A Few Things I've Learned About Creationists - PZ Myers -Skepticon 2 Redux

@pzmyers
freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/
Filmed at Skepticon 2 in November 2009
Please forgive the bad camerawork, I was very much still learning at the time. This video has been converted to SD to HD.
Skepticon.org

[@karlrschneider]

Science asks questions that may never get answered; religion preaches answers that may never be questioned.

[@squidgert566]

True words.

[@ericscaillet2232]

You can ask ,but if you do not accept the answer you are kaput.

[@waggishsagacity7947]

Speaking as a dog lover, it's heartwarming to know that we have been loving & adoring dogs about 9,000 years before creation. It's good to acquire great traits early on. No?

[@babsbylow6869]

Creationist: That which is asserted with evidence can be dismissed with miracles

[@Dearolor]

Explaining evolution to Ray Comfort is like explaining basic arithmetic to a cat.

[@katrand5357]

And I'm guessing that they both don't care!

[@carlpen850]

@ Johnny Chunders... come on now, cats are not as dumb as Little Ray-Ray Cumfart

[@alegnalowe3679]

I think it is worse..it is like talking to a brick.

[@TheCyrix1]

@@alegnalowe3679 "I think it is worse..it is like talking to a brick." The wall's silences are far cleaverer than Ray answers...

[@VaughanMcCue]

You have a *colorful* family name. I think it was derived via the technicolor yawn from the upper decks of migrant ships to Australia.

[@AmusedChild]

It is startling to realize how much unbelief is necessary to make belief possible. - Eric Hoffer, The True Believer Creationists are pessimists. Instead of lighting a candle, they curse the light.

[@thomasbriggs4718]

I understand where PZ's grumpiness comes from. When I was studying genetics and evolution I was seen carrying books on those topics and was set upon by creationist bumpkins where I worked. To anyone who makes the effort to understand these astonishing subjects it is depressing and irritating to be attacked with smug, condescending, proud ignorance.

[@delta-vk1me]

You are an idiot that thinks fish turn into people, there is no such thing as studying it lunatic, it doesn't exist. The lunatic is pretending it takes effort to understand his lunatic stories. You are delusional

[@ultimatedude5686]

@delta75 75 you obviously don't understand evolution, come back when you do

[@ultimatedude5686]

delta75 75 I told you to get an understanding of evolution. Fish don't turn into people, and evolution doesn't show they do. Its a gradual process over millions of generations.

[@delta-vk1me]

no such thing as understanding evolution lunatic its a fairy tale like three little pigs Yes liar evolutionists claim people came from fish It doesn't matter if you lunatics claim it takes one generation or a million, you are insane and a liar Since you choose to be stupid on purpose and a liar you will be damned forever to the lake of fire

[@delta-vk1me]

No it doesn't make you wonder unless you are insane This lunatic is claiming since people are not clones of their grandparents this is somehow some grand revelation You are clearly delusional Humans will reproduce Humans you dumb lunatic This is called basic sexual reproduction and genetics You are obviously stupid on purpose You will be damned forever to the lake of fire

[@petereuk52]

Stonehenge in the UK was built 500+ years before the flood yet has no signs of any flood.

[@LilithLiberated]

For the young woman who wanted a one sentence rebuttal to people who deny natural abiogenesis. It’s not one sentence but Aaron Ra did a very good, very simple video for young adults it’s pitched at a middle school level, explaining what research has currently shown about abiogenesis

[@timmarrier]

Very nice presentation PZ

[@elvisischrist]

The truth is out there, and quite visible and understandable. No magic or wizardry necessary!!

[@zooblestyx]

Dogs have owners, cats have staff.

[@QassimOmarri]

@zooblestyx - that is so fucking funny!

[@nevanderson1164]

+zooblestyx Unpaid permanent staff, aren't they slaves?

[@magnanimous4]

That's cuz cats are independent and still love you. Dogs are dependent, intelligent, still love you, but drool.

[@evillemon2472]

John Burrage >cats >loving you Top fucking kek.

[@warmhandswarmheart]

Having a cat is like taking something captive and hoping he/she develops Stockholm syndrome.

[@zebonautsmith1541]

Creationists live in the drug of "ignorant bliss" "cause it mahkes 'em feeeeel guuuuud"

[@foodiebeauty6738]

The more science understands, the more endangered creationists become. Oh for the day when they are an extinct species.

[@SaxyCalzone]

My Daily Kitchen sad we won’t likely live long enough to see it.

[@arjanstam78]

Never underestimate the resourcefulness and tenacity of human wanton stupidity.

[@roeazy]

I bet you wouldnt hate to exterminate us after all what's life worth in your world view

[@arjanstam78]

@@roeazy Strange as it may seem to you: once you realize that your life is finite and *yours*, and that your life is _not_ a test to see how well you are able to spend as much of your resources as you can, serving an unsubstatiated (Narcissistic, megalomaniacal, callous, cruel, jealous, vindictive etc. etc.) ruler (which one is typically supposed to love, worship and praise nonetheless, on pain of eternal torment), you might discover that it actually becomes way more precious. You might even realize that the desire to exterminate, so prevalent in YHWH/Allah, is more on the average monotheist's mind (although typically projected on the 'evil' godless heathens). As you just seemed to attest to. Feels great huh, imagining you're on moral high ground...?

[@roeazy]

@@arjanstam78 believe it or not we are here because of the belief in a higher power. Naturalism has not been tested and it was disastrous the few times it has (Marxism communism) . Criticizing religion for the human error while standing on the backs of a society whose foundation was shaped by religious people is ludicrous. It's like criticizing a guy in war while sitting at home. You havent been tested against the world so dont fill your self with conceit while elaborating on theoretical ideas.

[@gnagyusa]

You could literally build a *time machine* and drag a creationist's ass with you to *directly* observe evolution, from the first self-replicating molecule, to modern day humans. And, he would *still* deny it. He'll just say something like "ah, it's the trick of the devil".

[@orvillewright548]

lnpilot So what time and place would you stop at to view this first self-replicating molecule? I ask only because I didn't realize we had actually found it yet.

[@aurorafrost288]

Liver comes from Aunt Edna's kitchen, an abomination that can make house guests magically vanish.

[@Tony11442]

Aurora Frost Haha good one. And cool pic

[@magulater1]

I am loving this channel more everyday.

[@gideona.dunkleyiii699]

I was a committed christian and a Young Earth Creationist for many years. What turned me from a YEC to an Old Earth Creationist (and eventually from there to an agnostic when I couldn't make it work out) was actually Creationists bickering amongst each other in their technical publications, principally Journal of Creation and Answers Research Journal over things like acceptance of the geologic column, radiometric dating, and resolutions to the distant starlight problem. Those are big issues, and the solutions offered were just so ridiculous I eventually abandoned the whole thing. Even worse was that many YECs argued they should accept those frameworks/methods, but add in a sufficient number of ad hoc rescue devices (like accelerated decay and relative ages for geologic strata compressed to a Biblical timeline). This only indirectly validated the naturalistic approach, and started me on a path that ended in agnosticism(in addition to various other things going on in my life at the time). So... thanks creationists!

[@loricalass4068]

