I am thankful for Dr. Tour's intellect and scholarship, but more than that I am thankful for his passion for Christ and how visible it is. May the Lord equip and raise up more servants possessed by the same love and devotion for Jesus that Dr. Tour demonstrates.
Watching from Australia. Dr James Tour is right up there....along with J.S. Bach as one of my heroes! Tour is a giant among puny, anaemic, post modern peddlers of secular superstition.
Maybe you should learn the origins of the fictional Abrahamic god. *Although the biblical narratives depict Yahweh as the sole creator god, lord of the universe, and god of the Israelites especially, initially he seems to have been Canaanite in origin and subordinate to the supreme god El.* Canaanite inscriptions mention a lesser god Yahweh and even the biblical Book of Deuteronomy stipulates that *“the Most High, El,* gave to the nations their inheritance” and that “Yahweh's portion is his people, Jacob and his allotted heritage” (32:8-9). A passage like this reflects the early beliefs of the Canaanites and Israelites in polytheism or, more accurately, henotheism (the belief in many gods with a focus on a single supreme deity). *The claim that Israel always only acknowledged one god is a later belief cast back on the early days of Israel's development in Canaan.* *It is generally accepted in the modern day, however, that Yahweh originated in southern Canaan as a lesser god in the Canaanite pantheon* and the Shasu, as nomads, most likely acquired their worship of him during their time in the Levant. *Yahweh in the Canaanite Pantheon* The biblical narrative, however, is not as straightforward as it may seem as it also includes reference to the Canaanite god El whose name is directly referenced in `Israel' (He Who Struggles with God or He Who Perseveres with God). *El was the chief deity of the Canaanite pantheon and the god who, according to the Bible, gave Yahweh authority over the Israelites:* When the *Most High [El]* gave to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of men, he fixed the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the Sons of God. For Yahweh's portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage. (Deuteronomy 32:8-9, Masoretic Text). The Canaanites, like all ancient civilizations, worshipped many gods but chief among them was the sky-god El. *In this passage from Deuteronomy, El gives each of the gods authority over a segment of the people of earth and Yahweh is assigned to the Israelites who, in time, will make him their supreme and only deity; but it is clear he existed beforehand as a lesser Canaanite god.* Yahweh, according to Amzallag, was transformed from one god among many to the supreme deity by the Israelites in the Iron Age (c.1200-930 BCE) when iron replaced bronze and the copper smelters, whose craft was seen as a kind of transformative magic, lost their unique status. *In this new age, the Israelites in Canaan sought to distance themselves from their neighbors in order to consolidate political and military strength and so elevated Yahweh above El as the supreme being and claimed him as their own.* His association with the forge, and with imagery of fire, smoke, and smiting, worked as well in describing a god of storms and war and so Yahweh's character changed from a deity of transformation to one of conquest. *As the Israelites developed their community in Canaan, they sought to distance themselves from their neighbors and, as noted, elevated Yahweh above the traditional Canaanite supreme deity El.* They did not, however, embrace monotheism at this time. The Israelites remained a henotheistic people through the time of the Judges, which predates the rise of the monarchy, and throughout the time of the Kingdom of Israel (c.1080-c. 722). Google *"Yahweh - **WorldHistory.Org.**"* Watch Dr Christine Hayes at Yale University. Watch lecture 7 from 30:00 minutes onwards and lecture 8 from 12:00 to 19:00 minutes. Google *"Jews and Arabs Descended from Canaanites - Biblical Archaeology Society."* Google *"Canaanite Religion - New World Encyclopaedia."* Google *"Canaanite Religion - **Realhistoryww.com**"* Google *"Canaanite Phoenician Origin of the God of the Israelites."* Google *"The Phoenician God Resheph in the Bible - Is That in the Bible?"* Google *"God's Wife Edited Out of the Bible - Almost."* Google *"Yahweh's Divorce from the Goddess Asherah in the Garden of Eden - Mythology Matters."* Google *"Married Deities: Asherah and Yahweh in Early Israelite Religion - Yahweh Elohim."* Google *"How the Jews Invented God and Made Him Great- Archaeology - Haaretz."* Google *"The Invention of God - Maclean's"* Google *"The Boundaries of the Nations - Yahweh Elohim."* Google *"Excerpt from “Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan” by John Day - Lehi's Library."* Google *"How Did the Bible’s Editors Conceal Evidence of Israelite Polytheism - Evolution of God by Robert Wright."* Google *"A Theologically Revised Text: Deuteronomy 32:8-9 - Ancient Hebrew Poetry."* Google *"Biblical Contradiction #3: Which God is the Creator of the Heavens and Earth: Yahweh or El?"* Google *"Biblical Contradiction #27. Are Yahweh and El the Same God or Not?"* Google *"Mark Smith: "Yahweh as El’s Son & Yahweh's Ascendancy - Lehi's Library."* Google *"Quartz Hill School of Theology - B425 Ugarit and the Bible."* Google *"The Origins of Yahweh and the Revived Kenite Hypothesis - Is That in the Bible?"* Google *"Yahweh, god of metallurgy - Fewer Lacunae."* Google *"Polytheistic Roots of Israelite Religion - Fewer Lacunae."* Google *"Biblical Polytheism - Bob Seidensticker."* Google *"Combat Myth: The Curious Story of Yahweh and the Gods Who Preceded Him - Bob Seidensticker."* Google *"Religious Studies: El, Yahweh and the Development of Monotheism in Ancient Israel."* Google *"Decoupling YHWH and El - Daniel O. McClellan."* Google *"Yhwh, God of Edom - Daniel O. McClellan."* Google *"The Most Heiser: Yahweh and Elyon in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32 - Religion at the Margins"* based on the *majority scholarly consensus.*
The end is near? *The Bible’s New Testament contains a drumbeat of promises that Jesus is ready to return any day now, implying that it will happen so soon that it would be wise to keep it in mind when making any kind of life decision. But it didn’t happen.* The following is a sample of verses professing this theme: Matt 10:23: [Jesus said to his disciples] *‘When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next;* ***for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel, before the Son of man comes’.*** (They fled through the towns but the Son of Man never came) Matt 16:28: [Jesus said to the disciples], *‘Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death* before they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom’. Mark 9:1: And he [Jesus] said to them [the disciples], *‘Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death* before they see that the kingdom of God has come with power’. Mark 13:30: *[After detailing events up to end of world, Jesus says]* ‘Truly, I say to you, ***this generation will not pass away before all these things take place’.*** Mark 14:62: And Jesus said ***[to the high priest - died 1st cent. AD]*** ‘You will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven’. (The high priest died and never saw the Son of Man) Rom 13:12: The day is *at hand.* 1 Cor 7:29: The appointed time has grown very short; from now on, *let those who have wives live as though they had none.* (Funny thing to say if you didn’t think the end was imminent) 1 Cor 7:31: For the form of this world is *passing away.* Phil 4:5: The Lord is *coming soon.* 1 Thess 4:15: *We who are alive, who are left* until the coming of the Lord. Hebrews 1:2: *In these last days* he has spoken to us by a Son. Hebrews 10:37: For yet a little while, and the coming one shall come and *shall not tarry.* James 5:8: The coming of the Lord is *at hand.* 1 Peter 1:20: He [Christ] was destined before the foundation of the world but was made manifest at the *end of the times.* 1 Peter 4:7: The end of all things is *at hand.* 1 John 2:18: *It is the last hour;* and as you have heard that antichrist is coming. Rev 1:1: The revelation of Jesus Christ (i.e., the end of the world)…to show to his servants what must *soon take place.* Rev 3:11: [Jesus said] ‘I am *coming soon’.* Rev 22:6: And the Lord…has sent his angel to show his servants what must *soon take place.* Rev 22:20: [Jesus said] ‘Surely I am *coming soon’.* *It is puzzling to understand why Christianity survived the failure of this prediction. It is not ambiguous.* This would be like a rich uncle who promises to give you $10,000 ‘very soon.’ Ten years pass and he still hasn’t given anything to you, but he still says he will do it very soon. Would you still believe that it will happen any day? No, you would realize that it is a false promise. *For some reason, Christians cannot comprehend that they have been scammed. Jesus is not coming back, not tomorrow, not next year, not ever. But they still think it will happen any day.* www.kyroot.com/ Watch "Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet, Historical Lecture - Bart D. Ehrman" on RU-vid ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-s6GHEOOAXRI.html
@@LM-jz9vh Our Messiah came right on time as he said he would and he came back in judgment just as he said he would to that generation we Jews know this best we keep up with our scripture and history
I am a retired meteorologist. Somebody once asked me how I could be a scientist and believe in God. I told them that science is finding out what God did and how he did it.
