Discussion on MythVision Podcast (James Tour Debate - Featuring Aron Ra) 

Very Eustace Baggs of him.

I played the first 3 seconds back 5 times and laughed like a toddler each time

Just watched his Noah’s Ark series last night, and the first video ends with “SHUT UP, BIRD”

​@@raya.p.l5919liar

I think everyone at this point should know, when you invite Aron, there's going to be animal noises 🤣

Olala, did not watch that, not worth my time.

I take it your chosen RU-vid name is a Supernatural TV show reference?

From your perspective, is it negligent of Rice +/or Tour when he says repeatedly he counsels his students NOT to enter the OoL field? & that Rice lets him accuse people like Lee Cronin of being a scammer? I'm surprised the university lets him get away with either or both behaviours, along with what you point out.

@@sotecluxan4221 Yet you are commenting? Why?

​@@picahudsoniaunflocked5426they're sharing their particular thoughts on the 'debate'

It clearly was the only viable approach whatsoever. Sure it would've been nice to have more of a proper debate but it wasn't going to happen. He even tried to bring up relevant points like Systems Chemistry and Tour just refused to accept and went right back to his script.

​@@Nirual86you can't debate when the moderator is not only ignorant, but on the other side.

@@antediluvianatheist5262 that obviously doesn't help either ofc but Tour's behaviour was the biggest issue by far.

I'd seen so many of Dave's video's that lead up to the debate, and, when you do, you know that Dave knows he's not going to convince Tour, as Tour was not an honest interlocutor in the tiniest sense. Dave came as prepared as he could knowing he was facing someone who was just dancing to his base, and simply attempted to expose that fact by showing the pattern, knowing his work would stand scrutiny by those who were actually knowledgeable on the subject. I thought Dave did a great job, given this situation.

cry-bully is a great term for Tour.

i find it odd that he's quite happy for nature to be doing _this_ bit of the process, but then the _next_ bit requires god cos it's soooo complex, and then nature can take over again after....and as always what it amounts to is "god picked a really complex process that was unlikely to achieve his desired result" it's stupid to argue things are too complicated for nature.

Aron: *gets on stream* Dog: It's time to sing the song of my people.

Very clear that it’s the hound of heaven trying to bring Aron to the truth.

@@sammavitae114That the Lizard people are guarding us from the outside word, where living pyromaniac dinosaurs live.

I look forward to them!

I briefly explain how totally wrong headed Dave and Aaron Ra are on evolution

Good point. Like he tells his students not to enter the OoL field. Yeah, I'm shocked there hasn't been more focus on how much he harms his students with his obsessions. I have a feeling that could + should be a video all its own.

@@picahudsoniaunflocked5426 With all the conservatives losing their minds over so called "grooming," this is simply another example of them projecting their own behavior onto others as we watch people like Tour performing precisely what they are accusing others of doing.

yup, he has snakes. Lots of snakes

​@@diemwingI

Lol u just made me realize that

Must be those spectroscopy containers flat earth dave talked so much about 😂

Sneks!

He boiled for you.

Happy birthday, prematurely/late/whenever it comes, then...remember FSM brought you Aron's creatures too! Don't forget to make a wish for your year, one for every hole in the colander!

@@rembrandt972ify my Creamy Saucy Saviour😇

R'amen to that, brother!

*Mr. LeQuack. He's a "doctor" that's completely undeserving of a PhD.

You don't need experience to get good at debates. The arguments will hold by themselves if they have evidence and reason. Watching Peterson vs Matt is like looking at 2 toddlers arguing. At this point debates are just ego competitions. Besides nobody is that open to a change of mind. If you are a scientist and you are telling facts that should be enough and people can think about what you just said, but at the moment the debate starts to get ideology in it it's just an ego showdown.

That, and to use up Dave’s time drawing complicated diagrams that almost none of the audience understands anyway

Yeah when James went full Karen in front of the Blackboard was hilarious.

Oh geez that'd be hilarious to put fake binaural beats under it, sample his screaming, & throw some effects on it to satirize & call it "Relax with Tour ASMR Cosmic Binaural"🤣 I wish I had the skills

Haha, you've got thousands of hours of Ra magic weaving ( sic ) to negotiate yet 😎

you should not , watch his videos - he is trying to trick you, into believing in dinosaurs L0Lz

@@HNH421 why would I not think dinosaurs exist if there is so much evidence supporting the claim?

@@keypey8256 prove that god did not put the bones in the rock when he created them 5000 years ago

@@HNH421 I can prove that dinosaurs didn't exist 5000 years ago. Would that be enough?