See Dr. Russel Humphreys on the distant starlight problem. In addition the Bible says that the Almighty stretched out the Heavens and we have found space, as in outer space, is stretchy. Thus through stretching a false impression of ancient age would be created. Radiometric dating is notoriously unreliable. Carbon 14 dating cannot be used beyond 100 thousand years. Please give a link of a picture of a Geologic Column. Now I don't mean some far off pile of rocks or a mountain, but something that clearly shows so called Cambrian fossils at the bottom and an ascending series of fossils that match the GC going go the top. More on the GC coming up. I used to call myself an atheist and thought Darwin was a genius. Let's look at the "Bible" of evolutionism, The Origin of Species. Maybe because it is so mind numbingly boring, people rarely notice something, namely that it never shows the origin of anything! Darwin's finch beaks are supposed to support goo through the zoo to you, but what do they really show? Zero. . Research reveals that the beaks grow back and forth in size depending on climate variations. The evidence that finches or Galapagos Island Turtles et al have ever been or ever will be anything but finches, and turtles et al? Zero again. . Oh, and btw, as usual in evolutionary theory you are being told one thing while the opposite is true, as about natural selection. It does not lead to evolution as Darwin claimed. It only shuffles, or sometimes eliminates, pre existing information that has always been in the genomes. It never creates new DNA as would be necessary, for ex., to turn a fin into a foot or a leg into a wing. Nothing ever observed creates new DNA. All DNA is just a copy of a copy of a copy which can be altered by things like mutations. . Beneficial mutations? They are said to be the second force for evolution. However, Charles Muller, who won a Nobel Prize for his work on them, said "The good ones are so rare that we can consider them all bad." . Darwin was nothing but an armchair theorist who, unlike his contemporary Mendel, never supported his theory through the scientific method and cast doubts on it himself. Yet he is an icon of evolution, like another contemporary, a lawyer named George Lyell, who came up with the totally fictional Geologic Column. . The GC exists only in art work. The real evidence? Fossils are jumbled, in no neatly organized pattern whatsoever. There really are no such things as Cambrian, Jurassic, and so on "periods." Like the GC those are just fictions presented as facts. Giant shark fossils are found with dino fossils in Montana, for ex. Whales' fossils are found in wildly improbable places like the Andes mountains, the Sahara and a desert in Chile. Deep sea "Cambrian" fossils, such as sea shells and mollusks, are found at every level on the planet, including on most mountain tops - like the world's highest, the Himalayans. Fossils of ocean floor life forms, like trilobites. are found in the hills of mid America and countless other places world wide, high and far inland. In fact, 90% of the fossils on land are marine. Golly, how did that seawater get everywhere all over the planet? Hmmm.... . Take a look. See the ocean floor dwelling, now extinct, so called "Cambrian", trilobites found on mountain tops all over the world. (They are supposed to be at the bottom of the GC.) www.bing.com/images/search?q=trilobites%20On%20Mountains&qs=n&form=QBIR&sp=-1&pq=trilobites%20on%20mountains&sc=0-23&sk=&cvid=9008D75298A54105AD924CA3AACAE385 Notice the exquisitely preserved details on many. This is also seen with innumerable sea shells, mollusks, etc. . Now some claim "plate tectonics" moved, intact and conjoined, vast stretches of ocean dwelling, bottom floor, marine life fossils in the countless billions to travel for millions of years and then wrap around the tops of mountains. Not uncommonly the fossils are in their original shape with perfect details as you see in the link. "Plate tectonics" are purely speculaitons, piled on theories, heaped on hypotheses. They can't explain the lack of erosion which should have caused those fossils to be nothing but dust and rubble after their so called millions of years trek. . (And please do not send me a post quoting Talk Origins, which I call Talk Spin. Yes, I know that they claim to have found one GC on this entire, vast, planet. But they didn't. If you will check thoroughly you will see them saying "Some of the strata are out of place", i.e. there ain't any GC there, either. I am very familiar with TO. They have no problems with flat out lying and are not even an authentic science source. If you can find an authentic science source that shows a GC, include that with a link to a photo. Then explain why the rest of the planet shows the exact opposite of a GC. My experience is that knowledgeable evolution defending people will say "Well, the GC is just a model. We know none really exists." When I ask "How can you make a model of something that has no evidence whatsoever that it existed?" they don't respond.) . The Bible says that flood waters completely covered the whole earth after, for one thing, "the fountains of the deep broke forth." (Did you know there is an ocean below our commonly known oceans, or have you seen the mid Atlantic ridge which looks like it used to be a great crack on the ocean floor? Probably not.). Again, the fossil record shows that marine life fossils are at every level on the planet, everywhere around the globe, and that, in fact, over 90% of the fossils on land are marine. And they say the Bible is not historical and not backed by science. And btw there are almost 300 Great Flood legends around the world. Even the one by the Aborigines of Australia is highly similar to what the Bible reports. . So you've been told a book showed the origin of species, but it didn't. You've been told G.I. animals show evolution but they only show they are having, at most, minimal changes that leave them basically what they were before. . You were told there is a Geological Column, but there is not one on the planet. You're told over and over that natural selection shows evolutionism when it actually just somewhat modifies the organism through shifting already present information, or sometimes through loss of information, in the genomes, leaving it essentially what it was before. It may eventually become a new species of fish, or bee, or tree, etc., but it will always stay a fish, a bee or a tree etc. We see no evidence whatsoever of any species in a Genus moving up to the next step on the Animal or Plant Kingdom to become a new Family. (Not to mention never seeing any transitions from any order, class, phylum or Kingdom.) . Yet that would have had to have happened for evolution to occur, and it is claimed, with no evidence whatsoever, that it did happen over and over and over - in the conveniently invisible and unverifiable past. . We have trillions of life forms out there. So why don't we see mutations causing any lifeform of Family A to turn into a lifeform of Family B? After all, their ancestors have supposedly had hundreds of millions of Darwin years to make the switch and be moving around as part A and part B. But eagles stay eagles, bullfrogs stay bullfrogs, dolphins stay dolphins, eboli bacteria stay eboli bacteria, tulips stay tulips, chimps stay chimps, fruit flies stay fruit lies, and of course people stay people, no matter how much they change. This fits in with what the Bible says about creation having been halted. . What else does evolutionism offer besides unsubstantiated theories, in fact theories that defy the real evidence, presented as facts? Logical fallacies. Logical fallacies always, always, undergird evolutionism defense. . The favorites are Correlation Does Not Imply Causation and Presuming Omniscience, though it uses many. . Correlation Does Not Imply Causation goes like this: "Look! Fossil A has some similarities to Fossil B! We'll use big words to sound impressive about that, like 'similar homology.' We have exactly zero evidence Fossil A even had a descendant, much less one significantly different from it, much less that it turned into B, C, D etc. But we are going to tell you, as gawd's truth scientific fact, that we know all about what happened to its evidence-free, data-free, descendants. We'll call that science." . This leads right into the Presuming Omniscience logical fallacy. Another example of a use of that fallacy is when an evolutionary paleontologist will pick up a fossil from the ground and tell you with absolute authority that they know all about what happened to it's invisible "descendants" in the untestable past - for over 100 million Darwin years. . "Missing links" (2 to 5 million Darwin years' worth of them between you and Lucy or some other such "transition" du jour) is a Presuming Omniscience logical fallacy phrase. How do you tell missing links from never existed links? Have...faith...brothers and sisters! And be so grateful that YOU ain't religious! . Learn how to spot logical fallacies and you will see them used in every defense in evolutionary literature. . Ignoring the actual data is also part of evolutionism. For just one of innumerable examples, they say life can come from inorganic matter (and don't say they do not - who came up with the antiscientific primal pond, creationists?) The data, what real science uses, shows life, always and only, comes from life and life of the same kind. . Pile theories presented as facts on top of logical fallacies, ignore the real data or try to spin it away, and stir well with sophistry. Then you have evolutionary theory. . You're not a fish update. You have a Creator Who made you and loves you and wants you to know Him, and to love Him, too. Don't trade that in for pseudo science mumbo jumbo.

[@loricalass4068]

Dr. Russell Humphreys is a peer reviewed nuclear physicist working in the area of cosmology. He made accurate, peer reviewed, predictions on magnetic fields in our solar system based on a young universe model. You, on the other hand, have said zero based on any scientific data whatsoever. You seem to feel that if you are just nasty and insulting and name calling that you have shown your brilliant intellect, scholarliness and objectivity. Gee, should I listen to you? I don't think so. But you are already on mute so I don't have to worry about that. Bye!

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

Lorica Lass is a fucking liar. Not only was Charles Darwin NOT an "armchair theorist", but being an armchair theorist does NOTHING to disprove what a person says.

[@loricalass4068]

Notice something missing from your reply: Science. You not only offered no observable scientific data to refute anything in my post, you said nothing based on science whatsoever. Therefore you have followed a very typical pattern of YT evolution supporters. You also have followed their other typical pattern in that you feel free to insult people and, even, in your case, to be obscene. I have discovered over and over that such posters never do say anything based on observable scientific data. However, their verbal abuse escalates with any future comments. Therefore you will shortly go on mute. I wish you well, and have prayed for you, but can see that any further exchanges between us will not be fruitful. Bye!

[@loricalass4068]

You just gave a beautiful example of what I was talking about in my last post. Thank you. And you are now on mute, too.

[@byron2521]

I had a similar experience with this "pretentious" ignorance myself aver 20 years ago. I was a sophomore in college. I was studying anthropology and went to a lecture by one of these supposed PhD creationist. He claimed to have his PhD in biology. When it came time to ask questions I asked a question about something involving natural selection vs. artificial selection. Now, it was not that he didn't understand the wording of the question itself. It was that he didn't know the difference between the definition of natural selection (evolution controlled by nature or environmental pressure such as whale evolution) and artificial selection (evolution influenced by man such as the varieties in breeds of dogs). Sorry for the simplified definitions of artificial and natural selection, but I thought there may be some that have never heard these terms? But, I assume if you do not know the difference, you are not claiming to be a biologist. This supposed PhD in biology didn't understand what I meant by "natural" vs. "artificial" selection. Really? A PhD in biology doesn't know those terms. Even if he did not believe in the theory of natural or artificial selection (as most creationist do not), he should be familiar with their definition. That was my first lesson that some of these creationist credential claims are bogus (at best a non-accredited Christian creation course with no real science behind it).

[@frankirfourfingers]

Yawn

[@ericscaillet2232]

@@frankirfourfingers left or right🤭

[@DanielBrownsan]

To whoever filmed this and enjoys playing with the zoom function - please stop doing this in the future. Thanks.

[@isidoreaerys8745]

And please Edit original slides into the video. With PZ in a picture in a picture

[@maheinicke]

richard carrier got a question in about the liver! awesome!

[@Roedygr]

Ray Comfort is presumably just pretending to be dense. However, I think an animated cartoon will be needed to explain speciation to the world.

[@marcello234]

The problem with Creationists is that they're not willing to look. They only work backwards, they believe they already have the answer (God / Bible) and they're only interested in how evidence comes back to the answer they "already have".

[@Z4r4sz]

(Young earth) creationism is essentially the position that all of modern science, 90% of living scientists and 98% of living biologists, all major university biology departments, every major science journal, the american academy of sciences, and every major science organization in the world, are all wrong regarding the origins and development of life…. But one particular tribe of uneducated, bronze aged, goat herders got it exactly right. Reminds me of flat earthers and chemtrail nutjobs.

[@micheleploeser7720]

I love you guys, Science RULES

[@MsKariSmith]

Wonderful talk...keep them coming please!

[@williamheywood9115]

Brilliant lecture, extremely interesting.