There is a ton of evidence. As far as science goes, refer to the videos done by Dr. James Tour of Rice University, or Dr. Stephen C Meyer of the Discovery Institute, or John Lennox, or Douglas Axe.
@@marshallwickman6113 Dont worry about them... They are trolls. This is to much for them to understand, that science describes how things works, not why things works how they works. This is main issue of hard atheists, they make false, unprovable claim that they can disprove existence of God with Science. Poor logic...
Abiogenesis can't even happen in a pristine laboratory environment with all the purified chemicals at hand! Even if we did pull it off all it would prove is intelligent design!👍
@Tondy Maurice Wait until you discover what other truths in the Holy Bible known by the "leaders", yet hidden from the precious children.. please feel free to take a look at my research when you get a moment, no pressure and thank you for your consideration.
@@TakingBackEdenFE Mars is flat. Flat as a pancake. NASA's been lying to us all these years. And pizzas are actually round. It's just an optical illusion that makes them look flat. They have actually found alien artifacts buried inside of pizzas. All kidding aside, the Bible does not teach a flat earth. Gloria Dios.
Thank you for your courage in forcefully pointing out to everyone that the abiogenesis emperor of Darwinians is wearing no clothes, Dr. Tour. I believe that the Lord in his providence has fashioned you for just such a time as this. It just took the right person (someone who (1) could clearly see that the emperor was naked, (2) was immune to peer pressure and the madness of crowds, and who (3) was in a position to speak loudly and clearly enough to be heard and understood by everyone in the crowd) to puncture the emperor's grand delusion. Well done, sir!
Somebody is wearing no clothes and its always the religious apologists... they are always the slowest kids in the class. They are still struggling with evolution... science has left the religious apologists and theologians in the dust.
@@IIrandhandleII Haha... So says the "believer of men". Men lie to breed their sheep and goats with spots and stripes to call their own. Are you spotted or striped?
@@IIrandhandleII ...and yet, as Dr. Tour has pointed out, it is the apologists for the secular religion who do not even have a hypothesis for how abiogenesis could have occurred (i.e., who are buck-arse naked)... LOL! #PotCallsKettleBlack!
Absolutely agree! So many want you to buy their book or join their group. Dr. Tour wants you to contact him personally if in doubt, for free! My #1 channel for truth & hope.
I went to college 76-80. If I only had had instructors like this and a way to treat my ADD I would have been a genius. Lets hope they can kill cancer with this tech.Kudos to Dr Tour
I love it how Dr. Tour spends the initial minutes of his presentation flexing 💪 his expertise on the subject before dropping the hammer on abiogenesis 😆 🤣 😂
that's because there isn't any evidence for the existence of a god for you to start from. you are ignoring very important steps. i don't know to know how something happened, to know a leprechaun isn't a valid option. the same goes for a god.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki What utter nonsense. We do no such thing. It is perfectly reasonable to observe evidence of obvious design and conclude that there must have been a designer. To conclude otherwise is irrational. It is not necessary to observe the designer to reason its existence. Strengthening our conclusion is the fact that there is simply no other alternative process that is even remotely possible. Evolution is dead as a valid theory because-among myriad other things- it simply doesn’t explain the origin of even one of the billions of complex mechanisms required to produce life. Not one. So go ahead, create that cell abstractly and without organic compounds from scratch and without a template, complete with the lipid bi-layer, the necessary carbohydrates and complete protein assemblies, all found in your warm little pond. And, oh yeah, do it all at once so it can somehow split and create others like it before it degrades into nothing again in a few minutes. If you can do that, you’ll have an argument. Until then, crawl back under your rock. You don’t have the slightest idea what you’re talking about.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki : So basically your argument has been reduced to something like this: Since no one has been able to contact intelligence aliens in the universe, I guess they don't exist. Happy delusions if you think there can't be intelligent life forms much much smarter than humans.
More of a series of appeals to the magical mutation fairy (in biology) and the mystical, magical quantum foam which only produces universes and never something really useful, like an infinite supply of Talisker. Oh, and it can't be observed either. But in fact, the biblical monotheist position is what makes science possible. Only if you start from the ground of a rational creator are you justified in expecting to see laws and law-like regularities in nature. We know the cosmos was created, and we have the exciting challenge of finding out how- thinking God's thoughts after him.
I deny it. Tour is offering half truths, overstating the case, making logical fallacies and demeaning scientists to promote magic that he himself cant substantiate, describe, or justify. .
@@lrvogt1257 Hi LR, His logic when it comes to OOL chemistry is undeniable from the standpoint of experience, reason, and logic. The chemistry of life is barely understood, but what is understood is that the information rich, specified functionality in which the basic atoms and molecules of life are arranged are incomprehensively complex. The idea that this all came about by chance is childish wishful thinking (read magic), in the face of all the direct evidence. I understand his frustration with his colleagues completely. As far as promoting magic, that could not be farther from the truth. He freely admits that his belief in Christ is a spiritual awakening of his heart and soul.
@@markgrissom : "incomprehensibly complex." Sure... now. So what? We had no clue about quantum particles a few years ago and now we do. We learn more every day. Your incredulity is not the measure of reality. Magic is action from supernatural sources. Saying its supernatural may make you feel better but it still doesn't tell us a thing about the process.
@@lrvogt1257 Good point on the complexity, but Tour has always said the same. Folks may well figure out how to make a simple cell, but to say it all evolved by chance and natural selection, outside a lab without a designing intelligence (how quantum mechanics was discovered), is like saying that given enough time the computer like you and I type on will, with series of successive lucky approximations, appear out of a junkyard. Despite all the uniform and repeated experience encountering information based complex system and the astronomical improbability of them being built by chance, folks still wave the magic wand and say repeat after me...evolution, evolution, evolution. But you know, I use the same argument against forced belief in the literal Resurrection and literal belief in the Bible. You can't truly think that the God of the Bible exist, the fact that Christianity changed the world for the better, that yes Christ was divinely inspired, unless you believe that despite all the uniform and repeated experience encountering dead/inanimate information based complex systems, God made an exception this one time and you must wave the magic wand ..Resurrection, Resurrection, Resurrection. Belief in science and belief in God is not a "you got to believe one or the other, but not both" proposition. They are not at odds. I blame the Christian Fundamentalist for starting this antagonism. Keith Ward in his fundamentalism video on RU-vid explains this quite well, I think. If this gets you interested, he has a great little book, short read, titled Love is His Meaning.