I wanna check out his twitter but the app is so fucking broken i cant do shit

What's his Twitter? I didn't find a link on his channel

​@@kingmenelaus7083daveexplains I'm reading the arguments with the virus deniers now

@@Nanomusheens found him, thanks homie

My god, reading through some of the replies for his tweets just makes me want to die. How can people be so utterly dumb to believe that viruses are fake? If it's so fake, why don't they go infect themselves with malaria? It's not real, so it can't hurt them, right?

as a person with an art degree in art and drawing stuff, and also having spent an enormous amount of time in halo and assassin's creed, it is a joy to see folks like tour shouting childishly as if a piece of performance art.

Not sure, because many (if not most) people will only stay on one side and only see the entire debates through one person, who can of course make it look like they're winning no matter what. In face-to-face debates both audiences have to face each other and hear the arguments whether they want to or not.

@@temari2860 I didn't mean the idea of going through just one person, but presenting a case with time to research and then receiving a like response. You could still have debate rules---e.g. every response is posted, length limits, etc. The issue I have with live debates is that it is much easier to make up BS than it is to debunk it. It takes time to do the research to debunk a thing. Also, it seems to reward quick-wittedness and on-the-spot charisma over the actual arguments for a position. In the past, such person-to-person debates were much more beneficial in a relative sense because the research was much more time-consuming. So the best option for the public was to have two real experts who have more facts than everybody else at their disposal present them in good faith. But now, research is easier. A video response could come quickly and still involve research and even links so that those viewing can fact-check the sources.

The big problem was the moderator. When Dave called James out, the moderator should have said 'the court will wait for an answer'.

@@captainkong But people can change their minds. One of my favorite cases was this one. Fry and Hitchens not only clearly won this debate, but the audience polled before and after drastically changed their views. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-JZRcYaAYWg4.html&ab_channel=IntelligenceSquared

@@wefinishthisnow3883 hoped someone would dig into the moderator more. He didn't seem to understand the event, the rules, the science, the personal dynamics, moderation...bewildering choice.

Probably so the host and maker of the video gets most of the views. If they release at the same time then they split the views because most viewers would only watch one video once

Yeah to give them time with it, and also I did a bunch of these right after the debate and it's better to spread them out.

Ah, that makes sense.

Thanks for saying this from your perspective. I'm frustrated by people over-focusing on tone (just from Dave, tho!).

@@picahudsoniaunflocked5426 Yeah a lot of people call him out when he was calm the entire time while not mentioning the degree to which James was a screeching toddler for an hour if not more. Kinda not seeing the full picture of how Dave drove James into acting like that with a smile on his face lol

You don't have to be"gentle", but getting everyone offside by calling people name off the bat won't win anyone over. How much better would it have been if Dave was civil because Tour still would have lost his shit and no one would be talking about what Dave did. Never heard anyone call Dave out for being calm - do these people not know how debates are meant to be conducted? Generally speaking remaining calm is a win.

Derek shills too hard for my liking.

I do have to ask, do you know anybody who got "shocked out of willful ignorance"?

THANK YOU.

@@Trombi01 Yes, I know at least 3 people who in different ways did. You probably do too, you just haven't thought deeply about it.

@@picahudsoniaunflocked5426 Would you like to give an example?

@@Trombi01 I heard a story of a person who lived in the southern Hemisphere, and traveled to the USA to meet some friends. He had a whole mind-blown core-shaking moment when he saw the full moon appeared “flipped”. He nearly fell over from staring up for so long. He described how that moment really made him “feel”/realize the Earth was a globe. (He was also the one who posted the story).

Dave's a genre pioneer, not surprised other educators are taking inspiration from his practices. The science communicators I know personally are all really overworked & usually appreciate others who do what they do, as long as they do it well & aren't plagiarizing. There's lots of room in the field & Dave stands out regardless. Unless Adam's copying his material or not on the way to finding his own style, I don't see a problem. The name similarity could be as much an homage to Dave or to signal he's in Dave's genre as anything else. It's not a bad move, & you seem to have had good experiences with his material. I guess I'm trying to parse your comment for why it's here? Do you want to let others know there's another good channel to follow, are you worried he's too close to Dave's channel, or are you suggesting a collab, or that they could coordinate material sometimes to save doubling up on work?

@@picahudsoniaunflocked5426 Dave invented the educational video?