[@SlideRulePirate]

Puts me in mind of a (sadly true) horror story related to me by my son. Brit here. As a single Dad I made good use of the museums in London when my son was small because though the travel had to be paid for the entrance for them was free. He developed a real connection with the Natural History Museum. So much so in fact that now that he is not so small, it is a favourite place of his to take his young ladies. On one such trip he was dismayed to discover that his 'current' truly did not realise that dinosaurs had once been actual living creatures and were not simply dreamt up by the movie industry. I would suggest that there is a (hopefully small) silent, demographic composed of individuals who appear high functioning but are in fact near incapable of absorbing, or indeed of giving a damn about anything not immediately connected to their everyday lives. Thankfully they are not together now. :)

[@ringojmusic]

Happy Saturnalia!!

[@YNVNEone]

Mister camera operator.....you are appreciated. You make this so-o-o much more enjoyable to watch. Yessirree that is what you you are doing.

[@allwinds3786]

"believe" is the wrong word, understand is a better word for science based knowledge

[@ultraviolet.catastrophe]

I've always thought so too. The question, "Do you believe in evolution?" seems to suggest that there's no evidence for evolution. I always answer with, "No, I don't believe it. I know it's true because there's evidence." The creationists' rebuttal is always, "What? There's no evidence because we don't *see* evolution happening today." It's almost like they expect to wake up *tomorrow* and find totally new animals roaming the planet. That, to them, would be evidence for evolution. What a shame.

[@jonneexplorer]

Believe simply means to accept as true. You can accept a claim as true for good, or bad reasons. Belief isn;t the problem, the reasoning is.

[@allwinds3786]

@@jonneexploreryes, but to say you "believe" to some that word implies religious faith.

[@wesbaumguardner8829]

I suppose it depends upon what you consider science. Much of what is called science today has completely abandoned the scientific method. All of these doomsday prophecies supposedly caused by carbon dioxide are a fine example of pseudoscience being called science. They do not use the scientific method. Instead, they use computer programs they call "models" and pretend to empirically observe phenomena that only exists in their computers.

[@adonais81]

"Wrong" is a wrong word. Fuck others opinions. I believe , i believe but i dont believe in God. Debunked

[@p.bamygdala2139]

39:10 “How can we win?” Answer: You can’t. They will never relent. Period. A new strategy is required.

[@FlyingSpaghettiMonster2000]

Unless they die out.

[@Mark73]

How about a strategy of calling them on their bullshit?

[@tedapelt9944]

For anybody who is interested in the creation/evolution "controversy", I highly recommend the following exercise:1. Open up Answers in Genesis or whatever creationist website you like.2. In another tab open up talkorigins.3. See if you can find ANYTHING, no matter how obscure, in the creationist website that is not covered in talkorigins with stunning detail and comprehensive references.Good luck!

[@randyparsons3188]

It doesn't really matter what you say, the creationist will simply reject anything that doesn't fit into their religious dogma.

[@gregorybueschet9896]

the same goes to you atheists we try to do the some now you know how we feel I may not have prove that god exist but if he is I hope that he set things strait that he is for real

[@randyparsons3188]

This would be a trivial thing for a God to do. All She has to do is appear before people and do some magic. She could also appear before me and have a nice chat. The fact that God does NOT do those things which make the most sense, is further proof that God is a human invention, kinda like Superman, except that Superman doesn't sit around on his lazy ass and hide from people all day, even though he is fictional. What we have is a God that is all powerful and all lazy.

[@Spudcore]

Ray Comfort really is the worst.

[@danielstoner7807]

Adam Power And yet, bananas ARE delicious - how strange.

[@cheeple]

Adam Power he really believes what he's saying, I know because when your "mid-brainwash" nothing will change your mind, the separation only comes with time and improving mental health. Ray Comfort may be a neo-atheist in 5 years. They cant keep up their lies forever.................

[@Spudcore]

The worst wanker in the world.

[@massiveannie2358]

+Adam Power poor old ray he has far too much goat semen in his stomach to possibly make any sense

[@massiveannie2358]

2consider always ready to discuss these issues with theists but ray comfort is a fkn knob. have you actually researched how much money this brain dead fkwit makes every year? so he is worthy of abuse and ridicule. also i live in melbourne, australia and happy for you to visit so you can say that to my face

[@ladyjatheist2763]

It's ray comfort, and it's pat robertson... stupidity multiplies (geometrically). I wouldn't sully my brain with a second of either of the two, when they show up in a video my limbic system screams.

[@lauriesoper4056]

But even Pat Robertson no longer believes in Creationism. kzbin.info/www/bejne/eYDKe2WpoJVpZpo

[@jordanvincenzo464]

If you live in the 21st century, ridicule is almost a necessity if you hold to absurd notions of reality in opposition to overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

[@paulatiredofthisshit]

Merry Christmas, PZ

[@frogstamper]

Just don't engage with creationists, they will never accept the truth , they don't want too...don't give them the oxygen of publicity, let their fairytales die in darkness.

[@frogstamper]

@The 11th Hour And as always that eleventh hour will come and go, and morons like yourself will be scraping around for excuses...what is it now 2000 years and sky-boy still hasn't returned. Grow up and live the one life you know you have, not some bronze age desert fairytale brought about by illiterate goat-herders. As for being puppet, you've got to be kidding you believe your mythical friend has been pulling your strings all your life, you're the personification of a puppet. Carry on watching the clock...

[@jazzhuman]

Oh. There's Dr Richard Carrier at 44:00 asking a question.

[@jeffalbertson804]

Isn't it interesting how quickly they forget the commandment about "not bearing false witness". Their Christianity is rather selective.

[@probablynotmyname8521]

Ray comfort isnt stupid, he knows exactly what evolution is and coul easily describe its basic features. Rays problem is that his entire life (and grift) is tied to a creationist interpretation of the bible. To change now would force a rework of his entire life. Its a lot like priests, if youve been in the clergy for 20-30 years leaving that behind and trying to find something else to do is extremely difficult. Apologists are leeches on the faithful, they dont care about atheists or other faiths because they are only talking to people who would potentially give them money in the first place.

[@AndrewSanchez11235]

Obviously being and MD is not a qualification for understanding anything at all; just take a look at Ben Carson.

[@calebmatthews2026]

I used to think that dating doctors would somehow be a way to sort out the morons. After several failed attempts, I can firmly deduce that an MD or PhD is little more than a certificate of ability to comply and memorize a set of facts. These titles have no bearing nor represent a capability to think rationally, a level of maturity, skepticism, logic..... None of these. In fact, I would argue that a person who has gone through the processes and gained such a title, has a delusional sense of self-worth/importance and a sort of god complex. They are ordained by society to have gone through the gauntlet and garnered some sort of infallibility which simply has no basis in reality. Some of them never even put aside their religious beliefs and instead simply exist in a convoluted reality of cognitive dissonance. Moreover, I would say... These people, are the most immature, thoughtless, non-contrarian, bought by capitalism, shallow thinkers on the planet. They've earned this honorary place in society and tout it at every opportuniy to assert dominance and ignore logic or contrary fact or opinion. It's gross. It's frustrating. It's the American way.

[@malligrub]

American doctors do seem to be some kind of weird abomination...

[@KrisMayeaux]

Most American doctors believe in Creation because they see firsthand the design of biological systems.

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

Exactly how I feel about anyone with a well-paid job, such as police officer, soldier, prison guard. These people, are the most immature, thoughtless, non-contrarian, bought by capitalism, shallow thinkers on the planet. Self-entitled to the status quo. NOBODY is entitled to the status quo. There is NOTHING sacred about the status quo.

[@KrisMayeaux]

ALightintheDark: The majority of doctors believe in God because they see first hand the unbelievable complexity of the human body. And what you didn't know is that there is a major difference between microevolution (overcoming antibiotics by bacteria) and molecules to man evolution. Evolution is not at all important in med school except microevolution, and microevolution is part of the Creationist Model too. Nobody disputes it. It doesn't logically follow though that just because a microbe overcame antibiotics that the little microbe could fly over time and become a human being. No one has ever shown conclusive proof that evolutionary processes have the ability to perform such a creative feat. No one has ever show in the lab or real life any instance of morphological change coupled with higher complexity. Why? Did evolution just stop or something? Or did it just never happen?

[@siwilson1437]

Brilliant talk, educational and amusing. best of the best.

[@deeliciousplum]

This is a side to Professor PZ Myers that is such a joy to explore. There are a few quips and an ad hominem or two or three that he shares, yet most of this talk addresses the misunderstandings that prominent and influential bible literalists are hosts to. As far as evolution goes, I do deeply respect that Dr Francis Collins is fully onboard with what is known. Where I may draw the line is when Dr Collins claims that a supernatural entity, as like the one that is described in the Christian bible, is the initial catalist for life and for all matter. To me, that is filling an unknown with a Christian descriptor which comes with a lot of costly and unnecessary baggage. Dr Collins is free to believe in the supernatural. All that I hope is that he will not use such beliefs to impede our species from the humanitarian acts of lessening the suffering of others. I don't think he is doing that. So, huge kudos to Dr Francis and other theists, deists, and supernaturalists who have their beliefs, yet who do not add to the suffering(s) of our wonderous, yet challenging species.

[@tomtunafish8957]

Intellectual arguements with creationists are a waste of time. It may not be kind, but ridicule and shaming are the only ways to address their claims.

[@tomtunafish8957]

Jim Thinnsen ... you may think you're an intellectual, but not even close, dude!

[@tomtunafish8957]

Jim Thinnsen ... do you know anyone who thinks?

