Talking science, superstition, and sanity with

[@rkannan0emc]

When we teach science we also should teach what is not or can't be a science

[@Luixxxd1]

your requestis antithetical to the reason why science exist. In fact, calling something pseudoscience is far more damaging to science as a process, instead of respecting the efforts enough to disprove them just as hard as every scientist is trying to disprove every other theory. Science is not about being right, it's quite literally about finding out what's wrong

[@mrgyani]

What am amazing conversation, enjoyed every minute of it.. It's incredible how Dave was able to answer off the top of his head on so many diverse topics.

[@vishwakumar2864]

Professor Dave's videos of debunking James Tour provide better understanding of origin of life research. Must watch !

[@ChristianPrinceTELUGU1]

Why Dave couldn’t answer any of James Tour’s questions? James just destroyed the myth, the origin of life delusion. Stop throwing fake statements.

[@vishwakumar2864]

@@ChristianPrinceTELUGU1 yeah bro ! Therefore, a magical sky daddy turned mud into Adam and Eve. And the siblings born to Adam and Eve fkd each other and gave rise to humanity 👏. Hence proved 🙌.

[@godlessparticle]

Woohoo!! Professor Dave🤘🏽

[@alanjohn2675]

Interesting discussion thanks Vimoh

[@religiousatheist3430]

hi Vimoh, it was a nice stream .......I have a request, can you please bring Forrest Valkai and have a similar discussion he is also an atheist and he also does a lot of debunking videoes. especially about evolution. you can also talk to him about race and other things he explains things very well

[@shiroyasha_007]

Epic collaboration!

[@Mahesh-om6sq]

Worth watching, Thank you both guys.

[@prithwipatil5813]

Great stream

[@mrgyani]

8:31 - I had seen a video of Arvin Ash (great quantum physics videos) where he talked of a recent new paper that says - reality doesn't need an observer to exist.

[@pandawandas]

Quantum mechanics indeed do not say anything about consciousness per se - but what they do is cast strong doubt on physical realism, the notion that physical entities have defined existence independent of and prior to measurement. I would point to this year's Nobel prize recipients for their seminal experiments in refuting local physical realism, and to experiments that have been going on since 2007 refuting non-local physical realism (through the violation of Leggett's inequalities). An example of such an experiment would be the paper published in Nature called "An experimental test of non-local realism" by Zeilinger et al. Zeilinger concludes "There is no sense in assuming that what we do not measure about a system has reality" about his own experiment. In other words, it seems like physical properties don't exist prior to measurement. Another paper, also published in Nature (pretty strict & prestigious journal, not a place for woo-woo or speculation) titled "Testing Leggett's Inequality Using Aharonov-Casher Effect" concludes: "The violation of Leggett's inequality implies that quantum mechanics is neither local realistic nor nonlocal realistic. " In other words, the prima facie results of quantum mechanics do seem to indicate that realism is at least on shakey grounds. I feel like Professor Dave is not representing this accurately.

[@potts995]

Very interesting and insightful collab! I find myself wondering how effective Prof. Dave’s approach is in regard to changing others’ minds compared to other channels who tend to be more “soft” on others, but I guess when you’re targeting misinformation, we need as many different approaches as possible. BTW it’s interesting that Dave believes free will exists and brings up quantum physics. There are some physicists, like Sabine Hossenfelder, who has a KZbin channel, who argue that free will DOES NOT exist. For me, I just think, if anything, the concept is unnecessary to believe in.

[@pandawandas]

I don't see why randomness would be more free than non-randomness.

[@potts995]

@@pandawandas Same, plus I have some issues with the "you" and "I" concept. How can an individual be viewed as responsible for their actions if the universe is made up of information that travels at the speed of light? Wouldn't you just be better off blaming the universe for someone within it doing something by conforming to nature? The whole concept of free will just doesn't make sense to me.

[@gauravm8152]

I really love your channel vimoh, but it would be better if you let the guest finish and not interrupt in between

[@amitkolhe4155]

There's a KZbin channel called PBS EON. Watch the videos on PBS EON. They give you a detailed explanation on Abiogenesis... or how Organic life evolved from Inorganic life!

[@vimohlive]

I know of the theories. I was asking if there is a consensus.

[@amitkolhe4155]

@@vimohlive - There can almost never be a consensus. The origination of Organic life out of inorganic matter is such a complex process. Just imagine there are still Flat Earthers... we can't have a consensus on obvious things. Abiogenesis is clearly way beyond the minds of the Unscientific folks!

[@vimohlive]

@@amitkolhe4155 That's why I asked.

[@amitkolhe4155]

@@vimohlive - Waiting for a consensus is like waiting for approval to save the patient while you have the cure. You may have the cure but, you may not be able to use it for lack of approval from the regressive minded. Just imagine where the world would have been if, we had waited for the Regressive minded Religious people and not built any technologies, satelites etc. We would still be arguing about Flat Earth and How to be Pious in some secret society, scared for ous lives. If the Science is sound & logical & the tests prove it...simply ignore the nay Sayers. Don't wait for Regressive minded Nay Sayers !

[@amitkolhe4155]

@@vimohlive - Science doesn't work by consensus. It Either works or it simply DOESN'T! Doesn't matter if someone believes in Gravity or not. If he/she jumps out of a building, he/she will fall down. Doesn't matter if someone believes in electricity / electrons or not. Just hand a naked wire to him/her... and turn on the battery or the button... and the next moment he/she will start believing in Science. We need to be upfront and direct with these un-scientific people. The proof of science is in the fact that it works...Unlike God or Religion!