Does SCIENCE make FAITH obsolete? Rice Professor, James Tour at @TheVeritasForum at Tulane

Rice chemistry professor, James Tour, answers the question "Does science make faith obsolete? at The Veritas Forum at Tulane, 2015.

God bless.

00:00 Teaser
00:50 The Scientific work of James Tour
11:43 Personal Background and Faith
30:00 Chemical Issues with Evolution
45:03 What's your competing theory?
48:51 Man without God
50:40 Question and Answer

~
WeChat - @drjamestour

[des]

Thank you Dr. James Tour! We praise God for giving us His Word!

[boltrooktwo]

The main trick of nihilism that effects our meaning in life is to reduce something down to it's elements. You can see people as united beings or you can reduce them to their elements, they are an animal, a brain, a clump of cells, or molecules and from that perspective they have less meaning. You can think of a handshake or a hug and reduce it to a brief touching of skin, then it has less meaning. I respect Dr. Tour that he can work in something that reduces everything to it's elements but still see the united meaningful view of people and the united meaning of life.

[csmoviles]

Praise God for His children who love Him with all their heart, mind, soul and might 💖🙏💖🙏💖

[mosesexodus]

​Modern Quantum Physics has shown that reality is based on probability:
​
A statistical impossibility is defined as “a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 1/10^50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a Rational, Reasonable argument." The probability of finding one particular atom out of all of the atoms in the universe has been estimated to be 1/10^80. The probability of just one (1) functional 150 amino acid protein chain forming by chance is 1/10^164. It has been calculated that the probability of DNA forming by chance is 1/10^119, 000. The probability of random chance protein-protein linkages in a cell is 1/10^79, 000, 000, 000. Based on just these three cellular components, it would be far more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the cell was not formed by un-directed random natural processes. Note: Abiogenesis Hypothesis posits that un-directed random natural processes, i.e. random chance formation, of molecules led to living organisms. Natural selection has no effect on individual atoms and molecules on the micro scale in a prebiotic environment. (*For reference, peptides/proteins can vary in size from 3 amino acid chains to 34, 000 amino acid chains. Some scientists consider 300-400 amino acid protein chains to be the average size. There are 42, 000, 000 protein molecules in just one (1) simple cell, each protein requiring precise assembly. There are approx. 30, 000, 000, 000, 000 cells in the human body.)

Of all the physical laws and constants, just the Cosmological Constant alone is tuned to a level of 1/10^120; not to mention the fine-tuning of the Mass-Energy distribution of early universe which is 1/10^10^123. Therefore, in the fine-tuning argument, it would be more Rational and Reasonable to conclude that the multi-verse is not the correct answer. On the other hand, it has been scientifically proven numerous times that Consciousness does indeed collapse the wave function to cause information waves of probability/potentiality to become particle/matter with 1/1 probability. A rational and reasonable person could therefore conclude that the answer is consciousness.

A "Miracle" is considered to be an event with a probability of occurrence of 1/10^6. Abiogenesis, RNA World Hypothesis, and Multiverse would all far, far, far exceed any "Miracle". Yet, these extremely irrational and unreasonable hypotheses are what some of the world’s top scientists ‘must’ believe in because of a prior commitment to a strictly arbitrary, subjective, biased, narrow, limiting, materialistic ideology / worldview.

Every idea, number, concept, thought, theory, mathematical equation, abstraction, qualia, etc. existing within and expressed by anyone is "Immaterial" or "Non-material". The very idea or concept of "Materialism" is an immaterial entity and by it's own definition does not exist. Modern science seems to be stuck in archaic, subjective, biased, incomplete ideologies that have inadequately attempted to define the "nature of reality" or the "reality of nature" for millennia. A Paradigm Shift in ‘Science’ is needed for humanity to advance. A major part of this Science Paradigm Shift would be the formal acknowledgment by the scientific community of the existence of "Immaterial" or "Non-material" entities as verified and confirmed by observation of the universe and discoveries in Quantum Physics.)

[samuelmatz]

Many are striving for the Gospel. These persons take LORD'S calling to share with all before He returns, serious. Dr. Tour is a faith follower.

[Orionsbelt]

Awesome as per usual. Thank you for the 2014 reference on proving resurrection. It's good to have those tools available. My request...have that type of material more front and centre/easily found. Anyhow...thank you!!

[Jesus_is_Lord-]

Glory to God. He is using you mightily, Dr. James Tour.
Hopefully, you can make the audio better next time 😁

[edbarnes]

😇😇😃❤🌹🌹🌹GREAT to learn something NEW about our Faith in Christ--- we have a LOT to Learn as we get Older🌹🌹🌹

[alexstramp]

Great Job what a blessing.... May God Bless You, Your Family, Ministry, and Work even more....

[karlsteingall]

Dr Tour
Does a terminal alkene display cis/trans isomerism?

[pigzcanfly]

Please listen to the 14 part series on abiogenesis by Dr James Tour. He thoroughly dismantled the various arguments used by proponents of this belief. It really only covered the surface of the many problems but it's over 15 hours going over most of the biggest problems with it.

[peterjongsma]

I'm on Tour with James Tour.
It's a Pilgrimage.
Hello fellow Pilgrims.
Enjoy The Tour.
Sun.11 .Dec.2022.
Sydney Australia.

[cmathias]

Notice how everyone who comments can't disprove James Tour. They only attack him, because they know they are wrong, but they need to feed their insatiable desire to believe a lie.

[richardtucker]

Mitochondrial enzymes are necessary to make a cell, but the old conundrum of RNA is needed to produce DNA, and DNA is needed to produce RNA still holds true (logic is immutable). Cells aren't life without the code in DNA for mitosis, or in larger organisms to have stem cells that can instruct every new division of a cell to perform a specific function. Only God the Father could form life.

[falczi]

Seriously I love your work and honesty, maybe you could write a book with all those chemical patterns, etc. You know, a book with 2k pages with science on each page :) ?

[petermathieson]

Don't touch that question. Clear signal. That's a question that begs to be examined.

[shipwright]

Did you do a Socrates in the city? I heard Eric Metaxas mention that in October.

[johndavidmartin]

The belief that molecules without intelligent direction can be made to develop into life is indeed a reiligious belief, akin the worship of luck, that oldest of superstitions, or at least a non-scientific one, as in unfalsifiable, unrepeatable, unobservable.

[alexduran]

I love all of your science and your spirituality doctor Tour. I do have a problem with your conversion point however, would like to Have a conversation about it.

[spatrk]

and for people to say that you dont have an agenda when you deny science behind abiogenesis.
and here you are publicly talking how evolution is religion in christian gathering
like you are kent hovind.
how old is the earth james?