[@KeithCooper-Albuquerque]

This is a must-view video on the subject of just how hard-headed and wrong people can be! Great talk!

[@myster.ejones1306]

Mike behe, said "Blah Blah Blah Creation!" It's true! Ok, Say that to a Judge then, Under Oath! He Shat his pants! (See: Kitzmiller vs Dover, it's what happens when mythology meets reality, and is very refreshing for people who live in 'reality' 😊)

[@myster.ejones1306]

Psalm1Tree . Blah Blah Blah! If the American christian judge says that id/ creationism isn't science, and it's merely poorly disguised religious doctrine veiled in lies, Then what response other than utter ridicule do you expect from an educated Englishman? Dumbass!

[@myster.ejones1306]

Psalm tree.you've Deleted your bullshit responses then? Funny that eh? Dumbass! 😂

[@loricalass4068]

No, I didn't delete them. Apparently the person who has this channel deleted them. Guess he or she felt threatened by them. Below I will repeat what I said before, on my other account, and see if it gets deleted, too. I think you are on ignore for the usual - no science based observable data presented, just meaningless personal insults. For the discerning, such posts as yours are actually very helpful to show what the evolutionary mindset too often is like and, why, I believe, I had to put you on mute. ----------- If you want to settle science questions, guess where you go? Not to a courtroom with a politically correct, politically appointed, non science trained judge or any other judge. You go to the lab or to the field. The Dover Trial had zero impact on the creation movement. We saw how Kenneth Miller used the strawman logical fallacy to make his points against Behe. That is, he first misrepresented Behe's points, then attacked the misrepresentations. . As for the chromosome 2 argument that Miller seemed so impressed by in his court statements... . The whole chromosome 2 "evidence" for common ancestry is actually a beautiful little example of how evolutionary defense is always based on logical fallacies. Most people - including myself in the past - couldn't tell logical fallacies from a hole in the ground. Thus they are easily confused. . Okay, so if you fuse those two of our chromosomes together you could say there is a superficial match - in number only - with the 48 chromosomes of apes. Uh, tobacco has 48 chromosomes, too. Ever heard of the Correlation Does Not Imply Causation logical fallacy? . Also, other chromosome fusions do occur which are not being mentioned. For example 1 in 1,000 people, who function like others, have an additional fusion, the Robertsonian Translocation. However, no one is claiming it comes from some ape type creature. Cows and some other animals have fusions but no one says that shows they evolved from something else. Ever heard of the Cherry Picking logical fallacy? . Also, the Chromosome 2 fusion is human in every way. There is no ape type info in it. In fact, apes have chromosomes that are larger in size than those of homo sapiens. Ever heard of the Incomplete Comparison logical fallacy? . We have exactly zero data - you know, what real science uses, unlike evolutionism which always presents theories as gawd's truth facts - to show when or how that fusion got there. Yet we are being told as scientific truth that we do know! Is there even a fragment of a toe bone from that murky, mythical, hairy creature that supposedly gave us a fusion? No, there is absolutely zero evidence any such life form ever existed. But you aren't being told maybe it existed. You are being told it DID exist and that it DID give us our chromosome 2 fusion. Ever hear of the Presuming Omniscience logical fallacy? . Every bit of evolutionism is based on logical fallacies, theories presented as evidence, data ignored or spun, and lots and lots of...faith...all stirred well with sophistry. If you truly learn your logical fallacies, and take them seriously - which most evolutionism defenders refuse to do - you will see that they undergird every evolutionary peer review. . As for the touted so called 2% difference between apes and people, that is a perfect example of skewing the data. Get a female ape. Have a hair stylist work on her. Put her in a long, slinky dress. Teach her to wear high heels. Add some makeup and perfume. Then bring her to the Prom. See how many guys ask her to dance. Or... try getting Kongella a blind date. Tell the prospective guy that you can't say much about her, but that she is only 2% different from all the hot chicks he knows. If he is dumb or desperate enough to still go on the date, see how he reacts when he sees her. . Take an ape or chimp to a preschool. Will it perform only 2% differently from the children there in terms of learning the alphabet, standing in line to go potty, drawing, coloring, singing, speaking? Will it have social skills that are only 2% below theirs? And will the children only be 2% different from the beast in terms of strength, hairiness, dentition - well, the list just goes on and on. . Evolutionism teaches you to drop your common sense on the floor as soon as they give you a "science fact.". . And btw I have seen a clip of Ken Miller, on the Colbert show, where he says that as a Roman Catholic he believes "Jesus Christ is the Creator of all that is, seen and unseen." In this exact same time period he was running around the country giving lectures on the so called collapse of intelligent design. So...his Deity is dumb and design free, yet created all that is seen and unseen? Wow. What a miracle! . You are not part ape. You are made in the image and likeness of your Creator, Who loves you and wants you to love Him, too, and to know Him for Who He is, the Father of Mercies. I know because, as a former atheist, He showed so much mercy to me. .

[@myster.ejones1306]

Lorica Lass. Wow! I was totally unaware that they ever did that. Thanks for the information.☺ I make an extra effort to be incredibly rude, cruel, and aggressive to people who insult Me and I've never, managed to have a comment removed yet! You must have some kind of 'Special Status' ! (I'm guessing : 'Bonkers! With too many Socks' & not enough 'meds' )😂 Please don't bother re-posting 'chunks of cut-n-paste guff' on my account, as I won't bother to read it. If you actually have a specific grievance with any of My opinions, or feel I've misunderstood one your points, feel free to illustrate such and I will read it/them, but be brief if you wish to be taken seriously. I can't say fairer than that. P.S. I think you are nuttier than a squirrel's fart! & You'd better Read this quickly before the channel removes it! 😂

[@myster.ejones1306]

Lorica Lass. OK, I'll admit I was interested to remember exactly which 'person of alternate cognition' you were? You're the 'Kitzmiller vs Dover' creationistismist! Hahahahaha! Did you watch the trial? Dumbass! The prosecution informed the judge (who was a creationist btfw!) of the facts! 5 out of 8 of the 'Professional' defence witnesses shat their pants & refused to even show up! Two defence witnesses escaped 'Contempt of Court' charges 'by the skin of their teeth', after Lying to the Judge whilst Under Oath!. The Judge then 'Schooled' the contemptuous Bunch of ShitSacks on 'The Law!' Case is Closed! God Lost! Deal With it! 😂

[@NeilCrouse99]

FANTASTIC SPEECH!!!

[@andybeans5790]

"Incompetent sphincter" is my new favourite phrase

[@winston2015]

2:34 -You dont need any degree to 'understand evolution' -all one needs is to know the facts.

[@davidarmes9002]

winston smith The facts? There are no facts. Just a lot of wild conjectures and of course the phrase "millions and millions of years later". To form a transitional phase National Geographic has stated that about 5% of the fossils exist to show a transitional phase. The rest is filler.

[@williamjameslehy1341]

+David Armes So all the molecular analysis that has been done on different organisms clearly showing the exact sorts of nested hierarchical cladistic relationships science has hypothesised...is 'wild conjecture'? All the magnificent fossils we have beautifully showing the evolution of whales from small terrestrial hoofed animals, birds from small theropod dinosaurs, early amphibians from fish, and humans from our MRCA with chimpanzees...are all 'wild conjecture'? The biogeographical distribution of extant organisms and fossils which makes perfect sense within a scientific worldview, but is utter nonsense if you try to harmonise it with Noah's flood...is 'wild conjecture'? There are only two possibilities to explain the wealth of evidence we have today. Either the theory of evolution is true, OR else God created every 'kind' as-is ~6,000 years ago, but He's a bit of a trickster so He decided to mess with the fossil record to make it LOOK like evolution is real and has been going on for hundreds of millions of years or more. The idea of God messing with His creation just to fuck with us is invoked by creationists with surprising frequency. If you can manage to pin one down for a straight answer regarding the starlight problem, you're more likely than not to get some version of it, i.e. God used magic to make it seem like light from incredibly distant objects had had billions of years to reach Earth.

[@douglasmschwartz1402]

Aliens

[@Skiskiski]

P.Z. Myers is great.

[@ANTINUTZI]

*...THE* question that *finally* got me "disinvited" from presb-prot sunday school-- at age 6-- centered on the garden of eden forbidden fruit apple / knowledge of good & evil shtick, annnnnnnnnnd Adam & Eve getting so furiously busted *for not knowing what they were doing was wrong in the first place.* This essential paradox *FINALLY* got me sprung. I (sort of) grew up to be a same-sexual master's level social psychologist ... and during my 65 years, fellow professionals helped me understand, and best deal with, a 178 IQ and transvariant (self-relevance adjusting) photographic memory thingie (and that ain't all). So, I was evidently born immune from the presb-prot mind virus. I eventually put it this way: *Religion is the lethal psychological disorder that masquerades as it's own cure.* I still have my baptismal certificate. I keep it handy for the day we class-action sue for child abuse damages.

[@jeanetteyork2582]

I'd like to be in on that lawsuit....I'm qualified! Great commentary...thank you! 🌷

[@a787fxr]

Found, watched, liked then subscribed. Thanks for the informative and a bit sarcastic video.

[@p.bamygdala2139]

I enjoy these skeptical speeches and debunks to feel better about the state of the world, However, I am of the opinion that a more meaningful goal in the long term would be to collectively pursue an actual solution to the neurological problem of creationists and their questionable ethics. Ray Comfort and his brethren aren’t interested in listening to reason, because they have a very effective business model that perfectly suits their neuroses. So we need another method to introduce reason. I would love to see more videos and discussion about understanding the differences in the brain of the theist compared to the skeptic, and how we can help overcome cognitive dissonance toward reason, rather than to familiarity.