@@markgrissom : If Tour et al believed science and religion could cooexist on OOL he'd just let the abiogenesis scientists do their jobs and let the chips fall where they may. He goes to far and is too strident about it.
Atheist: I don’t believe in miracles! Dr. Tour: A miracle is a supernatural event that defies known laws, correct? Atheist: Yes Dr. Tour: You believe in abiogenesis and the Big Bang, both of which defy multiple laws of thermodynamics, right? Atheist: Yes Dr. Tour: Congratulations... you believe in miracles too!
@@derhafi Nothing exploded and became everything, then it rained on the rocks for BILLIONS of years, the rocks came alive and now you have us... Sounds reasonable...
@@Leszek.Rzepecki There IS NO known process, or series of processes, that could conceivably have resulted in abiogenesis (the entire point of Dr. Tour's lecture). This leaves you in the position of having to hold to your creator god, Nature (hence, Naturalism), by literal BLIND FAITH alone (faith without evidence) in "Naturalism of the Gaps" ("You just wait, eventually we'll figure out how Nature did it"), that Nature produced the first living cell - i.e., a miracle of Nature.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki in evolution; a frog becomes a prince after billions of years 😳, and by natural processes; NOBODY has ever witnessed it. Sorry atheists. This why Bible believers & Jewish scientists ; together; have conquered 85% of Nobel prizes.
That is not a miracle. If it defy natural law, it is a miracle. So Zac, you just made a terrible strawman to fight and you even misrepresented the Bible and what Christians believe in while doing it. Poor you. Also, to my knowledge, the Big Bang did not defy thermodynamics and there is no reason to believe it should be applied before the Big bang, since our current understod scientific laws, doesn't seem to apply at that point. Remember, the Big bang is not where the universe came into existence, but the expansion of the universe. If I may suggest, since you have 1½ hour for this video, that you bring yourself to watch this and also understand what is being said: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ghJGnMwRHCs.html
@@paulgarduno3127 and those scientists believe(d) in evolution. Also, evolution has been observed. There has been written scientific papers about this.
I'm a retired chemistry teacher. The problem with Dr. Tour's explanation is 99% of the general public isn't able to understand it. There's an old saying that lies travel a 1000 miles before truth gets out of bed. Abiogenesis breaks at least 3 classes of laws in chemistry; namely kinetics, equilibrium and thermodynamics. My personal belief is God created life here less than 10,000 years ago. That is not the belief of James Tour or Michael Behe or most any other scientist who's speaking out against Abiogenesis.
I'm a Christian and essentially agnostic towards an age of the universe and earth. I'd like to know how you've come to believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old. Thanks and God Bless.
@@utopiabuster The geneologies leading from Adam to Christ. Genetic entrope. No death before Adam. Why would God put the creation through millions of years of death, misery, bloodshed etc;? Examine Mendel's Accountant and or get the book Genetic Entrope by JC Sanford. Peace bro..
@@utopiabuster (One mans opinion freely given and worth ALMOST that much) Young Earth, Old Earth, Theistic Evolution which is true, is for us Believers, while interesting (to be honest its A Lot Of Fun to study this) is of secondary maybe even tertiary importance. You can find Followers Of Out Lord holding to each of these positions. Personally I'm an Old Earther (Progressive Evolution). Because it requires the smallest Leap Of Faith on my part.
@James Bell It Could Be Dr. Tour assumes those watching his presentations either know something of what he is talking about, or without That much trouble inform themselves on something they don't know about.
@@VernonChitlen Just a thought, but why didn't God create a perfect world where man already has the knowledge of good and evil? Why didn't God create everyone already in the heaven described in the end of Revelation and skip all the suffering? I honestly don't know, but my guess is that for whatever divine reason, God is interested in the processes involved leading to that. God is sovereign over all things, He does what He pleases. I do think life was a divine intervention, but if God used evolution to create life, who are we to question Him? Again, just a thought
@@Leszek.Rzepecki Fantastic response to Tour's arguements, he almost took me in with detailed examples of the problems facing abiogenesis until you came along with your devasting "he's clueless" rebuttal.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki About "most science"? And a few examples would be? ... In the above, all you've done is claimed you can "debunk" and attacked James. If you have some actual "science", now is the time... C'mon, share some of your "knowledge" of the fairy story known as Darwinian evolutionism and magical notion of abiogenesis via accident of nature. _We'll be waiting... most likely for millions of years!_ ROTFL
@@Leszek.Rzepecki Don't let Jesse away with that Leszek. All you have to do is copy/paste your refutation of Dr Tour's analysis of the problems facing abiogenesis right here. By the way, your "wee jimmie" quip is sublime.
For every James tour there's a thousand "professor" Dave explains fools hyping up the lay people saying its easy for life to have formed over millions of years under a rock or in a hydrothermal vent. This will be a tough battle in the long run, we need more James Tours speaking out.
@@Electrical.Perspective Wrong. I watched it and analyzed it and then looked up the experiments he was referring to and realized how he severely over simplified almost every experiment he referenced to make it look like it was all "easy" in his cheesy simple PowerPoint slides. I thought the part where he says some of the parts to make a cell came from space on a meteorite was hysterical. Because, let's say he's right it happened, that 1 part came from space, then how did nature purify what came from space out of the meteorite to a form pure enough to be used in a cell. You have to detach it and purify it from the meteorite before it can be used for the next step in life, no explanation there, it just "could have" happened that way. There is a lot of "maybe" and "might have" talk in his presentation like that.
@@kalobrogers235 good work bro...faith feels more powerful when it is backed by scientific reasoning...there is also another youtube channel/website/blog "reasons to believe"..it also provides rational scientific backings to our belief in the creator...god bless everyone ..
@@Electrical.Perspective If you understand science you would be embarrassed to defend high school professors Dave. I commented on one of his videos….Dave tried to debate me on the science, I shut him down in two posts. Dave is nothing more than a cut and paste Google educated Fraud.
I liked the auto analogy: I didn't actually make the tires, or the steering wheel, or the radiator, bumper, pistons, rings, battery, fuel pump,... I didn't make those things, I bought them already made. And I didn't make the car body; I bought it. And I didn't actually assemble the parts; I just threw them all inside the car body.... Oh Wow! look! I can create a car from scratch! Also, friend Tour brought out this poll question: "Under simulations of earth's early atmosphere, scientists have mixed molecules together in laboratories to produce simple single-cell life forms such as bacteria." truth or false? It is false, but 68% of the public have been lead to believe it is true. Memorize that and tell it.
2 года назад
"...To the making of many books there is no end, and much devotion to them is wearisome to the flesh." Ecclesiastes 12:11, 12
He's a sophist with a religious agenda. He knows enough to convince people who don't know anything about science but not biologists. He wants to undermine scientists to promote his religion.
