Dr. Tour has a good effect on OoL. All he has been demanding is HONESTY. That is it. And, they fight back so hard! I would like to hear Dr. Tour's response to this episode.

He has told us, we don't need to pray for that knowledge, we need pray for wisdom. The laws for understanding the universe have been written, we just can not understand them yet.

Dr. James Toir has been a great voice of reason calling the OOL researchers out. I'm glad they are responding by going back to doing good science.

It's so great that's it's beyond us but that we are unraveling the mystery. May it never end.

@scottwinseman8065

2 ай бұрын

The discovery institute has made me more faithful. I am happy for this. I believe the hype regarding origin of life research is part of a larger conspiracy to suppress the belief in a divine creator. The suppression makes the masses fsr easier to control. I wish everyone could hear the words coming from the discovery institue. Some people think I am nuts, so you can feel free to believe the same..

Great video, thanks.

If we play this at 75% speed it's more interesting and gives more time to think about what this guy says. He has a high speed delivery that leaves most behind.

@jacob.tudragens

Ай бұрын

Good suggestion! Thanks!☺️👍

Just a suggestion. Perhaps the 'Origin Of Life' researchers should start praying to God for insights towards how He did it. Perhaps He may answer the request.

@Minion-kh1tq

2 ай бұрын

Followed by a counter-suggestion: He's already told them what he wants them to know. Maybe _you_ should pray that they read it.

@cptrikester2671

2 ай бұрын

@@Minion-kh1tq do you?

@Minion-kh1tq

2 ай бұрын

@@cptrikester2671 Do I what?

@Vernon-Chitlen

2 ай бұрын

Ood researchers can't get past making carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, sulfur and phosphorus form a single protein or gene in any reasonable simulation of a prebiotic world. Nobody questions the experiments claimed as producing evidence for abiogenesis are fraudulent in the first place. Miller Urey type experiments for example, are one of the most cited experiments for the natural origin of amino acids. How ridiculous, in their simulation of a prebiotic earth, only 3 compounds and 1 element providing only carbon, nitrogen, oxygen and hydrogen are sequestered in a glass apparatus, excluding all other 94 elements. How is that anyway a reasonable simulation of a prebiotic world? They should have minimally included the 6 elements that comprise 97% of what living things are made of. The warm little pond was exposed to all 98 elements. Never producing more than 23 of 500 different types of amino acids, never more than 12 of the 20 specific proteins are made of. The simplest cell known today has 16.8 billion of only 20 particular amino acids arranged, exquisitely organized into 42 million proteins. The coding for their replication in a minimum of 473 genes...

@Vernon-Chitlen

2 ай бұрын

They are more interested in proving the origin of life doesn't require the influence of intelligence. As in the Creator. Most are methodical naturalists, nothing will be explained other than by natural processes.

I found this to be most interesting. Scientists have been theorizing about the origins of life for a long time, coming up with a variety of models including the primordial soup and so on. However, researchers are still in their early stages of understanding this. And it may take 50 years (or 100s) to really crack some of the science on it. That is not very startling, and nothing new, I'd say. But it does not refute the fact that scientists in many complementary fields have reached quite undeputable consensus that evolution has taken place, from simple-celled bacteria 3.5 billion ya to many complex eucaryotes (multi-called animals) today. The earth is not 12,000 years old, and a divine creature did not all of a sudden produce eyes (because they are irreducably complex?) or finished humans. Life evolved in many forms, slowly but surely, going back and forth, in progressive stages from PreCambrian times to the present. The result is the gradual appearance of ocean plants, fungi, ferns, then conifers, leading on to flowering plants. And animals from protozoa to multi-celled creatures, eventually with nervous systems and brains, then skeletons, gills, then lungs. Going from fish to amphibians to reptiles to mamals and so on. We even went through half-reptiles (reptiles which had live young, were warm blooded). And it probably involved some intelligent process where creatures interacted with the changing environment and through some mechanisms (maybe even changing themsleves!) which we are starting to understand better and better, life evolved. But we haven't even begun to look at the quantum consciousness, morphogenic fields, and intelligence field and so on that may eventually tie it all together. Perhaps at the quantum level, I am you and you are me, we exist in a totally interlinked "God" field where all spirituality is tied together in an incredible cosmic field. Looking at genes is just a baby, baby step. At this point, we are just babes in the dark regarding much of the substance of life. But it sure is going to be interesting to hear you guys you learn more and the field continues to open up. Thanks for the great work. Very intelligent discussion.

@TrevoltIV

Ай бұрын

As Dr Tour often notes, they are actually going in reverse. They aren’t getting closer, they’re getting further away.

Seems to me science would be better served by focusing on the Shroud, miracles, and the Bible itself. Not to learn HOW He did it, but to demonstrate for all mankind THAT He did it. The scientists who have studied the Shroud for example have come away with the strong conviction of its authenticity. This just isn’t very well known. More should know. Get going!