[@katrand5357]

Here! Here!

[@markkmiecik9797]

Next time you talk to Creationists, tell them you found the body but refuse to let them see it.

[@flatearth9140]

DO YOU DUMB GLOBEHEAD PEOPLE REALLY THINK ALL THAT MATH STUFF WILL HELP YOU ?? NO !! YOU ARE WRONG !! THE EARTH WAS PROVED TO BE FLAT BY ARISTOTAL AND KIMICHI !!!!!!! AND THOSE GUYS ARE FOREIGNERS !!!!!!!!!OU GLOBEHEADS DONT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE SPINTRIFICAL FORCE THAT RELATES TO QUANTUM DEBRIS !!! THE SYSTEMATIC DENOMINATIONAL CONCEPTUALITY DOESNT ALLOW FOR MASS !!! THATS WHY IRRIGATIONAL ROTATIONIONAL TOTALITY RESTRICTS DIOMETRIC CONCUSION !! THE MATH YOU USE DENOTES REAL TIME CONSEQUATIAL SPIN !! YOU DIRTY BASTARD !!!!

[@sundiver137]

Turn off the cap lock you idiot.

[@thebatmanover9000]

Say what you will about P.Z. Myers political views but he is a brilliant biologist.

[@cyprescrow]

It is kind of sad actually. First I was laughing just like everyone else. But something felt a little wrong. Then I began to feel sad for the people that guys like that Ray Comfort addresses. They live in a bubble which must be totally isolated from the rest of the world. And they actually hang on every word of the Ray Comforts in their world,. Probably because that´s the only "truth" they are being served. I´m thinking about the children. Growing up totally denied the developments and progress of humanity. I just felt a little sad for them. Though apart from My own short detour in sadness, this is a great both funny and educative lecture.

[@VfletchS]

Every fossil is transitional.

[@VfletchS]

Meat, do you really think I'm saying that apes have human babies or something? Let me guess... you also believe that evolution can't be true because if we descended from apes, there shouldn't be any apes today (we didn't; common ancestors, but even that simple concept would confuse you; "basic stuff"). You are just another sad "the-bible-is-true-because-it-says-it-is" imbecile. You are trying to participate in a conversation in which you deny a process, a scientific fact, about which you have *zero* understanding or knowledge. You haven't the slightest inkling of what evolution is or how it works, which is *amazing* because the principles are pretty simple, and you literally have the world's knowledge at your fingertips should you choose to look. You remain ignorant by choice, which means your opinions on the topic aren't worth a plate of cold piss. Be thankful that the "natural world" today is so accommodating to you and your idiot ilk. You would have been meat 150,000 years ago; a meal for some large apex predator that would have removed you and your potential, inferior spawn from the gene pool.

[@KrisMayeaux]

Evolution is completely unsubstantiated. There is no evidence for major transition coupled with higher complexity in the entire world -- for all of recorded history. It's just one big interpretation based on Naturalism. Intelligent Design is a competing theory for which there is evidence.

[@vinnytaranova6163]

ajs1031 , hey... thanks , I enjoyed that video.

[@paulnolan4971]

awesome lecture

[@Majellanz]

"Moron waves!"...where IS this evidence of 'intelligent design'?

[@jeffcd3559]

Maybe Ray was having trouble meeting a woman at that time.

[@jeanetteyork2582]

Could be...he underwent fission and was beside himself!

[@VaughanMcCue]

Perhaps his enthusiastic dexterity, with the banana and glistening eyes, scared the girls away.

[@melanievierth6120]

Ray Comfort is happily married and has a family.

[@jeffcd3559]

Honestly my comment was from 5 years ago. I have no idea what the conversation was from back then or what I was addressing. But thanks fro replying. :>)

[@rosesandsongs21]

For believers, the bible is like a credit card contract: it's written too mall so they don't bother reading it and sign ''I Approve'' at the bottom of the page. (saw that somewhere...)

[@Roedygr]

"Its just a little protein". But what have the creationists found. BUGGER ALL!

[@waggishsagacity7947]

I only have one question: When will we evolve enough to comprehend that there's absolutely no point in arguing with Creationists? I for one have a lot more important things to do. On the other hand, thanks for an enlightening & interesting lecture -- worth watching.

[@mizlpix4027]

As a former YEC, I beg to differ. It was the work of people like PZ Myers (Gutsick Gibbon, Stared Clearly, Aron Ra) that helped me understand evolution and the evidence supporting it, freeing me from my errant beliefs.

[@waggishsagacity7947]

@@mizlpix4027 I don't know which of my 2 comments you're responding to. So I will assume that you disagree with me that it's pointless to argue with creationists. Your comment is NOT about arguing, but about becoming convinced that evolution is both correct and scientific. So what do you disagree with?

[@davidarbogast37]

Yeah that sort of attitude has probably contributed to why creationists have flourished as much as they have. They've progressed for centuries while not being held to the flame, instead has done that to every other position so it's due time for them to get their comeuppance.

[@ViktorEngelmann]

Most Creationists believe Evolution meant that species change into wildly different species within seconds - like Dracula: *POOF* now he's a bat! That's a straw-man argument. Evolution really means that there are very small changes that add up over hundreds of generations for thousands of years before you can even see that something has changed.

[@TheDude50447]

I would argue that a good chunk of them has a basic understanding of this. Thats why they are lobbying for a few thousand year old earth.

[@jacobcampos2407]

Mutations that happen to humans all the time because our DNA is so complex and long and easy to mess up. Although they are usually bad change. Over 1000’s of years it’s bound to be beneficial

[@Programm4r]

There’s no such process that adds new information. Scientifically, all we’ve ever observe were modifications. You’re the ones that believe in magic. Lolz

[@ViktorEngelmann]

@@Programm4r that information isn't "added" by some entity. The current information mutates randomly. And the better a mutation, the better its chances of survival ("natural selection"). Evolution = Mutation + Selection.

[@Programm4r]

@@ViktorEngelmann how do you go from a single cell eukaryotes to a human being without adding new information? It can’t be done.

[@JTuaim]

The title should read; A few things I learned about Ray Comfort.

[@paulnolan4971]

awesome lecture

[@swordnquilstarskgrem]

One of the best, and presently going on, arguments for evolution is the Russian Fox experiment. For one thing, it shows that genes don't do just one thing. If you choose foxes for docility (like the ancient humans did with wolves), and mate the docile foxes together, genes get switched on that aren't related (at least to us) for docility at all. Like coat changes, and tail changes. That evolution is going on before our eyes, and one day, wild and domesticated foxes may grow so far apart that mating is no longer possible, and they will turn into a different species. Or they may stay like dogs, who can still mate with wolves. That's what evolution is. Species slowly EVOLVE. They don't just pop out of mom's womb a different species with no one to mate with. You have a docile fox, you find another to mate with it, choosing docility as your end point, and you wind up with a different animal after generations of simply choosing for one characteristic but having the genes come along for the ride! I don't get that folks can't understand this simple idea.

[@nevanderson1164]

+swordnquilstarskgrem "They don't just pop out of mom's womb a different species with no one to mate with. I don't get that folks can't understand this simple idea" To get it, means abandoning their protection from the vagaries of fate, And they would have to decide how to be. It is all too scary, like a child abandoned in the subway.

[@delta-vk1me]

nothing evolved lunatic its still a fox you idiot you are going to hell lying clown

[@tothesciencemobile4707]