Wait until you discover what other truths in the Holy Bible known by the "leaders", yet hidden from the precious children.. please feel free to take a look at my research when you get a moment, no pressure and thank you for your consideration.
@@stevenwiederholt7000 That's probably my favorite movie of all time. He has the Clint Eastwood poncho on and the "Go ahead, made a cell" is probably a reference to the Dirty Harry line "Go ahead, make my day"... whoever made the thumbnail is definitely a Clint Eastwood fan
"For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, ***casting down arguments*** and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ..."
Those who do not have a personal relationship with Christ, regardless of their education, are not able to see, or understand, the complexities of God's attributes and creation; they are looking at the infinite with finite physical eyes. Those who have had their mind renewed by a authentic personal relationship with Christ ( Do not be conformed to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may discern what is the good, pleasing, and perfect will of God. [ Romans 12:2 ] ) are able to see with spiritual eyes and understand more clearly the attributes, and creation, of God. "I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness". ( John 12:46 ) Those who reject God ( whether active or passive ) are NOT ABLE to see the nature and complexities of God "Such people do not comprehend and cannot understand, for He has shut their eyes so they cannot see, and their minds so they cannot understand." ( Isaiah 44:18 ) Those Christians who have a sincere desire to look into the complexities of God ( Dr. Tour included ) are able to see whatever God is willing to show them! Now if any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives to all generously and without criticizing, and it will be given to him. ( James 1:5 ) A person without a relationship with Christ is still able to acquire a lengthy, and secular, education; that person, however, is under a spiritual "glass ceiling" all the while wearing horse blinders! Education is not the answer, Religion is not the answer; only Christ is the answer!
Wrong. I see all of this complexity as proof of complexity, not proof of a Divine Father. Maybe the future came before the past, and we're all moving backwards toward the singularity of the everlasting complexity? The Bible, therefore was written in the future, when we were further from the zero point. You can't prove that science is wrong using science. That would be hypocritical. I remain agnostic. Dr. Tour knows the terms and words backwards and forwards, but only time will tell where his patents will be useful. I'd take warning of the "grey goo" nanotechnology blonder possibility. I hope he remains sane amongst his microscopic "understanding." It seems easy to lose grip on reality when you label "atoms" and "molecules," ignoring the God/Nature gift of "normal" size scales. Perspective is needed to see the big picture.
@@CandidDate Big time wrong! Your statement "You can't prove that science is wrong using science. That would be hypocritical" would be roasted even in a jr. high school logic class! When science is wrong, it is SCIENCE that proves it wrong! [ Phlogiston: Arising in the mid-17th century, physicians conjured up the existence of a fire-like element called “phlogiston”, which was contained within combustible bodies and released during combustion. Charcoal, for example, left little residue upon burning because it is nearly pure phlogiston. Experiments in the mid-1700s led chemists to conclude the theory was false, giving birth to the field of modern chemistry.] your statement "Maybe the future came before the past, and we're all moving backwards toward the singularity of the everlasting complexity?" is a statement that I actually like - without being in total agreement! God as Creator of the universe' is also the creator of time; consequently ( as the Creator of time ) God is not restricted by time. The past, the present, and the future are concepts that only man has to deal with; God is timeless. Your statement "I see all of this complexity as proof of complexity, not proof of a Divine Father" is technically true; however, when we see the the complexity of DNA, a designer is strongly implied. Furthermore, when we see the INTELLIGENT coding behind the complexity of DNA, a infinite designer is without question - if one is using enough perspective to see the big picture!
@@burkholdst.rudderberg3574 I wonder your opinion on the building of the {2} nearly identical pyramids in Egypt, not to mention other such stone buildings?
@@CandidDate The ancient stone work on this planet is absolutely phenomenal; much more skilled than modern day stone masons! As far as the ancient Egyptian pyramids, it is my opinion that the Creator of the universe actually assisted with the technology used by the Egyptians to create the ancient empire! For the Scripture tells Pharaoh: I raised you up for this reason so that I may display My power in you and that My name may be proclaimed in all the earth. ( Romans 9:17 ) How God assisted the Egyptians, I do not know; however, the Bible is clear that God raised up the Egyptians to show the world HIS power! Furthermore, as the ancient Egyptians were competent world traders ( how else do you account for South American Cocaine found in the bodies of ancient Egyptian mummies ) they would have shared their building skills with their trading partners. The stone work in ancient Peru is similar, if not identical, to the stone work in ancient Egypt! My opinion may not be as glamorous as the stories involving, supposed, aliens, but to a person who believes in a literal Bible and a sovereign God, it makes perfect sense!
Very sharp and convincing. And yes, the more we find out, the greater the admiration for God' ways. But how do we catch up with the shifting goal posts?
JAMES TOUR is my favorite scientist, and I know GOD created this man, so people could find out what the truth is about science and GOD, and the creation of science through GOD, the way the truth and the life, MAY GOD BLESS HIM COMFORT HIM AND GUIDE HIM IN ALL THAT HE DOES, TO THE GLORY OF GOD IN JESUS NAME.
This video was absolutely fantastic. The complexity of the chemistry is literally astronomical but I thought you did a great job explaining that complexity. The funny thing though, is Christians that believe in the bible, learn about abiogenesis from God's word but it never explains the complexity, just the dust. FYI While listening to you talk about spin selectivity and actually understanding what it is, that had me thinking. What if virtual photons are responsible for the photons existence, sort of like lights spin selectivity? Just an odd thought.
Tour cannot apply the rigor he demands of the science to his magical claims. It's a hypocritical and disingenuous argument. It's a rationalization of the old god-of-the-gaps argument.
@@lrvogt1257 It's not that James will be able to discuss all possible science concerning the origin of life, I mean one day, he won't be able to create videos anymore. With his argument, he doesn't necessarily have to keep up.. The illustration that he is sharing is about the vast complexity of the science and nature needing more than luck. He actually makes a compelling argument. So let's say we find an over complicated way of producing an organic ribo replicator in a lab. Dr tour's argument will still hold weight in that 'you need the scientists'. They still need to prove how it was possible in nature. Even then, if ool was solved James would just believe that god is that much more 'magnanimous', that is to say, when the gap of knowledge is crunched.
@@oskarsitarz569 I can agree with that to an extent, like if it was just about an exchange of ideas where both parties were taking away something from it. However, it was just my way of saying thanks by attempting to heighten the algorithms reach.
It is amusing to listen to Dr Tours who is normally soft spoken and reserved start raging in fury when he talks about origin of life. I can only imagine what he is feeling inside to explode like this. However I do understand how crass stupidity can be upsetting. Calm down James. You have to chill down and stay around. I am so glad you are on our side.
I vividly remember Dr Morris lecturing at my university answering a question about the difference between biblical chronology and modern Astro physics. He calmly reached into his pocket,pulled out a balloon and blew it up.And he suggested that space simply expanded like a balloon. All the atheistic scientists just stared blankly at one another in perplexity. Love it.Morris never even blinked an eye.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki Yeah... no... cuz if your explanation were accurate, I'm pretty sure those atheistic scientists would've jumped all over the opportunity to demolish Dr. Morris...
