Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 185 (8016 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-16-2014 5:56 PM
207 online now:
Aurelia, AZPaul3, Faith, frako, PaulK, subbie, Tangle (7 members, 200 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Ed67
Post Volume:
Total: 723,415 Year: 9,256/28,606 Month: 946/2,455 Week: 256/428 Day: 57/92 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2Next
Author Topic:   You Tube Videos on Evolution/Creationism
Tram law
Member (Idle past 980 days)
Posts: 283
From: Weed, California, USA
Joined: 08-15-2010


Message 1 of 18 (575909)
08-21-2010 5:48 PM


Id like to propose a list of you tube videos that help explain evolution for the Links And Information forum. Some people respond better to videos than to scholarly articles.

I'd like to start with this series of videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wv6kgjOEL0

It's called "15th Foundational Falsehood of Creationism Pt 1"

There are a total of fifteen parts to this series on evolution. Each part, except the last part, is ten minutes long and the last part is divided into two parts each ten minutes long.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add "on Evolution/Creationism" part to topic title.


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by ProtoTypical, posted 08-21-2010 9:12 PM Tram law has not yet responded
 Message 4 by hotjer, posted 08-21-2010 10:02 PM Tram law has not yet responded
 Message 5 by Huntard, posted 08-22-2010 2:57 PM Tram law has not yet responded
 Message 7 by slevesque, posted 08-24-2010 5:43 PM Tram law has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 11388
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 2 of 18 (575938)
08-21-2010 8:02 PM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the You Tube Videos thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
ProtoTypical
Member
Posts: 1241
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 3 of 18 (575948)
08-21-2010 9:12 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tram law
08-21-2010 5:48 PM


I have watched about 10 of this guys videos and every one of them was outstanding. Good sense of humour too.

http://www.youtube.com/user/philhellenes#p/u/7/BIT3TYnQJQc


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tram law, posted 08-21-2010 5:48 PM Tram law has not yet responded

  
hotjer
Member (Idle past 821 days)
Posts: 113
From: Denmark
Joined: 04-02-2010


Message 4 of 18 (575958)
08-21-2010 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tram law
08-21-2010 5:48 PM


Deconversion
I recommend this for both believers and non-believers. This is a very good proces of a person who once was a christian but is not anymore. It explains step-by-step.

While this is not about evolution, I think the whole proces is very important for believers to understand science and for non-believers to understand creationists.

http://www.youtube.com/user/evid3nc3?blend=1&ob=4


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tram law, posted 08-21-2010 5:48 PM Tram law has not yet responded

    
Huntard
Member
Posts: 2854
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 5 of 18 (576042)
08-22-2010 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tram law
08-21-2010 5:48 PM


Ah yes, Aronra.

I'd recommend all of his videos, f you want to watch all of his "foundational falsehoods", here's the link

Further, I'd recommend:

  • Extantdodo
  • Thundderf00t's "Why do people laugh at creationists
  • Any video by cdk007, really

    And that's all I can think of for now. Also, check out these guys "friends" on youtube, there's usually some pretty good stuff on those channels.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Tram law, posted 08-21-2010 5:48 PM Tram law has not yet responded

        
  • Asgara
    Member
    Posts: 1679
    From: Wisconsin, USA
    Joined: 05-10-2003


    Message 6 of 18 (576160)
    08-22-2010 11:32 PM


    http://www.youtube.com/user/ZOMGitsCriss

    Cristina Rad is fabulous too.


        
    slevesque
    Member (Idle past 916 days)
    Posts: 1456
    Joined: 05-14-2009


    Message 7 of 18 (576589)
    08-24-2010 5:43 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Tram law
    08-21-2010 5:48 PM


    Why does he try to explain that it is scientifically accurate to call evolution a theory all throughout both videos, but then ends the video with ''evolution is a FACT'' ???