delta75 75 Ah, yes, you're one of those EVILution is a LIE straight from the pit of HELL type. Why is the Adam and Eve story so important anyway? Is it perhaps because of the seemingly all too important selection process by which human nature is to be ultimately determined? Well, if that's the case, then, yes you're entire religion is screwed... However, if you concede that it is merely allegorical then you're fine, otherwise, the evidence is sorely against you... even according the bible itself because such a selection process (the one presented in the story of Adam and Eve) would've already occurred long before them anyway. The Adam and Eve story is, in fact, just redundant and completely superfluous. If this would've really been the case it would have been an incredibly stupid decision (especially by an all-knowing god). There's no need for the additional morality tale of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. An even simpler solution would've been for said god to simply choose a couple of those angelic beings who chose to fight for god, against Lucifer during the holy war that occurred in heaven in the first place, then poof them down to Earth and start the human population that way. Those were some worthy moral agents -- were they not? This is why I think the biblical creation story debunks itself. Admittedly, the Adam and Eve story on its own is a pretty air-tight one provided you don't question the stupid rule of atonement (but the same can be said for any mythology). Where they fucked up, however, was with the story about the war in heaven, but hey, every mythology has its fuck ups too so nothing new there. But then again without the war in heaven how would they've explained the existence of the kind of evil we see today without fallen angels? Its pretty obvious Genesis is just a bunch of mythological stories cobbled together in an attempt to explain where various things come from like good and evil and all the different languages and so on. But instead of saying that death (spiritual/physical) is some kind of curse (lol yeah, the thing that doesn't exist is the curse - some punishment), they should've just went with it instead of acting like this so-called 'death' is is such a big deal like it actually exists - in the sense that it is the actual end of life and just found a way to explain it better. But, poor primitive humans thought death was curse, lol! Not only is there no evidence for such a selection process having ever occurred, there's a plethora of evidence to the contrary, in place of where the evidence of Adam and Eve should be, such as: *endogenous retroviruses and their specific locations in both our genome and Chimps* *No.2 chromosomal fusion* *chickens with teeth* (god totally meant that though, right?) *moles with eyes - yet they're pretty much blind* *flightless birds* (one of god's cosmic jokes, I guess) *other animals have the gene that codes for the automatic synthesis of vitamin c... but ours is turned off* (one god's cool design tricks, I take it?) *note-worthy transitional fossil: Ardipithecus Ramidus, and of course the much touted Lucy* **BY THE WAY, BIOLOGICAL ORGANISMS ARE OPEN SYSTEMS -- YOU'RE PRODUCING ENTROPY RIGHT NOW, THERMODYNAMICS IS **_NOT_** A PROBLEM FOR EVOLUTION.** (The 2nd law argument is a bit misleading [if anything I think creationists are misleading themselves here] because this actual suggest that entropy *PLUS SOMETHING ELSE* (like some illusive _duality or hidden variable_ ) that they _themselves_ haven't even identified that causes the production of entropy to become antithetical to the evolutionary mechanisms). I'm pretty sure overpopulation would have been an issue if Adam and Eve _didn't_ eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and instead ate from the tree the of life because they would've incurred immortality as biological entities... unless they didn't need to eat or drink to sustain they're immortal lives (lol). Hell, they probably wouldn't have even needed to breathe! ....Except when talking, I guess. OR maybe they would've just foregone lungs, esophaguses, tongues, teeth,lips, etc and just incurred telepathy instead. I mean, why not? Also, adhering to such a story really dicks with the fine-tuning argument, because physics, chemistry, and biology would have been VERY for Adam and Eve and their descendants had this been the case. *So, is this (the way our universe currently is now) the only way we could possibly exist, or not?* Can't have it both ways. I take it you didn't think these thing through all the way, did you? How many cat kinds were on the Noah's ark? Just 1 kind of cat, right? Meaning just a single pair of... what was it? Lions? ...So, how did we get house cats if evolution is false? How do you get a non-lion from a pair of lions? I'm asking you this again because you evaded the question in your last response to me. So, try again lunatic - answer the question: how do you get a non lion from a pair of lions if evolution is false?

[@DaryMatera]

Are you aware that your "best argument" for evolution fully involves the machinations and input of a creator? Ironic, isn't it?

[@ImOddTodd]

Mudisuda Raman, even if we don't know doesn't mean we can say a god did it let alone your particular man made god.

[@Aria-Invictus]

All you have to ask a creationist, if they are pestering you about the Theory of Evolution, is what standard of evidence do they have for the Theory of Evolution to be met for them to be convinced the Theory of Evolution is true. You will hear crickets.

[@ExtantFrodo2]

What I often hear are things that would falsify evolution on the spot. "I would need to see a squirrel come out of a monkeys butt" I kid you not that's an actual quote.

[@sophonax661]

Aria Invictus No crickets, rather lies and religious white noise (bible verses, claims that i will go to hell, etc).. Problem is they don't know what these words mean. Neither 'theory'/'evolution' nor 'evidence'.

[@kennethd.9436]

Really cool video! Five thumbs up!

[@ericscaillet2232]

Talk about evolution....5 thumbs

[@marconatrix]

"Hi! I'm the First Dog, and I have to find something to mate with ... it's a Bitch!" ;-)

[@tedgrant2]

It's not boring at all, but does require concentration - huge contribution to the promotion of evolution education.

[@jonksmodels]

This is so funny. He makes some good points too :)

[@troyevitt2437]

Wouldn't a bull elephant, unable to find a female elephant with whom to mate, be an incelephant?

[@earlefrost5512]

"High intensity moron waves"..... ROTFL!! I died. Is funny because is true.

[@macey75]

Hey, Richard Carrier 43:39. Cool

[@ambulocetusnatans]

I would like to say that PZ is wrong, wrong, wrong. I strongly disagree with him. In fact I cannot find the words to describe how much I disagree with him. I have never disagreed with anything as much as I disagree at this moment. Christian radio is NOT entertaining!

[@sundiver137]

Maybe you can't get past the "high-intensity moron waves". I can't either.

[@Ravaxr]

I did have an experience with Christian radio that was VERY entertaining, but mostly because of its irony. I am an audio technician that works in a theatre. If you didn't know, there is a system called Telex that stage hands, technicians, and occasionally actors use to communicate between the light booth, sound booth, stage, and dressing rooms. That way actors stay on schedule, SFX and light cues can synchronize, that sort of thing. It turns out that the wall mounted units in my theatre in the dressing rooms is just so set up that the wires make a radio antenna. An antenna that is naturally tuned to a fire and brimstone christian radio channel. I took great pleasure in turning on the system each night, especially when we were performing The Full Monty, a broadway show about 6 men becoming strippers, and our performance went all the way!

[@WWZenaDo]

Ya gotta get together with a few like-minded friends, get some beer or wine in you, and "MST3k" it....

[@kathleenmckenzie6261]

Dear Dawkins: Just because you disagree with someone/something does not automatically make him/her/it wrong. I might disagree that the earth is a globe, but the fact remains that no one seems to have been able to take aerial photographs of the edges of the flat earth.

[@brianfoulkrod593]

Considering that you said you can't find the words, you sure used a lot of words. I'll at least say you told it like it is: you disagree with him. Any inferred "truths" should be spelled out, and show your evidence. (Spoiler: If you use the Bible as your source, I get to use Ken Ham's line: "Were you there?".

[@xxnoxx-xp5bl]

Love that I cam here to listen to PZ Myers and had to listen to a video featuring bloody Holly Willoughby talking about writing on the side of a banana... The absurdity of advertising. It was an advert for some product I can't even remember the name of by the way. Good job.

[@hamowl5794]

Love the Richard Carrier cameo at the end Q&A X^D

[@craigcovell409]

I love Ray Comfort. Clowns amuse me.

[@nevanderson1164]

Ray Comfort a Jester for Jesus

[@BFDT-4]

Creationists or Literalists, when they lose an argument, go away (Like Ray Comfort, for example) and then change the topic, and try to browbeat that one. Then they lose, and shift the topic, and rinse and repeat. Rinse and repeat...

[@DaryMatera]

Atheists do the same thing, and macro evolution remains full of massive gaps in the theory. Those who claim all the gaps have been filled are ignorant liars. Yet most internet atheists will make that claim.

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

+Dary Matera Hey, christurd! PROVE ANYTHING QUANTIFIABLY true in that worthless unimportant bible book of bullshit you take seriously.

[@theidiotwhowaitsforjesus889]

frankos rooni my only complaint about evolution is that it is overrated, OF COURSE animals and creatures will change and adapt in environments, but that is LITERALLY natural, but it does not disprove my Lord Jesus Christ . Jesus made all animals and creatures to change with the environment to some degree, just as he made humans, if I were to go to Africa, i would develop stronger muscles and bigger bones and a faster runnin speed. Jesus made me and all of you that way, and he LOVES Y'ALL VERY MUCH! He wishes that you all would believe in him😃

[@canyonparkerfirebird]

The idiot who WAITS FOR JESUS! That wouldn't happens dude I will have no features that change the only way he bones get dense is from milk

[@charlestownsend9280]

Science: evidence, observation, logic, reason, rational thinking, peer review, etc. Religious people: yeah but we have a tousand year old book full of myths from several thousand years ago when people thought that the earth was flat. Checkmate.

[@hifijohn]

Ray comfort is so crazy that I really believe he is a troll.

[@ParanormalEncyclopedia]

I for one think Ray distributing origin of the species is a great thing. Just skip his pointless intro, who reads intros these days, and enjoy a free copy of a very important work.

[@patbrennan6572]

a phd in religion, 'how rediculous', that's the same as saying i have knowledge in something that i have absolutly no proff off..

[@Red5614r]

+Pat Brennan My Moms defination of a PHD was a pickle headed dope.

[@rtarbinar]

the way i heard it was B.S. bullshit, M.S. more of the same, Ph.D. piled higher and deeper. :)

[@brainmaxxing1]

Rob biddlecombe, I will not deny that religion has had positive effects. For example, the manufacturing and printing of the bible greatly increased literacy rates, and the use of religion to provide political unity and to strengthen empires has been a major contribution to many historical developments. But you cannot deny that religion has had severe negative consequences. The majority of world problems are caused by differences in religion and culture. Religion has led to mass genocides and terrible wars. People desperate to cling on to religion reject scientific fundamentals such as the curvature of the Earth or scientific accomplishments such as the moon landing. All in all, while religion has had a beneficial effect in the past, human intellect has increased and we no longer need religions to keep people educated and together: in the modern day, it is doing the contrary.

[@nevanderson1164]

+rob biddlecombe "But, if it has positive results and brings good to life, is it bad ? " It stupifies, stultifies cognitive abilities by superimposing "God did it" over every field of inquiry. It teaches cognitive dissidence as a virtue, and promotes intolerance of any belief at variance to your bronze age delusion. It uses fable to terrorise and indoctrinate children. So YES it is beyond merely BAD, it is the every essence of the EVIL that it purports to counter

[@Summer4ever973.]

Not sure if stupidity pays, but pandering to the stupid is an eternal gold mine.

[@Roedygr]

The creationists keep moving the goal posts. We have to nail them down ahead of time what they would consider valid evidence.

[@patbrennan6572]

thank you for solidifying my belief in atheism..