Very. Very, very good… excellent …. Make a video about the resurrection … be very careful… your enemies will try to attack you… but the video will be great … God bless you… also all the people who help you, family, friends, colleagues…
@@Leszek.Rzepecki So... still... no... evidence then? And you double-down on your false claim-your refuted "science"? Still joking rather than presenting empirical scientific evidence for your magical faith? Well, no surprise there! [sigh]
@@derhafi So you believe in the magic of abiogenesis... for no good reason? That's what I thought! You've got way more faith than I could ever muster! Hey, can any of those you listed or appealed to make a cell? No? I rest my case! While all of your emotive language most certainly does not help yours...
@@derhafi Dissect? LOL 1. NOBODY denies that the laws of nature exist. But, how do you account for such laws? ... 2. Nature does the most complex changes? Sure! There are lots of chemical reactions and such! Is your faith that abiogenesis has ever occurred justified? Nope. But that doesn't keep your from blindly believing it did... by faith! 3. Again, NOBODY is saying that nature doesn't exist or that changes do not occur within it, but you are deny the principle that the food supply of the world is based upon-and appealing to, not only the miraculous (which isn't part of "science") and the unobserved! Which means that you have faith, not science. As for how you 'know' that "life is something that matter does," well, you can believe that if you like-but that is NOT science, that is faith. (I've little doubt that your logic here is viciously circular.) And NOBODY is claiming that matter "has" life. That would be a strawman. 4. My position rests on no such things-literally NOTHING you just said is correct. Clearly, you believe many false things... by faith. As for your "intelligence"... [sigh] As for your FAITH some supposed process of abiogenesis, well, that would be a supposed process that has "thus far eluded every controlled experiment ever performed in the history of science." _Touché?_ Hey, sorry buddy, but this abiogenesis delusion of yours, is indistinguishable from a child’s belief in “magic." Oh snap! _Touché again?_ 5. I use faith as a derogatory term? No I don't. I'm the one claiming what you've admitted, that faith is necessary to even do science. ALL scientists makes the SAME assumptions. Christians have good reasons for making them; cynics like yourself do not. This means that your faith is clearly blind, deaf, and literally dumb. The faith you practice is the faith of fools. You're just being gullible. _Yes, we all know that there are many definitions for the term 'faith'. YOU are the one who claims to believe that you don't practice faith at all-even though you obviously do-and you're the one acting as if faith is something to be mocked-even though you practice faith yourself._ So clearly, you are completely wrong while claiming to be completely right. Sad. And I think 5 is more than enough fodder for now...
@@derhafi You don't know? And that is what you prefer-to not know. Why? Personal reasons, not intellectual ones! You would not fear rational inference to the best explanation based upon what we do know, experience, and observe if you were interested in learning the truth-but you fear it instead. I mean, if the God of the Bible is THE GOD, what are the implications for you personally? At this point, it is either the God of the Bible or "I don't know." (Proverbs 1:22, Psalms 53:1) And again, I'm sure you have personal reasons for preferring the latter. (See Romans 2:14-15, John 3:19-20) But rest assured, you're preferred ignorance will prove to be no excuse. (Romans 1:18-20) The fact that you are not willing to accept the only possible alternative, is your irrational choice-and that is on YOU. (Proverbs 26:12)
@@derhafi 1. Neither. You're a fool and a liar who isn't willing to follow the evidence where it leads... I never said that you said that you prefer not knowing-I was merely stating what I believe is the case. You would prefer to NOT know than believe in the God of the Bible. _Am I close?_ And who said that we do have an answer? Not me! So... stop making stuff up! Also, how do you know that the God of the Bible is imaginary? Or were you just pretending to know what you don't know, even though you just claimed that you don't do that? Yeah, you need to pause and THINK rather than just REACT. _Just a suggestion!_ Also, how the world works ≠ question of origins. 2. So you claim again to KNOW that pointing to God is "delusional nonsense." Okay, fine. How so? ... Or were you just emoting and running your mouth... again-claiming to know things that you don't know-even though you said you don't do that? C'mon Rob, be honest! 3. So now it could be the God of the Bible or "I don't know"? Pretty sure "I don't know" is NOT an answer to the question, though it may be your honest-or preferred answer. 4. Project much? Again, fine. How so? Got an argument or some evidence of some kind-or were just REACTING again? 5. Impressive how then? See, you just keep REACTING rather presenting any kind of REASONABLE response. My guess is you simply can't put any muscle behind your hustle. _Or can you? Hey, give it your best shot!_ Seems to me that lots of emotionally driven retorts that only demonstrate what a liar and hypocrite you are is the best you can offer. I suggest that in the future, you pause, settle down, and think a little more seriously before answering, rather than just reacting. But again, that's just a suggestion.
Hey atheists! Do you think dirt and water can create better cars than humans? What about dirt and water struck by lightning ? Then HOW can you believe that dirt and water can create something several times more complex and intelligent than a car ? Food for thought.
FYI Atheist believe, you have to have plants and microorganisms to make dirt. The actually believe life started from Rock and water. Then dirt.is made from that combination. You have to have tremendous faith to be a atheist!
It's a heart issue! Some people will see this information and more like it, but never see the truth. No matter how much evidence for a creator is presented to the world, some will just not see it due to hardness of heart. That said I'm all for getting into discussions with people about it (and I do), but keep the heart issue in mind.
There is no "creator". The universe and all life on Earth, and presuming that there is life elsewhere in the universe, are the products of natural processes. Truth is understood through evidence. Your bible is little more than absurd assertions with no evidence.
Conservatives and Christians know the truth can be demonstrated. They watch the people who are best at demonstrating the truth with video and cross referencing. Liberals and atheists have the 'truth' dictated to them by their academic, scientist, and political mentors they choose to listen to. That is the difference between the two groups.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki Give a link of ANY combination of 'building blocks' of life in a beaker coming together in ANY bio-sophistication under a microscope. Go ahead. Where is YOUR evidence? Give me ANY definition of evolution and I will pick it apart for you. Which definition is your favorite?