    Also, Fred Hoyle wasn't a creationist as the guy says in his video. Which would seem pretty obvious given that he was a proponent of the steady-state theory in cosmology, which says that the universe never had a beginning (obviously contradictory with any definition of being a ''creationist'')

    Edited by slevesque, : No reason given.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Tram law, posted 08-21-2010 5:48 PM Tram law has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 8 by Huntard, posted 08-24-2010 6:11 PM slevesque has not yet responded
     Message 9 by hotjer, posted 08-24-2010 6:37 PM slevesque has not yet responded
     Message 10 by dwise1, posted 08-24-2010 7:44 PM slevesque has not yet responded
     Message 13 by PaulK, posted 08-25-2010 2:29 AM slevesque has not yet responded
     Message 18 by Buzsaw, posted 09-07-2010 9:10 PM slevesque has not yet responded

      
    Huntard
    Member
    Posts: 2854
    From: Limburg, The Netherlands
    Joined: 09-02-2008


    Message 8 of 18 (576607)
    08-24-2010 6:11 PM
    Reply to: Message 7 by slevesque
    08-24-2010 5:43 PM


    slevesque writes:

    Why does he try to explain that it is scientifically accurate to call evolution a theory all throughout both videos, but then ends the video with ''evolution is a FACT'' ???


    Well, it is.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 7 by slevesque, posted 08-24-2010 5:43 PM slevesque has not yet responded

        
    hotjer
    Member (Idle past 821 days)
    Posts: 113
    From: Denmark
    Joined: 04-02-2010


    Message 9 of 18 (576611)
    08-24-2010 6:37 PM
    Reply to: Message 7 by slevesque
    08-24-2010 5:43 PM


    There is the Theory of Evolution and that fact that evolution happens... so it is both.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 7 by slevesque, posted 08-24-2010 5:43 PM slevesque has not yet responded

        
    dwise1
    Member
    Posts: 2049
    Joined: 05-02-2006
    Member Rating: 3.7


    Message 10 of 18 (576619)
    08-24-2010 7:44 PM
    Reply to: Message 7 by slevesque
    08-24-2010 5:43 PM


    Also, Fred Hoyle wasn't a creationist as the guy says in his video. Which would seem pretty obvious given that he was a proponent of the steady-state theory in cosmology, which says that the universe never had a beginning (obviously contradictory with any definition of being a ''creationist'')

    Mind you, I've not viewed the video. But Fred Hoyle is on record as an opponent of "chemical evolution", offering panspermia as his alternative, and is widely quoted by creationists and IDists, especially his "tornado sweeping through a junkyard assembling a 747 by pure chance". From the Wikipedia page on him (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hoyle):

    quote:
    Hoyle compared the random emergence of even the simplest cell to the likelihood that "a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein." Hoyle also compared the chance of obtaining even a single functioning protein by chance combination of amino acids to a solar system full of blind men solving Rubik's Cube simultaneously.[11] (See the watchmaker analogy for similar reasoning.) Hoyle's statements and this line of reasoning (at various levels of accuracy) appears frequently in support of intelligent design. Mainstream evolutionary biology rejects Hoyle's interpretation of statistics, and supporters of modern evolutionary theory, such as Richard Dawkins, refer to this as "Hoyle's fallacy".

    And earlier in the same article:

    quote:
    However, those energy levels, while needed in order to produce carbon in large quantities, were statistically very unlikely. Hoyle later wrote:

    quote:
    Would you not say to yourself, "Some super-calculating intellect must have designed the properties of the carbon atom, otherwise the chance of my finding such an atom through the blind forces of nature would be utterly minuscule." Of course you would . . . A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.

    Hoyle, an atheist until that time, said that this suggestion of a guiding hand left him "greatly shaken." Consequently, he began to believe in a guiding force in the universe, which led him to a belief in panspermia.[4] Those who advocate the intelligent design hypothesis sometimes cite Hoyle's work in this area to support the claim that the universe was fine tuned in order to allow intelligent life to be possible. Alfred Russel of the Uncommon Descent community has even gone so far as labeling Hoyle "an atheist for ID".[5] Some of Hoyle's thoughts in this area have been referred to as "Hoyle's fallacy" by detractors.


    So Hoyle would be better labelled an IDist, even though he was motivated by an form of religious belief.

    Interestingly, he co-authored his panspermia book, Evolution From Space, with Chandra Wickramasinghe, who testified at the 1981 Arkansas creationism trial on behalf of the creationists.

    PS
    And the theory of evolution and the fact of evolution are two different things. The fact of evolution is that evolution has happened, whereas the theories of evolution are attempts to explain how it happens.

