Comments by "Phil Aypee (Philip Potter)" (@philaypeephilippotter6532) on "Professor Dave Explains" channel.

  1.  @truthanon8443  You mean you can write on it? Whoops, that's stationery!
    334
  2. That's actually the right way to do it and Dave knows that - but it takes time and preparation to get it right. Dave knows that too though Tour doesn't.
    101
  3.  @canyonboy9  Cells are organisms, not machines - don't you know that? Actually it's extremely likely that the first cells were far from complex as they'd just been formed by abiogenesis. If you prefer the machine analogy the first flying machines were vastly simpler than even a Douglas DC-3. Why should a synthetic chemist know anything about abiogenesis? Why should he know vastly more than the scientists doing actual research in that field?
    63
  4.  @sciencewolf7775  The flaturthas have the same problem.
    61
  5.  @canyonboy9  Nothing except that evolution couldn't happen if abiogenesis hadn't happened first. What has synthetic chemistry to do with abiogenesis or evolution?
    56
  6.  @rocketsurgeon1746  What has synthetic chemistry to do with abiogenesis or evolution?
    52
  7. Dunning–Kruger.
    51
  8.  @felixwinter3173  Please believe me when I tell you that the vast majority of 10 year olds are much more intelligent than an extremely bright flaturtha.
    42
  9.  @droidcrasher  Balderdash - even codswallop. And that applies to both your posts.
    34
  10. I think you meant empirical evidence - then you're spot on.
    26
  11. I think he's actually managed to hold two conflicting ideas at the same time. It's not something I can understand - and I don't want to understand it either. I run firstly on logic and then on taste. But I've known a few people who can compartmentalize their minds like that, usually for religious reasons (the flatuthas treat flaturth as a religion). Tour probably justifies his mendacity by telling himself I'm telling lies to expose a higher truth that others won't listen too otherwise. It's the worst aspect of evangelism.
    26
  12.  @jasbour2222  I hope you're wrong. Certainly here in 🇬🇧 most kids are bright enough to disregard that kind of lunacy and that has long been true.
    22
  13.  @nebtheweb8885  They may have moved them to another hemisphere.
    22
  14.  @scptime1188  In Goscinny & Uderzo's Mansions Of The Gods one character is a Nubian slave called Flaturtha. I prefer it.
    21
  15.  @Kimmy1783  Sincere answer: as far as I know, no-one. It's not about what's possible now, it's about what may have happened then. That's what abiogenesis research is about. Despite what Tour has said he's wrong. Abiogenesis research is far more advanced today than the Urey and Miller experiment in 1952 was.
    21
  16. I rather think that flaturthas have discovered something momentous. Negative IQ.
    19
  17.  @wolflarsen1900  So you haven't watched the videos and believe that qualifies you to judge them. Tour certainly has a real reputation amongst his peers - and it isn't a good one. Dave has the relevant qualifications and has exactly the same qualifications in abiogenesis as your hero, Tour. If you'd seen the videos you'd know that Dave cannot be realistically diagnosed as a D-K sufferer by a qualified mental health expert because he, like myself, doesn't suffer from such a problem. But you might.
    18
  18.  @aniksamiurrahman6365  Have you seen Tour's lie-athon? That's why Dave was so thorough.
    16
  19. Of course they can't, they can't even think beyond their self-absorption.
    16
  20.  @pigzcanfly444  Will you pull a Bob Stay and delete all your comments so you can claim Dave did?
    16
  21.  @lucamedugno  If any do they'll know their messiah has feet of clay. So they won't.
    16
  22.  @aniksamiurrahman6365  No honest scientists who have seen Tour's lie-athon should feel ashamed - but Tour himself is the guilty party and should be ashamed.
    15
  23.  @BillMorganChannel  What makes you think science can be decided by debate?
    15
  24.  Craig Laycox  You wrote: And until quite recently all scientists (actual not pseudo) were Christians. So the scientists of China, India, Arabia, the fertile crescent and various other non-Christian ethnic areas were all Christian even before Christianity reached those places. Well I never knew that! Or, to put it another way, rubbish.
    15
  25. He's long been all in with the Discovery Institute, it just wasn't terribly obvious outside the creationist movement. Sadly for him he overreacted to Dave's Elucidiating video (probably with the DI's approval) and produced his lie-athon thinking that he could intimidate Dave. He could hardly have been more wrong!
    14
  26.  @TheHibbitydibbity  So why have you singled out atheist dictators when the vaster amount of cruelty throughout history has had nothing to do with atheism?
    13
  27.  @braija  Why didn't you watch the video before posting a comment here? Are you afraid?