@@Leszek.Rzepecki So...your 'evidence' for evolution of being like the appendix and whale hips having a 50/50 chance being caused by evolution is better than the mathematical impossibilities by chance in biological structures PLUS over 122 do-or-die mathematical impossibilities precision measurements and constants in physics and chemistry. LOL. Go thru the logistics, bright boy.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki If God were from time, space, and matter you would have a great point. However the God of the Bible is not from time, space, and matter. He is outside of the universe, not bound by the physical . This is exactly what is needed to show where the information came from. Man invents things like a car or a computer. These ideas don't come from chemicals in our brain. In fact we can't put the puzzle together to know where and how thought comes about, but we do know it happens. We live in it everyday. Are we ever going to get a road map to beyond the universe? No, we aren't going to get the map. Even without the map we know the road is there. We see part of the road in information, DNA, cell structure, the periodic table, and many more places. So we know there has to be a creator or these things would not be. Once this is realized , the next question is which God did all this? It has to be the God of the Bible, for many reasons. First is the Bible has God outside the creation. No other religion has this. There are many other examples to prove out the Bible. If you need more I'll go into it based on the right questions.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki There are many questions here. Some are silly illogical questions and others are just angry. However I brought them all down to 8 questions. 4 concern outside the universe. We'll start with the 4. There are things outside the universe. In math we have imaginary numbers. They don't really exist but they are part of algorithms. We use them in quantum wave calculations, and in cube volume formulas. In Genesis 1:1 it says, God created the Heavens and the earth. This puts God outside the creation. There is no other interpretation. Spinoza died in 1677. His ideas of the universe are 3000 years after the Bible's book of Genesis. The Quran is a commentary of the Bible. If you read it this becomes obvious. So it is a second rate book with no ideas of its own. Example; in the Quran god made man from blood clots. Since blood has DNA , this means their god in within the universe. The God of the Bible creates man from dust, something with no DNA. This type of creation puts God outside the universe. The Hindu religion is a circular system. Since it is a circle it puts everything in the universe. Thought or consciousness isn't limited by the physical presents of a man. A man can write a song. The song lives forever, even when the original document is long gone. In fact all the information we have can pass beyond this universe. Like I stated before , we don't have a map of outside the universe, but we do know it is there. We can see part of the road that goes beyond the universe. There are over 300 prophecies that tell us about Jesus showing up the first time. This alone proves the Bible. Jesus couldn't have self fulfilled many of these. Like His birth place, family line of King David, place of death- this was in Roman control, type of death- again Roman control, there are many more. The Bible is true and it has proofs. People can read it for themselves, we aren't tied to what others say about it.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki Your not going to actually look at the Bible. I can't force it. So we are left with you don't believe in the Bible and I do. You don't have strong arguments, they come off as silly and childish. So I'll leave it there. We're done. You have a good day.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki Not running away. Just not going to argue with a child. I mean if you say the New Testament is fake, it makes no sense to continue with you. You've won nothing.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki I'm not interested in your games. You'll just say not true, because we all know your word is the only proof needed. You think ya have something , but ya don't.
lol tour waited couple of months and continued to make same errors that were debunked by dave. hilarious. it was already explained to you that nobody is trying making a cell.
@@jessebryant9233 it seems that you are confused. nobody can make a cell because that process took millions of years. its not single spontaneous event.
@@spatrk6634 The "process" took millions of years? Is that what you believe... by faith? I mean, what "process" is that? Hey, thank you for demonstrating my point! Your faith ≠ science, and yet you seem to be claiming that it is! Okay, where is your... EVIDENCE?
I have a hard time with the Resurrection, for the same reasons that Dr. Tour describes in his OOL critique, and Dr. Meyers "uniform and repeated experience" observation when it comes to information in living systems. Common sense will tell you that a God who created the universe and the information it depends upon most certainly could raise someone from the dead, but the question is has he really done so in a strictly literal sense? The miracle in Christ is the profound impact of his teaching on hearts and minds, to a lesser or greater degree as evidence in Dr. Tour's faith. A continuum of faith that has changed the world.
The apostle Paul said if Christ isn't resurrected, we are above all to be pitied. it was the resurrection that changed the behavior of the apostles unto death. Christianity is about literal resurrection. There are lots of "churches" backing off of that, but then it leaves no real hope. Historical Christianity has always been about resurrection. For us as well as Christ.
@@Golfinthefamily Hi Zach, What do yo mean by no real hope, and always been about resurrection? Can you uncork your thought processes behind those declarations?
@@markgrissom if Christianity is just a metaphor and we still perish without our sins forgiven and there isn't eternal life, then it's not of any actual hope. Just like materialism...you are evolved pond scum, you live, you die, worm food, and ultimately none of it matters. Historical Christianity has always taught a literal bodily resurrection from the dead for Christ and one day his followers as well. In summation, progressive christianity isn't christianity and it doesn't offer any real hope. The Apostles lived their life in complete consistency with having seen a resurrected Jesus, not a metaphorical or mythological one. That's the point I'm making.
I recommend people to see the movie Expelled: No intelligence allowed. This film exposes the level of duplicity and misrepresentation of the current scientific culture and how it borders on the tyrannical The assumptions made in this establishment has narrowed the perspectives of the community to the point of blinding them to the obvious. Namely that the law of abiogenesis is broken by the current assumption’s of the origins of life!
Check out Genetic Entrope by JC Sandford and Mendel's Accountant. Demonstrates the flawed claim of randomly occuring mutations plus natural selection of evolution.
The pathway to destruction is broad and spacious and MANY are finding it, the pathway to life is narrow and twisted , and FEW are finding it. Which pathway do you think you're on? Matt 7:13
What gets me is when you have a debate with evolutionists, they always try to claim the abiogenesis is not part of evolution, when it most certainly is - all the textbooks teach it as part of evolution, and it is taught in all the schools, and all the evolution popularizers that evangelize for evolution, teach it as part of evolution, and when you extrapolate evolution backwards, you end up with a single cell eventually, anyway, so abiogenesis is absolutely about the origin of the first common ancestor.
No. The bible is almost entirely bullshit. Science looks to real evidence to understand what is true. Science and your bloody bible could not be further apart.
This is a test. I am a creationist, in fact I've often debated evolutionists online, however I did make a comment critical of one of James Tour's recent videos. My comments since then have consistently been deleted, either by Tour's algorithm or by the RU-vid anti-science police, even when I was defending creationism. I can understand RU-vid censoring my comments which challenge and refute their biased worldview, however if this is being done by Tour's monitor or algorithm then it is really sad. My former admiration for Mr. Tour has been declining, not only for my input, even when I am agreeing with him, being deleted, but for his recent video on Vaccines. Fortunately for myself, I keep a record of all of my web comments, on RU-vid and elsewhere, with the web address and heading and subject matter so that if and when I desire to use it again I may on other media channels such as BitChute, Odysee, Brighteon and Rumble among others. I will freely copy and save and reuse anything from RU-vid that I have written and they have deleted. I have that copyright privilege since anything they delete falls into the category of "garbage" and what is discarded becomes public property. Too bad, huh RU-vid?
@J W I am so glad for Black History Month and Juneteenth! I LOVE ALL OF MY BLACK BROTHERS AND SISTERS OUT THERE! I am so sorry for being white! I couldn't help it. I was born this way. But I'll make it up to you somehow. I want to apologize for my innate, subconscious deep seated racism and for living such a privileged life because of my skin color. I feel that all white people should pay reparations, not only for oppressing blacks but also oppressing our alien UFO space brothers. After all, wasn't it little Yoda who broke the color barrier and became the first green Jedi Master? So, in honoring those of other racial ethnicity groups, human or alien, let us stand in solidarity with Yoda as he proclaims "#GREENLIVESMATTER!"!
@J W My mother was a symphony violinist. So that's a compliment. Over the past twenty years I've given thousands of dollars to help starving orphans and persecuted Christians in Africa through Voice of the Martyrs, International Christian Concern, Barnabas Fund and other charities. How much have you given to save the lives of orphans and persecuted Christians in Africa? Go ahead and play your violin buddy, but you're a hypocrite. You spend your money on Nike shoes and rap music. What a waste.
It's just not fair that the comment section has gone quite for about a year. There have not been any successes in the creation of life to date. However, the nanotechnology demonstrated in this video are awesome. Maybe I could get some of those to increase my IQ! Oh well, just a thought.
@DrJamesTour flat earth: would you prefer a flat petri dish or a curved equipotential dish? flat level bed or curved, tilted and rotating? Dinner Table? Mirror? FYI, Biblical cosmology includes a flat earth with a firmament as confirmed by leading ancient Biblical language expert Dr Michael Heiser. And thank you!