    Those are two separate questions that need to be addressed separately, such that you cannot disprove the fact by attacking parts of the theories. Even Dr. Duane Gish of the ICR acknowledges that in his use of philosopher of science Larry Laudan's article that was critical of Judge Overton's pronouncements about the nature of science in his opinion for the 1981 Arkansas trial: lack of a mechanism to explain a phenomenon does not disprove the phenomenon. Of course, Gish only wanted that to apply to creationism and not to evolution.

    So then, the two questions are:
    1. Did evolution happen? (the fact)
    2. How did evolution happen? (the theories)

    {"Links and Information" forum - Not the place for debate on the video content. Find a better place for such. - Adminnemooseus}

    Edited by dwise1, : PS

    Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Comments in red.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 7 by slevesque, posted 08-24-2010 5:43 PM slevesque has not yet responded

        
    Minnemooseus
    Member
    Posts: 3152
    From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
    Joined: 11-11-2001


    Message 11 of 18 (576620)
    08-24-2010 7:49 PM


    Dawkins on religion run schools
    Recently someone embedded the first of four Richard Dawkins videos concerning religion run schools in the UK. At the time I watched the first 3 and intended to get back to the forth. Now I can't track down the containing message.

    But, using the power of the almighty Google, here is that video.:

    Moose

    Edited by Minnemooseus, : Tracked it down via Google.


    Replies to this message:
     Message 12 by jar, posted 08-24-2010 7:52 PM Minnemooseus has acknowledged this reply
     Message 14 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-27-2010 10:12 AM Minnemooseus has responded

        
    jar
    Member
    Posts: 24504
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004
    Member Rating: 1.0


    Message 12 of 18 (576621)
    08-24-2010 7:52 PM
    Reply to: Message 11 by Minnemooseus
    08-24-2010 7:49 PM


    Re: Need help tracking down Dawkins on religion run schools videos
    try looking for Faith schools.


    Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 11 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-24-2010 7:49 PM Minnemooseus has acknowledged this reply

      
    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 10476
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 2.6


    Message 13 of 18 (576674)
    08-25-2010 2:29 AM
    Reply to: Message 7 by slevesque
    08-24-2010 5:43 PM


    Evolution as Fact and Theory
    Evolution as Fact and Theory by Stephen Jay Gould
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 7 by slevesque, posted 08-24-2010 5:43 PM slevesque has not yet responded

        
    Artemis Entreri 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 504 days)
    Posts: 1194
    From: Northern Virginia
    Joined: 07-08-2008


    Message 14 of 18 (577143)
    08-27-2010 10:12 AM
    Reply to: Message 11 by Minnemooseus
    08-24-2010 7:49 PM


    Re: Dawkins on religion run schools
    What does that have to do with the topic? Faith schools in England?

    How does a faith school have to do with evolution/creation?

    Creation is taught in Home schools, the equivalent of faith schools in the US do teach evolution.

    I don't know maybe I am missing your point?

    I do know the Richard guy in your vid is hilarious as his inability to analyze all the angles, and only present this skewed view.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 11 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-24-2010 7:49 PM Minnemooseus has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 15 by Modulous, posted 08-29-2010 9:44 AM Artemis Entreri has not yet responded
     Message 16 by Minnemooseus, posted 08-29-2010 3:21 PM Artemis Entreri has responded

      
    Modulous
    Member
    Posts: 6086
    From: Manchester, UK
    Joined: 05-01-2005
    Member Rating: 3.7


    Message 15 of 18 (577501)
    08-29-2010 9:44 AM
    Reply to: Message 14 by Artemis Entreri
    08-27-2010 10:12 AM


    Re: Dawkins on religion run schools
    One of his points is that creationist talking points, and outright creationism is taught at some Faith Schools. In the UK, home schooling is rather rare - going to a Faith Schools is much more common. And there are potentially more faith schools, with an even laxer curriculum on the horizon. All great places to find loopholes to get blatant creationism taught at taxpayers expense.

    Richard Dawkins writes:

    Some faith schools, as I discovered while making my recent television documentary, use their state-subsidised freedoms to undermine the teaching of science. It should be unthinkable in the 21st century to have a state-funded school whose science teachers believe the world is less than 10,000 years old, yet that is what I found

    So yeah - I think it's sufficiently related.

    Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 14 by Artemis Entreri, posted 08-27-2010 10:12 AM Artemis Entreri has not yet responded

        
    1
    2Next
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014