I could sort of understand if Tour was flustered by the debate format when he’s used to one-way lectures, EXCEPT he does the same shouty thing in his own solo videos! It’s his only technique when he cannot prove a point; he starts yelling “CLUELESS!” as if volume correlated to veracity.

of course he is a villain !!! only someone truly , evil' would believe in dinosaurs L0Lz

@@HNH421 I can’t tell if your serious or if your being sarcastic. If your serious I don’t have time for you if you aren’t that shit is hilarious lol.

@@azazelsiad3601 the dinosaurs that are very small , are far away.

Picturing Captain Hook aren't you? Lol

i really like his mug tho it looks damn amazing

That sounds like he indeed did something unrightfull.

@@damianferr390 dave was right alrighty. mighty righty alrighty.

Agreed. The characters of proven liars like JimmyT deserve - and when as prominent as he: nééd - to be destroyed.

@@marknieuweboer8099Bingo! 🎯

Agreed. It's disappointing how much tone policing is being done. Esp on unequal terms. I don't hear many people on either side talking about how rude + mean Tour was to Dave, yet he's been awful, & Dave has supporters worrying about harshness on the debunk side. It's a red herring. I like the way Dave argues, & I'm for civility when someone is being civil back. Lying, yelling, reputation-destroying, deliberately steering people away from the truth, trying to bully your religion's way into non-religious fields, dehumanization of opposing perspectives --- none of that is civil, & Dave's approach is warranted. The gift Tour gave him was a dominance move obvious to anyone who's been watching all the videos as this progressed. If you go back & watch his first video on Tour, Dave gives him so much benefit of the doubt, it's amazing to watch in hindsight how willing he was to give Tour grace. Tour proceeded to violently shred any splinter of goodwill or illusion of acting in good faith. Dave's responded according to Tour's provocations + escalations. As a culture, we need to learn how not to be manipulated by cheap appeals to politeness when the end goal of an argument is absurd or authoritarian or destructive lies --- they deserve scorn + outrage.

@@picahudsoniaunflocked5426 tour wore a tie, dave did not.

Yes she already wrote the scripts! I will start working on it soon.

​@@ProfessorDaveExplainsthat will be amazing.

​@@ProfessorDaveExplainsthis will be EPIC

@@albertomartinez714 Nah, Erika is insanely intelligent and would be a far better creator to collaborate with for educational purposes, especially since anthropology is the field she specializes in. And please, we're supposed to act professionally when it comes to science. Keep your misogynistic and racial biases out of scientific discussions.

Omg I can’t wait. Love, a 50 yr old former YEC now trying to get a biology degree

Who is Aaron?

Which was one time.

@@ProfessorDaveExplains Oh really? I'll have to rewatch it then, because I thought they reacted every time. Still, pretty funny!

@@robwright8949 I only swore once, but they did gasp like toddlers and an older woman left.

@ProfessorDaveExplains HA! Wow. It's amazing you can nail their savior to wood, but we draw the line at "hurtful" dialogue. Amazing

Light takes time to travel. It takes 8 minutes for light to travel from the Sun to the Earth, so when we look at the Sun we see it as it was 8 minutes ago. Likewise, if a galaxy is 100 million light-years from Earth, we see it as it was 100 million years ago.

Check my astronomy playlist.

@@ProfessorDaveExplains Thanks :)

I hope you go into OoL outta spite + fascination & win a Nobel

Yes check my channel. I posted it two months ago.

Architects make plans. Nature does the building.

@@spankduncan1114 bad example; in reference of architects making plans, builders would do the building.. anyway, whats your point?

@janolthof2487 there is no architect. Just nature.

@@spankduncan1114 then we agree, no God involved

@@spankduncan1114 " there is no architect. Just nature" tell that to Neo.

There's gotta be an RFK Jr video soon, now that he's so visible, I bet Prof Dave's working on a response to his Rogan appearance. Or I hope so!

Debunk of anti vaxxers is telling of your credibity..and your followers

Technically Aron was at the debate, so only since the debate happened.

They’re both pretty busy fellas I’d imagine

Tour has been badmouthing Dave for years. I understand his irritation with him.

I agree I thought it was a waste of time too, but Dave wanted to publicly confront Tour, for all the good that will do. I'm sure he is getting a lot of pats on the back from fanbois and the echo chamber, but how does one measure any effect?

hal 😃 cute🥰 why did you do that? 🥰

The problem is rather that way too many believers think that their god send them to say something about science.

Um, James pretended to praise me on my chemistry tutorials while having told his audience for years that I'm a moron who doesn't understand chemistry. He was being a disingenuous two-faced piece of shit, and I exposed him for it right in that very moment. It was brilliant. Everyone was laughing at him.