@@Leszek.Rzepecki This time I agree with you! Stawmen are silly. And like scarecrows, they fool no one-excepts other misinformed and ill-informed cynics.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki You've found no such thing. You might want to look up the definition of the term... But then, what is your excuse? You don't seem too well informed... _What does that make you?_
@@Leszek.Rzepecki How so? How did you come to that conclusion? Can you start producing some evidence or argument FOR your position or are you just gonna continue to make unsubstantiated claims about me? Please, tell me of this "reality" of which you speak and explain why you believe it "terrifies" me. _Can you do that?_ Your naturalistic faith proves my "religion" if "fake" how exactly?
*Although the biblical narratives depict Yahweh as the sole creator god, lord of the universe, and god of the Israelites especially, initially he seems to have been Canaanite in origin and subordinate to the supreme god El.* Canaanite inscriptions mention a lesser god Yahweh and even the biblical Book of Deuteronomy stipulates that *“the Most High, El,* gave to the nations their inheritance” and that “Yahweh's portion is his people, Jacob and his allotted heritage” (32:8-9). A passage like this reflects the early beliefs of the Canaanites and Israelites in polytheism or, more accurately, henotheism (the belief in many gods with a focus on a single supreme deity). *The claim that Israel always only acknowledged one god is a later belief cast back on the early days of Israel's development in Canaan.* *It is generally accepted in the modern day, however, that Yahweh originated in southern Canaan as a lesser god in the Canaanite pantheon* and the Shasu, as nomads, most likely acquired their worship of him during their time in the Levant. *Yahweh in the Canaanite Pantheon* The biblical narrative, however, is not as straightforward as it may seem as it also includes reference to the Canaanite god El whose name is directly referenced in `Israel' (He Who Struggles with God or He Who Perseveres with God). *El was the chief deity of the Canaanite pantheon and the god who, according to the Bible, gave Yahweh authority over the Israelites:* When the *Most High [El]* gave to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of men, he fixed the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the Sons of God. For Yahweh's portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage. (Deuteronomy 32:8-9, Masoretic Text). The Canaanites, like all ancient civilizations, worshipped many gods but chief among them was the sky-god El. *In this passage from Deuteronomy, El gives each of the gods authority over a segment of the people of earth and Yahweh is assigned to the Israelites who, in time, will make him their supreme and only deity; but it is clear he existed beforehand as a lesser Canaanite god.* Yahweh, according to Amzallag, was transformed from one god among many to the supreme deity by the Israelites in the Iron Age (c.1200-930 BCE) when iron replaced bronze and the copper smelters, whose craft was seen as a kind of transformative magic, lost their unique status. *In this new age, the Israelites in Canaan sought to distance themselves from their neighbors in order to consolidate political and military strength and so elevated Yahweh above El as the supreme being and claimed him as their own.* His association with the forge, and with imagery of fire, smoke, and smiting, worked as well in describing a god of storms and war and so Yahweh's character changed from a deity of transformation to one of conquest. *As the Israelites developed their community in Canaan, they sought to distance themselves from their neighbors and, as noted, elevated Yahweh above the traditional Canaanite supreme deity El.* They did not, however, embrace monotheism at this time. The Israelites remained a henotheistic people through the time of the Judges, which predates the rise of the monarchy, and throughout the time of the Kingdom of Israel (c.1080-c. 722). Google *"Yahweh - **WorldHistory.Org.**"* Watch Dr Christine Hayes at Yale University. Watch lecture 7 from 30:00 minutes onwards and lecture 8 from 12:00 to 19:00 minutes. Google *"Jews and Arabs Descended from Canaanites - Biblical Archaeology Society."* Google *"Canaanite Religion - New World Encyclopaedia."* Google *"Canaanite Religion - **Realhistoryww.com**"* Google *"Canaanite Phoenician Origin of the God of the Israelites."* Google *"The Phoenician God Resheph in the Bible - Is That in the Bible?"* Google *"God's Wife Edited Out of the Bible - Almost."* Google *"Yahweh's Divorce from the Goddess Asherah in the Garden of Eden - Mythology Matters."* Google *"Married Deities: Asherah and Yahweh in Early Israelite Religion - Yahweh Elohim."* Google *"How the Jews Invented God and Made Him Great- Archaeology - Haaretz."* Google *"The Invention of God - Maclean's"* Google *"The Boundaries of the Nations - Yahweh Elohim."* Google *"Excerpt from “Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan” by John Day - Lehi's Library."* Google *"How Did the Bible’s Editors Conceal Evidence of Israelite Polytheism - Evolution of God by Robert Wright."* Google *"A Theologically Revised Text: Deuteronomy 32:8-9 - Ancient Hebrew Poetry."* Google *"Biblical Contradiction #3: Which God is the Creator of the Heavens and Earth: Yahweh or El?"* Google *"Biblical Contradiction #27. Are Yahweh and El the Same God or Not?"* Google *"Mark Smith: "Yahweh as El’s Son & Yahweh's Ascendancy - Lehi's Library."* Google *"Quartz Hill School of Theology - B425 Ugarit and the Bible."* Google *"The Origins of Yahweh and the Revived Kenite Hypothesis - Is That in the Bible?"* Google *"Yahweh, god of metallurgy - Fewer Lacunae."* Google *"Polytheistic Roots of Israelite Religion - Fewer Lacunae."* Google *"Biblical Polytheism - Bob Seidensticker."* Google *"Combat Myth: The Curious Story of Yahweh and the Gods Who Preceded Him - Bob Seidensticker."* Google *"Religious Studies: El, Yahweh and the Development of Monotheism in Ancient Israel."* Google *"Decoupling YHWH and El - Daniel O. McClellan."* Google *"Yhwh, God of Edom - Daniel O. McClellan."* Google *"The Most Heiser: Yahweh and Elyon in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32 - Religion at the Margins"* based on the *majority scholarly consensus.*
Job38:33.Do you know the laws of the heavens? Can you set up their dominion over the earth?…36. Who endowed the heart with wisdom or gave understanding to the mind?
Here is an interesting tidbit: I generate about $1.4 million dollars worth of ATP everyday. Why is that? And why can't I profit off of that somehow? I could REALLY use the money right now!
Hey Dr Tour do Viruses Exist can you have a video discussing them. Can you show images of Existing Viruses such as HIV,FLU,Coronavirus. HEK 293 Aborted Fetal tissue. Are you able to share a video tackling this. Thank you in advance God Bless you.