[@loricalass4068]

Let's see how pseudoscience is being used to convince you that you are nothing but a fish update who sprang from some antiscientific primal pond type scenario, and who certainly doesn't have a Heavenly Father Who...loves...you. Then let's look at some real science, a bit outside the box. . We have been told that life came from inorganic matter. Now, science must have observable data to be valid and must not ignore the actual data. The actual data, per the LAW of Biogenesis? Life always comes only from life and life of the same kind. Theories are fine if they don't defy the actual evidence. Even in labs, with intelligent design and high tech equipment, life has never been created. The best they can do is take an already living cell and alter it with genetic engineering, or get a few components of the cell, not nearly all of them at al, which never come close to being alive.. . The needed proteins and other components of a cell are not only not all there, they are not arranged as they need to be arranged - in statistically impossible ways if random chance had put them together. No one has even gotten close to creating life. It should be easy. Just take a simple cell or any life form that has died. There you have all the components needed for life - except life. So why can't anyone do a Dr. Frankenstein on any of them? (And kindly don't say that evolution doesn't "do" abiogenesis. Look. It's in evolution writings and documentaries, and all over the net and YT.) . We have also been told as gawd's truth scientific fact that a 3 foot high ape type creature, an Australopithecus, Lucy, was your great, great etc. granny. Based on? Some minor similarities, namely "similar homology", namely the Correlation Does Not Imply Causation logical fallacy. The fact that she was pretty much like any other ol' Australopithecus was irrelevant to them. Incomplete Comparison logical fallacy. . Since evolutionists are always disagreeing with one another on everything, now some of them say, No, it wasn't Lucy but some other such creature. Some creature with no evidence it existed. Presuming Omniscience logical fallacy. . Now how do they know Lucy et al even had a single descendant, much less one significantly different from it, much less one that could turn into you? Presuming Omniscience logical fallacy. . Guess for how long any "transitions" are missing between you and Lucy or some other transition du jour? Oh, for just 2 to 5 million Darwin years! The rocks say no transitions exist. The evo spin, their Presuming Omniscience logical fallacy, tells you, again as gawd's truth scientific fact, that they are just "missing." . We've also been told that we came via a fish, Tiktaalik. The story goes that this...fish...was found in just the right place for a "transition". Problem is, it's 100% nothing but a...fish. See Wiki describing it as "an extinct species of lobe finned fish." Google the fossil of Tiktaalik, which is mostly missing. Do those tiny fin fragments look like they could be said to be turning into legs - without the Presuming Omniscience logical fallacy? Yet we see all sorts of fanciful art work of Tik with long, muscular "evolving" legs, bending as the fish transits, supposedly, to land. The real evidence? . In countless billions of fossils and in living examples, all we ever see are 100% fish and 100% tetrapods/four legged animals. (No, mud skippers and "walking" catfish are not transitions. They are using their 100% fins in an unusual way, similar to a flying fish which is no way turning into a bird.) . Evolutionists are constantly picking up fossils like Tiktaalik from the ground and telling you, for up to over a 100 million Darwin years, what happened to their invisible and evidenceless billions of "descendants." Never ask them how to tell missing links from non existent links. And then they accuse Christians of being into "magical thinking." And, as a former atheist, I agreed with that! . You are not a fish update. You are infinitely more than that. Here is some actual, observable and documented evidence, to help you see that: Now in the Bible we are told of a Man Who believed in Adam and Eve and Noah as being actual, historical figures. The Bible says He did miracles and told others to do things like raise the dead and heal the sick. It also describes His death and burial. Is there any actual scientific data to support those stories? . See secular news reports about Val Thomas, dead for 17 hours but now alive and normal after prayers from her family and her Church. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qYGrqpapfsl1Z7s . . See Medical Marvel Beyond Chance, from a secular source, with a pediatrician giving his report. this one attesting to a dying child's healing which cannot be explained by modern medicine, and came after a relative laid hands on her and prayed for her. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrOoGBra7N2idk The DNA in every cell in her body was transformed. . See CBN's short vid with Dean Braxton. You'll hear his critical care doctor, rated the best patient care doctor in Washington state, saying "It is a miracle...a miracle..." that Braxton is alive, has no brain damage and is normal in every way. Why? He had no heart beat and no respiration for 1 3/4 hours! His family believed in divine healing and they and others were praying for him. kzbin.info/www/bejne/mWS9m6dup5KbhKM . Also see CBN Dr. Chauncey Crandall Raises A Man From The Dead. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qV6ai56imrGoZ9k Part 1. This video is a bit faded but has the most complete information on this story. . Get Dr. Richard Casdorph's book The Miracles. There he gives medical documentation for miracles, mostly, but not all, from Kathryn Kuhlman's healing services. Casdorph came to Kuhlman's meetings to debunk her but turned into a supporter, as did other doctors. You can see him and other doctors in some of her healing services on YT. (She is now deceased.) Delores Winder is one of the cases documented in his book. You can watch her amazing story on YT with Sid Roth. kzbin.info/www/bejne/eZfHeGiZr8aIjpI . Bruce Van Natta was in a horrific accident and lost about 80% of his small intestine. Someone he never met was told to take a plane to lay hands on him and pray for him and to his doctors' amazement, his small intestines grew back! kzbin.info/www/bejne/nIrad6Sbfad0aJo , Here we see many witnessees testifying to food being multilplied miraculously. kzbin.info/www/bejne/najWpoyPfq9miMk . Do you think that Someone Who can raise the dead, restore missing body parts, and multiply food out of nothing, needed "evolution" to make life forms? No, He created them fully formed and fully functional in 6 days just as Genesis, a Book He always supported, tells you. . Then there is the Shroud of Turin. If you don't know, the Shroud is a linen burial shroud with the faint, blood stained, image of a crucified man on it. If you have heard that the Shroud was proven to be a Medieval fake based on carbon 14 testing, in the documentary Jesus And The Shroud of Turin, you can see the very inventor of carbon 14 testing saying that the sample was invalid due to contamination. . kzbin.info/www/bejne/joXXdZusoMSUrZY . The vid demonstrates many miraculous features such as pollen from Jerusalem and faint images of flowers that are found only in the Jerusalem area during the spring, as at Passover when Messiah was crucified. With modern technology we also see that the Shroud has an x ray quality which even reveals the bones and dentition of the Man on the Shroud. . In the 70s a NASA scientist noticed the Shroud's photographs had inexplicable, unique in the world, qualities. He got up a team of scientists, called STURP, to examine it in person in Italy. (No, the Shroud is not "just a Catholic thing" as the Vatican only came into possession of it fairly recently in history.) They used NASA, and other, high tech equipment, with 100s of thousands of hours of research. Their findings are seen all over the net and were published in respected science journals. . The team was composed of 3 Jews, at least one agnostic and one atheist, and people of various faiths. They all agreed on these things: The Shroud image was not painted on, and they have no clue how it got there. It exactly matches, down to blood stains where a crown of thorns would be, the description of Messiah's death and burial as given in the Bible. The image could not be duplicated with modern technology. . About the Shroud I say "If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck, maybe it's a duck." . Maybe that Man on the Shroud is your very Best Friend and Savior. I pray you will find that out. You're going to need a miracle some day friend. They are out there in abundance for those who humbly seek them from their Creator, the One Who made all that DNA out there, and Who said, "Whoever comes to Me I will no way cast out."

[@katrand5357]

@vilcantroper she doesn't know anything because her comments are too long... please don't try to help. Your logic is as valid as any creationists

[@adamkunzun]

I am always amazed whenever see some rational scientific minded non creationists like people you & feel secure thinking I am not alone on this earth.👍

[@ericscaillet2232]

Unfortunately too many that in turn lowers the quality of life ,we should learn to manage ourselves.

[@bonusflaps1749]

@@ericscaillet2232 What absolute gibberish.

[@reallyoldfatgit]

Humans didn’t domesticate cats, cats enslaved humans.

[@mistou26]

A bliss to watch and learn from someone who really knows what he is speaking about. At first, in evolutionary biology of course, but also about creationists. The fact is, thtat here in France (my country), if we probably have a few of them, they make absolutly no noise in the media, Of course, we have our bigots, and they are very influencial especially in the right wing of political landscape (your republicans). But none of them are yet dangerous enough for scientists to be obliged, as you are in US, to fight strongly and publicly against their attempts to descredit scientific knowledge. Seen from outside of the nation who succeeded to send men on the moon, and who is still (but for how long ?) the world leader in scientific discoveries, it is something absolutly staggering.

[@donaldedward4951]

If they believed you they would not get to heaven so they persist in not believing you. Heaven is more important to them than your logic. Don't you get it?

[@MrExEssex]

I applaud Myers for his blunt speaking. Creationists are ignoramuses and need to be told so by as many people as possible. I think for many religious people, their adherence to their beliefs is purely defensive. It's very difficult for people to admit that all the stuff they had faith in is a load of old hogwash. They should be encouraged to do so however.

[@ikatgoat8578]

6:50- So anything after the blow hole develops would be considered "post nasal drift?" Badump da :)

[@grazihartwig9235]

Amazing

[@bigboy9983]

And on the eigth day God created the Ostriches and creationists, both of whom stick thier head in the sand.

[@martinathom5167]

even pat Robertson thinks creationism is ridiculous. I I don't like him either. I never thought id say this but pat Robertson is a voice of reason in this matter

[@sundiver137]

IKR. Poor Ham, when you get your ass schooled by Pat fucking Robertson you are really, really lame.