@@ProfessorDaveExplains You're not wrong, and you overall did a great job in the debate, especially your ability to remain calm, but I think you missed Zach's point. Zach was not saying to not do it, but just to not overdo it. In debates, generally the first person to resort to personal attacks loses, but because as you said in the video that your opponent did not come to debate in good faith and had previously personally attacked you with recorded evidence, I think you are right and it was fine to make an exception here and call him out as a liar with listing the reason for his lies like you did. Your point was made very well early on, but just the personal attacks didn't need repeating later in the debate (still call out his lies though as you did). To then attack the audience would probably trigger something akin to the psychological phenomenon known as the backfire effect which will trigger their defensive survival instinct, in their minds label you as a threat not to be trusted which would shut them off from you resulting in them being entirely unconvinced by you no matter what you say. But I give you credit here because as a random internet commenter hiding behind a screen, I wasn't there and I can only imagine how difficult hearing the constant heckles were, especially those that weren't all captured on the recording. In reality I would probably start to grow tired of it myself and react the same. Having said that, Zach is only offering an alternative way of winning audiences over. You're not there to debate them, you're there to convince them by debating James. Charming the audience like you did at the start with saying how they use your material to pass James' class was brilliant, so the ideal is to just keep doing more of that. There are many other psychological tricks you can try. Maybe try cracking a joke when they boo like 'I'll be sure to put your boos in my next study materials for your upcoming exams'? Dawkin's likes to ask the audience a question like 'why is that funny?' or 'what is wrong with that?' or perhaps if you can sneak it past the moderator, single out one audience member to ask why they booed and when they sheepishly respond with a non answer, quickly humiliate that individual with your superior knowledge over their lack of knowledge to manipulate the audience into stopping the heckling out of fear of being singled out for humiliation as well (aka psychological deterrence). The main idea is to seem in complete control even when the audience heckles you. Jimmy Carr is a master at this, but he's a professional and it's much easier said than done in the heat of the moment, especially with an angry idiot on the other side of the room yelling and writing nonsense on a chalkboard as a debate strategy. As a former creationist who used to be like and use the same arguments as creationists like James, I think you did an outstanding job and clearly won the debate by a mile.

The chance of Dave "converting" even one of Tour's acolytes was already zero. Tour stacked the auditorium with people who believe as he does.

@@Dreamline78 I was once one of those creationists (born into the church) who would have supported Tour and after James' performance, I would be questioning my beliefs. Nobody that deep in converts overnight. You are right that nobody was going to lose their faith from anything Dave said. But over time, looking into the facts and the evidence eventually worked for me and in my experience it takes seeds of doubt which can be planted by overwhelming evidence. This doesn't work for some people because not everyone has the brains, willpower or desire for objective/scientific truth that are required to properly examine evidence and judge impartially. Those people tend to hold beliefs more based on emotion than fact, so emotional arguments might hold more sway for them.

@ProfessorDaveExplains I understand that in other videos he's said your stupid or whatever. We all know ppl get carried away when making videos, and name calling especially when the other person isn't their to either pu ch you or defend themselves. But Dave, u said the exact same things about James. So let's call that even. The point is yall we're asked, as a sign of goodwill, to say something nice or something you admire about the other person. James took that opportunity to take the high road and actually compliment you. You didn't take the high road. The idea that you can't have normal human manners for a minute or 2 because he said mean things in other videos is just an excuse. At the end of the day, he's a guy you have a disagreement with. He isn't the killer of your mom and dad, wife or kids. You're nor being asked to give 1 compliment to Jeffery Dahmer or Ted Bundy. He's an academic with questionable conclusions. There are alot worse things u can be in this world than a bad scientist or even a liar. Murderers, pedophiles, racists ect. They may deserve this treatment and even then I think we should try and show all humans sympathy, empathy and understanding even if you think they're worthless. This is just a moral preference for me so there's no real logical argument I can give ultimately. I do appreciate the comment dave and I think you're the man. I just don't like us skeptics/Atheists to appear like hostile smug know it all assholes who think we're better thN religious ppl just based on our beliefs, even if they are 100% correct and theirs aren't. Because ultimately, that's a big reason I dislike religion and especially the self righteous religious maniac. Because they are know-it- all assholea that get their knowledge and authority from a sky daddy and his special book with silly stories.

1) Genesis wasn’t first (most cosmological myths have a part on the creation of life) 2) It’s abiogenesis, not spontaneous generation (the latter was disproved by the Pasteur experiments)