Відео

The book is brilliant.

You know the worst part? That young couple were afraid and Ghost Nation left them even more frightened, the rotten mongrels!

Hey dude. Just because you used layers to recreate that doesn't mean that he did it. His house could really be haunted.

So interesting that I borrowed the book from my library. Can't wait to read it.

Bacon is the only superfood!😜

Wouldn't this just take what some in the Middle East are doing , and make it American? This would be total and utter chaos. Worldwide. Can you imagine being asked, when you apply for a US visa, if you believe in God, and being refused entry if you say No? Can you imagine how US citizens who don't believe in God would be bullied and discriminated against? Religious extremists don't believe in tolerance, equality or even consideration of anyone who doesn't agree with them. If this gets worse, well, I'm just glad I'm not American.

evolution is ridiculous because it implies "natural selection" is a force that knows the future and past and present and is able to converge creatures to move into a certain direction even though it completely lacks to explain why a fish came out of water, when it was perfectly fine in water maybe even safer in water than outside of water

science seeks truth? hahahahah did we already forget the vaccine and covid?

evolution is a ridiculous nonsense theory from a guy who used to do seances (Darwin) to try to find answers to his unanswered questions, so many basic questions that evolution hasnt answered i cant begin to name them all but ask me if your curious if u dare

so much propaganda and nonsense in the woman's initial statement, atheists arent sentenced to death anywhere unless u go and commit a crime in the name of atheism , even homosexuals arent chased after and killed in majority of countries, so this is nonsense propaganda

σ(^_^;)? The universe was created in 1976. It is too hot to make a universe at the time of the big bang. It can be created at anytime. God is slow and easy. A human can do a lot with their lifespan. I got the hunk. God got the chunk. Everyone else can have the rest. That is song spirit of ''76 by The Alarm.

(^-^; This is an artistic proof of a created universe. When you paint a shadow it's the opposite color of the object that made the shadow. Nobody knew what the opposite color of white was so the artists avoided painting white on white. The opposite color of white is baby blue and baby pink. The first artist to figure it out was Norman Rockwell. I was the second artist to figure it out. I saw it in the corner of a white room. The lighting was perfect to see it.

If you love this kind of video you gotta realize you're in some kind of a cult & you have a pretty personal issue with religion

here after la chimera

26:20 those ideas in fact can emerge from dreams, hallucinations, meditations and even appear randomly because when they think it up it’s not necessarily with the freedom of will. As Fry said not much earlier: “you can’t will what you will” and thus they emerge from the collective unconscious which is the part of the psyche one share as a species, which is specific to the evolutionary experience of that species. Symbols and myths are collective representations of those shared experiences, which is why some can survive and some can’t, like with Dawkins idea of memes, except Dawkins doesn’t explain how or why some survive and some don’t and the reason is that some capture the mind of a certain species because it resonates with them so deeply. I don’t think it was all consciously made up, but some conscious parts were definitely added over time to the myths, symbols and stories, but probably they didn’t consciously know what these appearing images of narratives meant exactly in dreams or hallucinations for example. What makes up images, narratives and symbols do actually come from somewhere and with an actual reason. This is something Dawkins can’t understand in my opinion, which is that narratives and symbols can indeed be ontologically true and epistemologically subjective (just like feelings and pictures in the head).

Dear Prof Brian Greene Could amassiv BH or even more than one, completely radiates (cosmic time scale ) and release the extreme curved space overtime , does this also contributes to the expansion of the space? Would it be possible that DE is maybe the last resedue energy of those BHs? Hope this make sense, and doesn't sound stupid 🙈🙈🙈 Best, Cleaning lady Berlin,Germany

❤Brian Greene is awesome🎉 The way he talks about complex subject like QM of a BH or BB with his String theory 🎉 As only HS level education..i believe to understand the deep principles. I am lifetime greatful to you❤ Best Cleaning Lady Berlin, Germany

i lived at a house for 3 years and out of that whole time there was only 6 or 7 times where stuff happened that made me believe the place was haunted. if you catch a location when its active, you will experience stuff that shouldn't be possible. i have personally witnessed with a room full of people something invisible, other than wind, gravity, or magnetism move a physical object. that shouldn't be possible...

(^^; The universe was created in 1976. It is too hot to make a universe at the time of the big bang. It can be created at anytime. God is slow and easy. A human can do a lot with their lifespan. I got the hunk. God got the chunk. Everyone else can have the rest. That is song spirit of '76 by The Alarm.

σ(^_^;)? This is an artistic proof of a created universe. When you paint a shadow it's the opposite color of the object that made the shadow. Nobody knew what the opposite color of white was so the artists avoided painting white on white. The opposite color of white is baby blue and baby pink. The first artist to figure it out was Norman Rockwell. I was the second artist to figure it out. I saw it in the corner of a white room. The lighting was perfect to see it.