    13
  28.  @BillMorganChannel  Actually you hate science as you find it too challenging to the goddidit ideology you espouse. Science embraces I don't know and responds with then let's find out. Your ideology says of course I know, goddidit, goddid everything, that's real science. Ideology breeds idiots. science breeds explorers.
    13
  29.  @bokononbokomaru8156  It's just another creationist groupie, it will refuse to either watch Dave's videos or learn. D-K writ large.
    13
  30.  @BuIIetBiII  Having a PhD doesn't give you a free pass to be right about anything. Not that it matters here as pigzcanfly obviously hasn't got a PhD. He's a NephilimFree fan.
    13
  31. Hi Dave, I couldn't stand more than ten minutes of this. As soon as Hovind started the arrogant, patronising and hubristic attitude got my hackles up. So I'm sorry but I didn't hear most of what you said. What I did hear was rational and lucid if a little pushy (which was quite understandable). I'd barely heard of Hovind and I'd be quite happy never to hear of him again. Phil. 🇬🇧
    12
  32.  @NinjaMonkeyPrime  I hope you're right but I'm afraid I doubt it.
    12
  33.  @ronaldweaver3829  said intelligence can't make these molecules therefore NO intelligence MUST HAVE made these molecules. Absolutely right. It wasn't any kind of intelligence, just quite natural and normal emergence over millions of years.
    12
  34.  @daviddobronyi5490  Why should he? We all know Tour is a liar, nothing to be debated or discussed. The proof is there on the table. The only meaningful gesture Tour could make is to give Dave an abject apology.
    12
  35. With such a convincing argument you'll convince - nobody. Tell me the name of anybody killed in the name of religion. I don't expect you to name them all even if you could, YT wouldn't permit such a vast post. Then name just one person who was killed because of atheism? Not somebody killed merely by an atheist but someone killed in the name of atheism. I know you can't as there are none.
    10
  36. Actually they don't bother because these people give no evidence for their beliefs.
    10
  37. Popcorn.
    10
  38. Money and power - he wants them. Or he's just a bible-thumping idiot, a fully-paid-up member of the god-squad. Take your pick.
    10
  39. You must be very proud of your facility with language. It's a pity you're so facile.
    10
  40. Actually it reaches no speed at all because there's no space for it to go through in that model. How it's accelerating through nothing is an entirely different matter. One of the troubles flaturthas have trying to explain their version of flaturth is that no one model satisfies more than one necessity of flaturth but each model is inconsistent with every other model. But usually this doesn't matter to them. They start with the absolute knowledge that the globe is actually flat. Most never want to go further than that. Sure, they're daft but most are harmless. But they are preyed on by unscrupulous con-men who make money from them. It's just as evil as taking candy from a baby. Yes, I know that all con-men are unscrupulous, it was a deliberate tautology.
    10
  41.  @daviddobronyi5490  Well, you're probably not alone but I doubt it would really be fun. Probably Tour would engage in a gish gallop or some other stupidity. As it stands leading abiogenesis researchers are solidly against Tour's crusade and I imagine quite a few biologists are willing to join them. Their combined academic weight will finish him off and he'll be left preaching to the sheep. The Discovery Institute are probably very angry, which is a good thing. What we have to do is wait for them to wheel out another big gun with no ammunition.
    10
  42.  Craig Laycox  According to Wikipedia Pseudoscience consists of statements, beliefs, or practices that are claimed to be both scientific and factual but are incompatible with the scientific method. Pseudoscience is often characterized by contradictory, exaggerated or unfalsifiable claims; reliance on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts; absence of systematic practices when developing hypotheses; and continued adherence long after the pseudoscientific hypotheses have been experimentally discredited. Now why does that remind me of the Craig Laycox approach to science? Is it the pseudoscientific word scientism or the fact that his definition of science is that which he believes is supported by some version or other of some holy book or other?
    10
  43. What on earth makes you think that science is decided by debate?
    9
  44. You should watch the videos to learn about that. That's what they're for.
    9
  45. So you couldn't be bothered to watch the videos but could be bothered to make ignorant criticisms of them. Clever.
    9
  46.  @queerios9925  Actually it's empirical, not emperical!
    9
  47.  @masterofthepluses  Why should anyone debate Tour? Dave showed him to be disingenuous and dishonest. Tour deliberately misquoted his peers and betters and this Dave proved beyond all shadow of doubt. Why should anyone grant Tour any kind of credence?
    9
  48.  @garricklittle314  Why should any deity be involved in material procreation?
    9
  49.  @NinjaMonkeyPrime  He subscribes to Kent Hovind too, he's that intelligent. I don't think he actually knows what he believes in he's got so many different fundamentalist subscriptions!
    9
  50. I enjoy looking out those things and fitting them together. I'm sure Dave enjoys it too.
    9