[@martinathom5167]

LOL very very true!!

[@loricalass4068]

Let's see how pseudoscience is being used to convince you that you are nothing but a fish update who sprang from some antiscientific primal pond type scenario, and who certainly doesn't have a Heavenly Father Who...loves...you. Then let's look at some real science, a bit outside the box. . We have been told that life came from inorganic matter. Now, science must have observable data to be valid and must not ignore the actual data. The actual data, per the LAW of Biogenesis? Life always comes only from life and life of the same kind. Theories are fine if they don't defy the actual evidence. Even in labs, with intelligent design and high tech equipment, life has never been created. The best they can do is take an already living cell and alter it with genetic engineering, or get a few components of the cell, not nearly all of them at al, which never come close to being alive.. . The needed proteins and other components of a cell are not only not all there, they are not arranged as they need to be arranged - in statistically impossible ways if random chance had put them together. No one has even gotten close to creating life. It should be easy. Just take a simple cell or any life form that has died. There you have all the components needed for life - except life. So why can't anyone do a Dr. Frankenstein on any of them? (And kindly don't say that evolution doesn't "do" abiogenesis. Look. It's in evolution writings and documentaries, and all over the net and YT.) . We have also been told as gawd's truth scientific fact that a 3 foot high ape type creature, an Australopithecus, Lucy, was your great, great etc. granny. Based on? Some minor similarities, namely "similar homology", namely the Correlation Does Not Imply Causation logical fallacy. The fact that she was pretty much like any other ol' Australopithecus was irrelevant to them. Incomplete Comparison logical fallacy. . Since evolutionists are always disagreeing with one another on everything, now some of them say, No, it wasn't Lucy but some other such creature. Some creature with no evidence it existed. Presuming Omniscience logical fallacy. . Now how do they know Lucy et al even had a single descendant, much less one significantly different from it, much less one that could turn into you? Presuming Omniscience logical fallacy. . Guess for how long any "transitions" are missing between you and Lucy or some other transition du jour? Oh, for just 2 to 5 million Darwin years! The rocks say no transitions exist. The evo spin, their Presuming Omniscience logical fallacy, tells you, again as gawd's truth scientific fact, that they are just "missing." . We've also been told that we came via a fish, Tiktaalik. The story goes that this...fish...was found in just the right place for a "transition". Problem is, it's 100% nothing but a...fish. See Wiki describing it as "an extinct species of lobe finned fish." Google the fossil of Tiktaalik, which is mostly missing. Do those tiny fin fragments look like they could be said to be turning into legs - without the Presuming Omniscience logical fallacy? Yet we see all sorts of fanciful art work of Tik with long, muscular "evolving" legs, bending as the fish transits, supposedly, to land. The real evidence? . In countless billions of fossils and in living examples, all we ever see are 100% fish and 100% tetrapods/four legged animals. (No, mud skippers and "walking" catfish are not transitions. They are using their 100% fins in an unusual way, similar to a flying fish which is no way turning into a bird.) . Evolutionists are constantly picking up fossils like Tiktaalik from the ground and telling you, for up to over a 100 million Darwin years, what happened to their invisible and evidenceless billions of "descendants." Never ask them how to tell missing links from non existent links. And then they accuse Christians of being into "magical thinking." And, as a former atheist, I agreed with that! . You are not a fish update. You are infinitely more than that. Here is some actual, observable and documented evidence, to help you see that: Now in the Bible we are told of a Man Who believed in Adam and Eve and Noah as being actual, historical figures. The Bible says He did miracles and told others to do things like raise the dead and heal the sick. It also describes His death and burial. Is there any actual scientific data to support those stories? . See secular news reports about Val Thomas, dead for 17 hours but now alive and normal after prayers from her family and her Church. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qYGrqpapfsl1Z7s . . See Medical Marvel Beyond Chance, from a secular source, with a pediatrician giving his report. this one attesting to a dying child's healing which cannot be explained by modern medicine, and came after a relative laid hands on her and prayed for her. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqrOoGBra7N2idk The DNA in every cell in her body was transformed. . See CBN's short vid with Dean Braxton. You'll hear his critical care doctor, rated the best patient care doctor in Washington state, saying "It is a miracle...a miracle..." that Braxton is alive, has no brain damage and is normal in every way. Why? He had no heart beat and no respiration for 1 3/4 hours! His family believed in divine healing and they and others were praying for him. kzbin.info/www/bejne/mWS9m6dup5KbhKM . Also see CBN Dr. Chauncey Crandall Raises A Man From The Dead. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qV6ai56imrGoZ9k Part 1. This video is a bit faded but has the most complete information on this story. . Get Dr. Richard Casdorph's book The Miracles. There he gives medical documentation for miracles, mostly, but not all, from Kathryn Kuhlman's healing services. Casdorph came to Kuhlman's meetings to debunk her but turned into a supporter, as did other doctors. You can see him and other doctors in some of her healing services on YT. (She is now deceased.) Delores Winder is one of the cases documented in his book. You can watch her amazing story on YT with Sid Roth. kzbin.info/www/bejne/eZfHeGiZr8aIjpI . Bruce Van Natta was in a horrific accident and lost about 80% of his small intestine. Someone he never met was told to take a plane to lay hands on him and pray for him and to his doctors' amazement, his small intestines grew back! kzbin.info/www/bejne/nIrad6Sbfad0aJo , Here we see many witnessees testifying to food being multilplied miraculously. kzbin.info/www/bejne/najWpoyPfq9miMk . Do you think that Someone Who can raise the dead, restore missing body parts, and multiply food out of nothing, needed "evolution" to make life forms? No, He created them fully formed and fully functional in 6 days just as Genesis, a Book He always supported, tells you. . Then there is the Shroud of Turin. If you don't know, the Shroud is a linen burial shroud with the faint, blood stained, image of a crucified man on it. If you have heard that the Shroud was proven to be a Medieval fake based on carbon 14 testing, in the documentary Jesus And The Shroud of Turin, you can see the very inventor of carbon 14 testing saying that the sample was invalid due to contamination. . kzbin.info/www/bejne/joXXdZusoMSUrZY . The vid demonstrates many miraculous features such as pollen from Jerusalem and faint images of flowers that are found only in the Jerusalem area during the spring, as at Passover when Messiah was crucified. With modern technology we also see that the Shroud has an x ray quality which even reveals the bones and dentition of the Man on the Shroud. . In the 70s a NASA scientist noticed the Shroud's photographs had inexplicable, unique in the world, qualities. He got up a team of scientists, called STURP, to examine it in person in Italy. (No, the Shroud is not "just a Catholic thing" as the Vatican only came into possession of it fairly recently in history.) They used NASA, and other, high tech equipment, with 100s of thousands of hours of research. Their findings are seen all over the net and were published in respected science journals. . The team was composed of 3 Jews, at least one agnostic and one atheist, and people of various faiths. They all agreed on these things: The Shroud image was not painted on, and they have no clue how it got there. It exactly matches, down to blood stains where a crown of thorns would be, the description of Messiah's death and burial as given in the Bible. The image could not be duplicated with modern technology. . About the Shroud I say "If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck, maybe it's a duck." . Maybe that Man on the Shroud is your very Best Friend and Savior. I pray you will find that out. You're going to need a miracle some day friend. They are out there in abundance for those who humbly seek them from their Creator, the One Who made all that DNA out there, and Who said, "Whoever comes to Me I will no way cast out."

[@sundiver137]

When your imaginary friend heals an amputee, tell us. Until than all you've got are anecdotes, which are NOT the plural of data christard.

[@loricalass4068]

I do not know of all the miracles that have been. However, I gave you an example of amputated intestines growing back again. I gave you an example of food coming out of nothing. Can your friend Darwin or your imaginary friend of evolutionism cure even so much as a hangnail? Can you? Your mind and heart were created for more than denial and animosity toward others who disagree with you. May you find that out. You are now on mute. Bye!

[@koltirasrip5775]

To add on a funny extra bit to the dog note at the end... There are marble didlos from ancient Germany that are 14,000 years older than the creation of the world.

[@saultube44]

Please put in the description the names of the boks that PZ Myers recommend?

[@Scyllax]

These people at a certain point are deliberately lying. They are con men or worse, they are convinced that any lie will be forgiven as long as you win a soul over.

[@PcPete123]

Very informative, great tnx... As for Mr Ray Comfort I've always considered him as being slightly dim. Calling him banana man I now know to be an insult to a banana's intelligence. That's of little comfort, obtuse Comfort... The penultimate question from the lady who asked for a one line retort. This was to her friends belief that they agreed about evolution but that god just started it off. I'd reply with the god of the gaps argument, conformation bias and where science doesn't have all the facts is not proof of supernatural causation.

[@Mark73]

Oh, PZ, it's so adorable that you think you could ever expect anything resembling intellectual integrity from creationists. Rule 1 of creationists. Their ONLY goal is to hold on to their creationist beliefs at all costs. They don't care about evidence, they don't care about facts, they don't care about what is actually true about the world, they don't care about making sure that their beliefs accurately reflect reality. They care about one thing. Staying creationists. The sooner you accept and internalize this fact and start treating them accordingly, the happier you'll be.

[@norbertjendruschj9121]

Creationists treat their deluded adherents like tobacco companies treat smokers: With self-serving lies.

[@polar-lights5778]

Creationists: People who - through the power of faith alone - have managed to launch manned rockets from the 'mount stupid' portion of a Dunning-Kruger graph.