Response to James Tour: 700 Papers and Still Clueless (Part 2 of 2)

Last year I made a video about James Tour, a chemist and creationist who speaks out against origin of life research. He didn't like it much, so he decided to make a 14-part series about how dumb I am. He really pulled out all the stops, parading all of his classic fallacious talking points, with plenty of bald-faced lies and deliberate misrepresentations of scientific research peppered in for good measure. Honestly, I was rather shocked at how stupid it was. With so much material to work with, I ended up with quite a lot to say in response, and had to split it into two parts.

In this Part 2, we examine how James is lying about our progress towards prebiotic syntheses of all the major classes of biomolecules, and when it comes to cells, James would rather mislead his viewers with dazzling animations of modern eukaryotic cells than actually dig into the relevant literature. If you thought Part 1 was devastating, strap in.

Research cited in this video:

Check out "Is This Wi-Fi Organic?", my book on disarming pseudoscience!

[abragamjoe]

40:44 is my paper. Thanks to Prof.Dave !

[stevewebber]

"The ideal experiment should have no human interaction."
That isn't experimentation anymore then. It's only observation. And that would make most of science impossible.

[piwi]

You kept the best video in the end, when he explains why he doesn't want students to go studying abiogenesis. His argument is the following : we have no clue, therefore we should continue to have no clue. Assuming he was right on such cluelessness, he is basically denying the entire concept of research. His main goal is actually to stay ignorant.

[GutsickGibbon]

I know a lot of youtube creationists who have been pushing the Tour series for the past few months. It must be very embarrassing to back someone and have them so thoroughly shown to be uninformed/dishonest? Dave, my favorite part was the "Deceptive Tactics of Id proponents", because you so succinctly summarized exactly what dealing with these people is like. These guy (Tour, Jeanson, Sanford, Carter, Tomkins) have the incredible ability to do decent science when it doesn't threaten their YEC, but revert to a highschool level understanding the moment evolution or abio enters the picture. It's a powerful cognitive dissonance OR a downright chilling deception. And when they do attempt to address the gaping holes of Creationism, it becomes appearent it isn't about answers, but the illusion of answers, if only to placate the flock into believing that "everything is under control, we will be vindicated in the end". Great work!

[camwyn]

James: It’s invalid because it wasn’t in a lab.
Also James: It’s invalid because it was in a lab

And round and round he goes

[Jonperk]

When this video came out, I left a comment as a Christian who was thankful for the debunk. Almost a year later, I'm an atheist. This video was one very important resource of many on that long and painful journey where everything in that system of beliefs collapsed. Thank you for all you do, Dave - exposing pseudoscience and misinformation on all fronts, combatting preachers who make money by deceiving the masses, and helping to make the world a better (and more educated) place.

[janjoska]

So all natural ways to create life from things lying around is absurd but magic sky daddy described in a bronze-age book is somehow relevant explanation.

[SkateGeneva]

James : ''DO YOU HAVE A REFERENCE FOR THAT''
Dave : b*tch please

[joeldobbs]

This will be my fourth time listening to these, I understand about 20%, which I think is good for someone that loads windows onto trucks for a living. I was able to explain abiogenesis to a co-worker and describe autocatalytic reactions and their significance in abiogenesis. My brain still hurts a bit, both from the unadulterated biochemistry and Jesus James' horrible voice. I bet any student stuck with him reviewing their thesis has a good cry and changes majors.

Four months later: figure I'm good for 33% now including the relevance of wet/dry cycles, evolution of homochiral proteins and co evolution of differing RNA molecules. Our workplace apologist now actively tries to sabotage my day and I am pretty sure he thinks I was sent by Satan to test him. It is a testimony to how I feel about Christians that I made absolutely sure he couldn't do any real harm to me before I pissed him off.

[thenickstrikebetter]

Imagine debunking a 14 part series in 2 videos.

[sciencewolf]

Does anyone else love how Dave uses a a BUNCH of references in his arguments and not misquoting them? I do

[napdejoras]

Problem is, you're attacking his source of income. No matter how right you are, he'll never confess. Plus, most of the info he purports are beyond most people. I do admire your efforts on this. Keep it up!

[aiayta]

how many people are here enjoying the debunk of something they don't understand, but watched anyway because of all the sarcasm and the pleasure of watching a quack get smacked?

[kumaSOevl]

Professor Dave is definition of high level roasting

[tobiasbehn]

Synthetic chemist here. How can he not understand that controlled, quick synthesis of *single* target molecule is not comparable to the synthesis found in nature. If you want to make 1 special peptide in a high quantity and short period of time sure you need all that stuff . But if you just mix all the amino acids under the right conditions for a sufficient time you would get your target molecule, just in a small yield mixed with all the other combinations.

[TheLivingDinosaur]

There are two sad things here. First, it is a hear-breaking demonstration of how religion (as well as other beliefs in woo in general) can warp even the most functional minds. Dr. Tour is clearly an extremely intelligent individual, and yet when it comes to anything that impinges on his particular flavor of irrationality he becomes a functional imbecile (I'm a practicing biochemist myself and can attest to verisimilitude of Prof. Dave's expositions vs Dr. Tour's downright dishonesty/ignorance). The second is that Dr. Tour works at Rice University, an excellent academic institution from which one of my daughters just graduated. It is sad to think that some of Dr. Tour's cranial flatulence in this area might at some point rub off onto her alma mater.

[paulmoran]

I have an internet troll who uses Tour as his source of chemistry knowledge….and I’m so glad he does. I’m a chemist and I’d never heard of Tour, despite his 700 publications, but I dug in to him.

I’m astonished at the mendacity, hubris, ignorance, arrogance. I find him utter reprehensible and unethical - it shames me as a scientist.

[Broockle]

Kinda crazy how much effort Dave puts into his responses citing and explaining all these papers.
Can only hope Tour does the same.

[Brunnen_Gee]

1:26:09 this is scary, this guy actually has input on others who are trying to learn the field? So this man is purposely misdirecting people not only in their beliefs, but in their careers? How does he still have a job?

[jones]

I have special contempt for PhD's who use their credentials to mislead laymen - whether deliberately, or by neglecting to do their homework. When I was in Church, we identified preachers who used the bible for monetary gain - 'Prosperity Gospel' and the like. We called them 'Jack-Legs'. Tour and others fit the bill.
To me, PhD means you KNOW HOW to do research, and what constitutes an argument, etc.. There's no excuse for being unprepared and sloppy. At minimum if you are unstudied in a particular aspect or field, then you should say so up front. And if such is the case then don't turn around and make arguments from that ignorance, 'I just don't see how...', which laymen interpret as an expert declaration that some thing is therefore not possible. He's a Jack-Leg.