Dr Tour said the mass transfer problem is huge. So I got curious. I know my calculation is over-simplified. But I just wanted to put some numbers to it. So I made a very rough sketch to give a small overview on the boundaries. If I made any errors in thinking please correct me. Okay, let's assume from pure chemistry to the first living cell we have to follow a few simple steps which can all happen one after the other. The entire process takes one day. I will now say that each step has 10% yield. How large is the maximum numbers of step possible to create a cell, if we use the entire earth water over the course of half a billion years. The water on the earth is 1,386,000,000km^3. That has to be multiplied by 10^12, to get to dm^3. That way we end up with 1.4*10^24 dm^3 or 1.4e24l. Let's say a cell needs 1ul of end product. So we can add another 6 zeroes to that number. So we end up with 1.4e30ul. But now we have to add the days to the calculation. I make the simplified version of each day we start the experiment new. That would mean we can just multiply half a billion years with the amount of days in a year. 500'000'000y*365d/y=1.8*10^11d That's the amount of days. Now we need to multiply those two big numbers. 1.4e30ul * 1.8e11= *2.5e41ul* That is the amount of starting material we have. And that starting material is mostly water. So let's assume the original concentration of the useful material is 0.1%. That would mean we have a starting position of useful materials of 2.5e37ul. Our cell in the end only needs 1ul. So we start out with 2.5e37 times the amount of raw materials than we use in the end product. I deliberately took 10% yield per step, since that is an easy way to add up the step. Each it's basically 1/(10^n) whereas n equals the amount of steps. So if we have 37steps, then we would end up with a final yield of 1e-37. Let's put that number into the calculation. 2.5e37ul * 1e-37ul = 2.5 *So if we had 37 steps with each having 10% yield, then if the entire ocean is usable over half a billion years for the creation of the cell, then we end up with 2.5 cells.* And if we have 38 steps, then we hard a forth of a cell or in other words, a one in four chance of getting a cell. If there are 40 steps we had a one in 400 chance of getting a cell. And that ignores that scientists think that the first cell started to exist in ponds on the shore or in underwater volcanos, which reduce the amount of water-volume. Or it ignores the chemical process or that the yield is sometimes way smaller. But as a broad upper limit this calculation is quite good. Unless of course I made a big thinking error. If I did please correct me. I don't want to have false believes.
That's one cell fantasy ,get perpetuum mobile working first before free energy for all ,known nature is highly rough with chance driven extrapolations .Current replication is the only way for real science ,past and future claims are mostly empty talk .
@@rovidius2006 When I look at all those hobby coders on RU-vid who try to get an artificial animal running with evolution in mind, then I see that most of these cells drive themselves into extinction. Only after lots of optimization will they survive and actually do stuff. I'm fully aware, that their models are not representative of what happens in a cell. The cell is way more complex. But with that I want to state two observations. 1. The assumption that evolution has to be antifragile per definition is absurd. It's theoretically possible, but it's not inherent. 2. I'd much rather try to make a simple system run stable than a complex one. Complex ones are way more likely to be unstable. In short, I agree with you.
Surely if the beginning of life is purely mechanical, the same conditions must exist today and evidential by the presence of basic cellular forms and every step in between to a recognisable form. Not just one form but a male and female of each form. What new creature crawled from the primordial soup today? Not a single formed unit but in the millions, male and female. A purely mechanical, non directed event cannot suddenly decide that this is the amount of creatures allowed, no more. Any new forms of types are Created by humans in laboratories by manipulation of existing types, but always within the same species/phyla. The wisdom of the wisest man is but foolishness to God our Father, Creator of all that is seen and UNSEEN. "For those that believe, no proof is needed, for those that despise, no proof is good enough " St Thomas Aquinas.
To deal with Professors and others in authority read Gregory Koukl's book, Tactics. He explains what he calls "The Colombo Method" which uses questions instead of statements to have a productive conversation without producing conflict.
Witnesses are required , for History events; to be accepted as true. Creation is History . This is why, God has provided us with, HIS WITNESSES. = the nation of Israel.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki Until your fideism (blind faith) called "palaleontology".. Deals & Proves with tangible evidence, for the source of the tons of encyclopedias containing, ALL the INFORMATION (=aka ); DNA CODE Needed in it's 100% fullest & timely provided for the "survival of your fittest " Ameba-to homo-sapiens . Until then your conjectures are not better than any religious sect.
@@Leszek.Rzepecki yes , Evidence is; what every atheist fails to accept. THE ABSOLUTE NEED for DNA CODE with the specific INFORMATION for each & every LIVING ORGANISM.
And even to copy , is not actually the original. Its stays a copy. And even when you copy something, the outcome is not exactly the same as the original. Cuz its a copy.
Pretty sure there was no lab or intelligent designers (per atheist belief) running origin of life in the beginning. The more intervention by OOL scientists just proves that life cannot arrive on its own. We are designing and making these complex experiments. And humans are designed and made in the image & likeness of THE designer. That is precisely why we can even ask these questions about OOL and come up with these complex experiments trying to answer the how.
This guy is brilliant. He has discovered that science doesn't answer all questions in each single detail. Great discovery. 😀 I have another one for you. 2 + 2 = 4. Scientific progress allows us to answer more and more questions. ID has an answer for all questions, god. An answer that doesn't explain anything 😀
Science explains everything if you have it ! Impersonators of science rely on that fact and fill the void with their own narrative ,instead of saying we don't know they claim to know just about everything .Not familiar ?
@@rovidius2006 Science has shown to us that the universe is around 13.8 billion years old and life originated on earth around 4 billion years ago (the Earth is ~ 4.5 billion yo). What other scientific explanation can you see about the origin of life apart from that it evolved / came from inorganic (non-living) matter? God put it there? We might know very little about it now, but it is a topic science can deal with and produce more and more evidence about how it occurred. God put it there is a dead end that could be said 2,000 years ago and can be said in 2,000 years in the future adding no light at all about the issue.
@@alanwhite3154 There is a big void of knowledge phony's are trying to fill to their own gain , we will know when that time will arrive till than science will do what's repeatable . There is always a good logical solution for everything .
@@alanwhite3154 It is hard to name them as many live double lives passing lies just to get by ,many pass lies without knowing or for many various reasons .Self creation and evolution is a lawless free ticket for all one may desire .If you can't even copy life presenting how life is built is just passing out phony science because you don't know how life is built ,believing phony don't make it right but owning it is highly desirable .
Romans 10:9 presented here is the sticking point for me. I your interpretation is correct, this means that I must believe that God literally raised dead innate matter to life, my salvation depends on it, when you and like minded ID researchers have spent a good deal of time saying that this just doesn't happen in nature, except for this one time.
Can "life" be defined? Maybe in this sense - as the sum total of forces that resist death. The same elements that cause life to thrive (oxygen, water, sunlight) are the very elements that cause death and decay once that force of life is removed. I think life is a mystery to the human mind (Jesus called Himself Life). The creation of life by God, whether "in the beginning" or "in the tomb", is consistent with His power and is established, in the latter, by credible witnesses.
@@mugdiller2124 Hi Mug, agree with you about credible witnesses as it is compared against all other evidence for famous persons of antiquity, but you did not address the central issue.
The first miracle in the Bible is the Creation of the Universe. Light beams from a singularity expanded forming energy, mass, space, and time. Yes, this same causal agent can raise the dead.
Dr James Tour, to what extent does quantum theory explain what you make in lab? Is everything going according to theory? Is what you are creating computable? I was a Computation Chemist and I would like to know.
@@MutsPub I just watched his Covid video and he says it's up to your own "personal choice" whether to take the vaccine or not. I wonder if he isn't privy to what the mechanism the mRNA vaccine is composed of?
@@erlwilliam1 Seems a little outside of Jame's area of expertise... But I see your point. I mean, 'Errorman' [sic] denies BOTH doesn't he? Could be interesting... or they may just be talking past each other all the time.
@@jessebryant9233 I don't think that either would not present their argument in a debate , I have heard Richard Lane Craig debate Bart Ehrman in the past . I think that James Tour would have a very powerful challenge fo Bart from the position of a scientific argument. He would wipe the floor with Barts argument and throw it into the trash can
