How do Molecules demonstrate the Anthropic Principle? - Dr. Kurt Wise, Devotional Biology

[@michaelteel4917]

I know I keep saying this but I can't help it, GOD IS SO AMAZINGLY AWSOME !!!

[@lynnmitzy1643]

Thank you IGH 🕊️

[@galaxyrider9599]

Amazing lecture! Thank you!!

[@michaeljenniferbrabson6263]

Thank you IGH!

[@reneeglover4819]

Wish u had taught my chemistry class in high school cuz u explain it so well!

[@jamesrattenborg]

Great job. Dr. Kurt I always enjoy watching your posts on Is Genesis history? You have a wealth of information on the case for creation.

[@MegaKnutten]

so cool ty

[@parulchauhan6144]

Very nice sir may LORD YESHUA HA MESSIAH bless you and your entire family forever amen in the name of the lord Jesus amen my dear and beloved sir

[@donniev8181]

Jesus Christ is the only name given under heaven by which man can be saved. Does your name change spelling when someone who speaks a different language writes it? Hebrew in the old testament did not even use vowels and was a dead language from 370ad to 1870.

[@vsevolodtokarev]

The way I first learnt the anthropic principle was: "if the Universe was not precisely fine-tuned for existence of life, and intelligent life at that, there would be nobody to argue about this (marvelous and unlikely) fine tuning". I am of an opinion that observation of nature can't, in principle, prove existence of its Creator (thought definitely it can provide hints); faith, by the very definition, has an irrational component to it. Rather, believing in Creator gives a chance to thank Him for this anthropic principle.

[@obiecanobie919]

The existence of a creator is a elusive matter ,cannot easily prove it and cannot disprove it either ,a unbiased careful observer really looking into it will lean towards creation model

[@ronaldmorgan7632]

Yes, the fine tuning of so many constants, our location in the universe, the information in a cell and the way cells function, and the properties of elements and molecules does not prove anything, but suggests something based on the totality of it all.

[@obiecanobie919]

@@ronaldmorgan7632 If one would assume that life is a higher form of energy than that of the materials is made of the second law of thermodynamics would call for a creator of that life to be the only way to equilibrium .Life emergence only happened in the past ,no one done it or seen it since .

[@ronaldmorgan7632]

@@obiecanobie919 Well, the biochemists keep saying, "Just give us more time and we'll prove how life started!". More like, keep giving them more grant money. It always comes down to time with scientists who refuse to even have an intelligent designer as an option. Given the odds of certain things happening, time being the answer requires more believing in magic than does believing in a creator.

[@josephbaker5810]

Does water exhibit the frozen floating property at all pressures?

[@christophersteger3401]

Just wanted to make a correction and say that he probably meant to say N2. N2 has a triple bond and is very stable. N3 is not very stable.

[@MilesDavisKDAB]

At 1:22 Dr Kurt the Unwise says "Nitrogen actually gets together in sets of three, three atoms, to produce a very strong double covalent bond between them". The text onscreen even shows N3 as the formula for molecular nitrogen. This is totally incorrect. TWO Nitrogen atoms form a Nitrogen molecule by forming a triple covalent bond i.e. three pairs of shared electrons. I know that his PhD is in invertebrate paleontology but anyone who has done high school chemistry should know this. I'm rather surprised this very basic error hasn't been edited out or corrected. I'm now at 7:00 and Kurt says that an ionic substance is polar. This is also not correct. I realise he is trying to explain some quite tricky ideas to people with little or no knowledge of chemistry but this can be done without making these sorts of errors. A polar substance is one that has a positive charge in one part of it's structure and a negative charge in another. Kurt gets this correct when describing water but is wrong to call ionic substances polar. By 8:00 Kurt has gone completely off the rails suggesting that the polar nature of water causes it to "hold up" large and heavy molecules. The diagram he shows with water molecules attracted to the positive charge on a large molecule is wrong on many levels too complicated to explain here. At 9:00 he says "the stronger the charge the easier it is to hold it up in water". Again this is completely wrong.

[@LTworkshop]

I noticed the N3 too. It is a mistake.

[@MilesDavisKDAB]

@@LTworkshop Sadly not the only mistake. Pretending religion is science is the biggest one.

[@LTworkshop]

@@MilesDavisKDAB That one he does not make. If you watch from chapter 1, he made a clear distinction between science and God.

[@MilesDavisKDAB]

@@LTworkshop So why does he continually mention God and creation throughout this series of videos?

[@LTworkshop]

@@MilesDavisKDAB I mean, why not? What do you think is science possible? (This question is discussed in chapter 1, so it is better to work on it there)

[@randyp15]

I need to make homemade glue clear strong..... For making unbreakable window glass using plastic

[@catmanbluz]

since most of the planets in our solar system do not have water, they all should be cold. Why is Venus, Neptune, Uranus hot?

[@ronaldmorgan7632]

Venus is close to the Sun. Never heard of Uranus and Neptune being hot.