You should stay in the house alone over night and record it

I got randomly recommended a video of someone's Homer Simpson bottle cap opener dying that is battery powered and has Homer saying something when you open the beer. It eventually started sounding like a haunted demonic thing lol Made me think of the Panasonic and I had to show my friends this video cause I got onto a rant about how this device made the whole ghost hunting community super disingenuous because everyone didn't even bother to check with the company. Last I heard Panasonic discontinued the product because of how faulty it was. I think its funny how easy people will jump on anything and call it paranormal. I first heard someone from England use the device years ago and wow was I scared shitless until I learned this device is just like that. Not paranormal just a bad faulty device. Would be annoying honestly if you bought it back in the day and couldn't even use it for what it was designed for and every time you listened back to whatever you recorded was interrupted by screaming

As Sapolsky argues, free will is an illusion. Our behavior and evolution are shaped by genetics and even more by various external factors such as cosmic rays, radon, climate temperature, sun exposure, and other environmental influences. It's remarkable that we still cling to the idea of free will, which is likely rooted in centuries of anthropocentric thinking ingrained in our culture's DNA. Isn't it freeing to know that our shortcomings are basically not our fault? Probably, the only choice given to us is to strive for self-awareness, unbiased self-discovery to understand ourselves and how we are influenced. This awareness can open up new opportunities/possibilities for personal growth, better adaptation strategies, and increased efficiency, allowing us to move beyond our animalistic impulses, leading eventually to transcendence. I am curious about Sapolsky's perspective on transcendence and where it fits into his theory. To me, transcendence is a way to break free from the constraints that determine our behavior - like cutting the chains that bind us or severing the umbilical cord connecting us to Mother Earth. Perhaps, transcendence is free will?

Good news about Richard Dawkins he now believes he is a Christian. Good stuff. l KNEW he would see the LIGHT CHEERS

Fascinating but scary. I can't help but think about how humans are this susceptible to suggestion, and that's why social media has been so damaging to society with how it polarizes people. How they internalize what they read and then feel like it's real, and mistake their gut reaction to things as truth.

I used to see him in London when I lived in his neighborhood. Down to earth, friendly and likable atheist!

I think, at least from the footage you shared, your debunking of the table moving is flawed. You provided no observation of how the hands of the other individuals were moving, and you did not conduct a physical test of your own to determine if the subtle hand movements you caught could move the table in the manner it was being moved. Regardless, your theory that the seance leader was moving the table seems to be the most likely explanation by far.

Derrick and After Life 👌

1. REMINDER FOR ATHEISTS. The Universe has not "always existed"; like all created things the Universe has had a BEGINNING. It will also have an END. 1.1 The BEGINNING: "In the BEGINNING God created the heavens and the earth." [Genesis1:1]. 1.2 The END: The heavens (Universe) and the earth (planets etc.) will burn up to be replaced by a New Heaven and a New Earth. "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a rushing noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat. And the earth and the works in it will be burned up. Then, all these things being about to be dissolved, what sort ought you to be in holy behavior and godliness, looking for and rushing the coming of the Day of God, on account of which the heavens, being on fire, will melt away, and the elements will melt, burning with heat? But according to His promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells." [2 Peter 3:10-13]. 2. BELIEVING IN GOD IS NOT MANDATORY. Nobody forces any atheist to believe in God. It is a free country and the Gospel of Jesus Christ, while offered to all, is forced on none. Believing in God and trusting the Bible is not mandatory. What will be mandatory, however, will be for atheists to stand before the Great White Throne Judgment of God to be judged for their atheism. If Christians have to be judged, what makes atheists think that they will not be judged? Marx may have said that religion is the opium of the people, but the heroin of the people are the heroes of atheism's terrible mistake of thinking that they will not be judged by God one day. The wheels of justice turn slowly but surely, and the last thing anyone should have to hear (but probably will unless they repent) will be the words of God coming from His Throne on Judgment Day as the mother of all wake-up calls: "Mene, mene tekel ufarsin!' Atheists who are really smart will avoid this scenario at all costs. omments

why are MOST of Sapolsky's streams so so so SCUFFED dude

You claim science how ridiculous!!! Accepted science you have so many holes in your analysis, focus group ? What the hell are you thinking

Way to many people how Abt alone challenge

You should absolutely try to reenact a scene in color on the 3D or 2D colored version on the XLS camera, (Not the regular picture)!and see what would happen. I’d be curious to see that. Give it a go. I mean you figured how to add a skeleton to the live view and it was pretty cool.

Ricky is a genius, literally. You can't trip him up.

So, we are all just “Biological Machines” and our bodily actions are merely expressions of causal chains in our neurons. That’s not science. That’s Misanthropy, because it diminishes human value down to that of a machine. It’s the same value profile as religion. For religion, human value is far below that of God. Humans are born with Original Sin. As “sinners” we are nothing compared to the God Who made us. This guy takes the same value structure as religion, but he reduces human value to that of a machine. A machine is useful for a while, then it becomes trash which can be thrown away as worthless. He would substitute religion’s system of praise and blame, for the permanent evaluation of humans as machines. Like he said at 1:01:49, its better to dehumanize humanity than to demonize it. He actually thinks he's making "progress" with such repulsive balderdash. Dr. Sap is full of s**t.