@eswn1816

2 ай бұрын

No John 20: 28-29 "And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” 29 Jesus said to him, “Thomas,fn because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” Romans 10: 17 "So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." The Bible is clear: Faith comes through hearing God's Word... We don't need nor should we rely upon a controversial "shroud" unknown until the middle ages, in order to have faith (trust) God.

@GreatBehoover

2 ай бұрын

The LIES of biased scientists need to be answered. Faith is NOT FEAR of SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE. Why should we allow people to be fooled by their lies of naturalism? Sure you and I believe already that the Bible is true. But what about those that have never been presented the lies of naturalism FIRST? Why shouldn't they be skeptical of believing the Bible when no Christian has dared to be brave enough to disprove the lies of the naturalism that these people learned was "true". You and I have just as much RESPONSIBILITY to dispel the lies told throughout the halls of "teaching" in all science departments! You don't need to be a scientist to dispel their myths...but you do need to be educated on FACTS. FACTS MATTER to people. Anything that prevents belief in Jesus Christ should be addressed. Not for us as believers...but precisely for those who aren't! The shroud of Turin would never cause me to believe because we CAN'T GUARANTEE it was used on Jesus. HOWEVER...we can GUARANTEE that DNA CODE CAN'T SELF-CREATE and SELF-ASSEMBLE into cells ACCIDENTALLY. I can't force anyone to believe that Jesus Christ Healed my 30 years of chronic back pain and a torn shoulder and sneezing fits...INSTANTLY just 2 years ago. I have the medical documentation! Atheists Don't care. I am attacking their FAITH in naturalism when I can PROVE that there are no peer reviewed scientific papers devoid of faith statements and circular reasoning that support any abiogenesis or evolution! ZERO! Naturalism is FAITH BASED MYTHOLOGY....NOT SCIENCE! When you remove this BARRIER to faith, you are taking away the stumbling block created by lies by exposing the lies. Maybe you didn't once believe those lies. I did. They destroyed my life. I desperately want to help others who were duped into believing the Bible is false because naturalism is "true". Naturalism is a total LIE! It is the mythology! Weak or fake Christians are fearful of science disproving the Bible. But science hasn't. It won't. It never will. Silly BIASED scientists BELIEVE it has because you they willfully IGNORE the FACTS and focus instead on the DISTRACTIONS! For instance, the largest evolutionary study ever which ran for decades found ZERO Novel Proteins emerged in TRILLIONS of offspring. ZERO! Instead of seeing this reality of FACTUAL OBSERVATIONALSCIENTIFICEVIDENCE, these BIASED researchers focus on the things that AREN'T evolution. They pretend that forcing the bacteria to feed on a synthetic substance by flooding them these diets, that the bacteria evolved! Bacteria could ALREADY eat nylonase BEFORE this study! Nothing "evolved"...yet they lied and claimed that they had. The same scientists overfeeding the bacteria and produced fatter and lazier bacteria....again... NOT EVOLUTION! I didn't "evolve" when I gained weight and fat! But if people DON'T address the lies, others will be duped and fooled by what SEEMS like "truth" to the uneducated. It is IMPORTANT when someone says the Bible tells us that works get us to heaven...for us to do the FACT CHECKING and say NO...HERE'S the FACTS! In the same way, naturalism has a direct conflict with what the Word of God says. When scientists CLAIM that they disproved part of the Bible...SHOW THEM FACTUALLY they are wrong and lying! Don't be a lazy Christian!

@jamesmiller7457

2 ай бұрын

Let's just start with proving its age.

Biblical history is an epic win. Darwn's theory is an epic fail.

So, these researchers from OoL go in accordance with what James Tour has been saying for years. But you know! Uneducated KZreadrs know better. 😅

@KennyTC63

2 ай бұрын

you mean, like, 'Dave' lol

@GodID7

2 ай бұрын

@@KennyTC63 how dare you! 🤣

@martinjan2334

2 ай бұрын

these OoL-researchers say EXACTLY the same what James Tour has been saying for years. I am quite surprised, that something like that was even published in NATURE. This is the article conclusion (NATURE, FEB 26 2024, Nick Lane, Joana Xavier) "It is too soon to aim for consensus or unity, and the question is too big; the field needs constructive disunity. Embracing multiple rigorous frameworks for the origin of life, as we advocate here, will promote objectivity, cooperation and falsifiability - good science - while still enabling researchers to focus on what they care most about. Without that, science loses its sparkle and creativity, never more important than here. With it, the field might one day get close to an answer." I will repeat this part "...the [OoL] field might one day get close to an answer." and let me repeat that again: ... one day .... get close ... (not to answer), just get close to an answer ... one day ... _