim" Ubermensch, AKA a person who knows everything better and is better than everyone...
Pure logic.
I mean, it even says 'Elitist "muslim" Ubermensch'. Therefore they are automatically better.
"What does it mean to be related?"
"We share genetics" (ding ding, huzzah, a surprisingly good answer)
A little later
"Well, i am also related to a rock because we are both on the planet" (gnid gnid, taking back those dings)
You gotta be really reaching if you think you're genetically related to a rock
Genetically gonna be difficult, but chemically, definitely. Now if that's the standard, needing salt and iron makes the personn a rock. That's Hovind level of refusing to understand.
Peterson is wrong here - mutations are random - i.e. all of them one way or another product of quantum processes - which are truly random.
…it isn’t random due to selection and environmental pressures. #ReadAndLearn
@@niaralosusa mutations are random, selection is not.
There was only one person over generalizing and that person was not Peterson… just wow
You know, this guy keeps using words I don’t think he knows what they mean
This caller does not know the first thing about evolution. You can tell he's been deliberately taught it wrong.
Dude is trying to gaslight Peterson