Another possible explanation for the spike in religiosity among mathematicians among other scientists is that other sciences like physics and evolutionary biology account for things that are attributed to God. With the partial exception of statistics and probability, this isn't really the case with mathematics. In other words, math alone does little to contradict religious doctrine or beliefs, and hence, doesn't force a mathematician to scrutinize the beliefs he was brought up with in the same way it does for an evolutionary biologist.

I love this video and the new book. Very important research.

1:06:14 Ricky "Most religious people aren't crazy" Sat next to Richard who wrote the book 'the God Delusion'...

At 1:00:20 He suggests that the solution to misinformation is to ignore it. False. I, and many others know Fox is garbage, and ignore it accordingly, but that doesn't stop a third of the American public from believing Trump's baseless bullsh*t in claiming that the election was stolen. Ignoring him and right-wing media didn't stop Jan 6, and it isn't enough to stop the rampant and unchecked dissemination of corrosive lies.

Even though I would want revenge upon someone who harmed me or mine, Dr. Sap's comments make good sense, and I wish they didn't.

Hi Virulent team, my wife and I are a few weeks away from our baby boy arriving to the world. We came across your documentary in our education journey on vaccines. Is there a way we can stream this? I just submitted a screening request for me and my wife.

So, his interpretation of determinism is not at the quantum or atomic level, but at the brain structure/chemistry/hormonal level? Is he saying that we cannot even control our own thoughts? I greatly respect Mr. Sapolsky as a professor, having enjoyed many of his lectures. So I would be very curious to know, with all of his knowledge regarding neuroscience... How can he be so certain that there is not some mechanism of autonomy and genuine volition that has evolved within our complex brain structure, that might allow us to actually make a bona fide decision capable of overriding all of the "deterministic" aspects of our brain structure and chemistry? Is he convinced that such a mechanism definitely cannot exist?

JUNE 2024 - That "anti=vaxers" comment didn't age well.... 😅

In high school, over sixty years ago, I read "In Every War but One" which is a study of how the Red Chinese brain washed so many of our POW's. It made me think of how I had been "brain washed" into who I am. So I've been in agreement with Sapolsky for sixty years. If we don't figure it out we'll destroy ourselves.

Premise 1: Biological Determinism The central nervous system (brain) and associated biological systems are the foundation of thoughts and actions. These systems operate according to complex, interconnected causal processes. Therefore, our reasons and decisions are the determined products of these biological causes. Premise 2: Social Constructivism of Personhood "Personhood" is a social construct, not a biological given. We develop our sense of self and agency ("will") through social interaction and the roles we adopt within society. Premise 3: Relativism of Individual Freedom From an individual perspective, we experience a sense of agency and free will. Our choices seem self-directed, even if they are ultimately determined by biological and social factors. Premise 4: Authoritarian Collectivism and Limited Freedom In authoritarian structures, individuals are largely determined by the system's rules and the leader's will. Only the leader possesses a degree of relative freedom, limited to strategic decisions within the constraints of the system and competition with other groups. Conclusion: The concept of free will is complex and depends on the perspective: Individual Perspective: We experience a subjective sense of free will, but it might be an illusion rooted in biological and social determinism. Collectivist Perspective: In authoritarian systems, free will is largely suppressed, with only the leader possessing limited freedom within the system's constraints. Additional Considerations: This argument presents a somewhat pessimistic view of free will, emphasizing deterministic factors. Other philosophical perspectives argue for the existence of free will, either through alternative interpretations of causality or by emphasizing the unique nature of human consciousness. The concept of free will has significant implications for moral responsibility, legal systems, and our understanding of human nature.

It's scary a non-profit advocating for reason and humanism would associate with Professor Dave. That dude is a totally unhinged bully that does the opposite of applying reason and critical thinking.

I believe there are many aliens just outside our planet in craft we are not able to see and travel by frequency which they can travel great distances instantly which is far greater than light speed. We don't think outside the box and we don't think extraterrestrials are smarter than we are. Actually we are not smart

Let's now explore how we can apply logic, math, and physics to formalize the relationship between determinism and indeterminism in causality within the monadological framework. First, let's define our basic entities and relations: - Let M be the set of all monads (fundamental psychophysical entities). - Let T be a set of "time points" or "moments." - Let S be a function from M × T to some set of "states," where S(m, t) represents the state of monad m at time t. - Let C be a relation on M × M × T, where (m1, m2, t) ∈ C means monad m1 "causes" or "influences" monad m2 at time t. Now, let's formalize the idea of determinism and indeterminism in causality: - Determinism: ∀m ∈ M, ∀t ∈ T, S(m, t) is uniquely determined by {S(m', t') : (m', m, t') ∈ C}. - Indeterminism: ∃m ∈ M, ∃t ∈ T, such that S(m, t) is not uniquely determined by {S(m', t') : (m', m, t') ∈ C}. In other words, determinism means that the state of each monad at each time is uniquely determined by its causal influences, while indeterminism means that there are some monads whose states are not uniquely determined by their causal influences. We can formalize this further using the mathematical framework of graph theory and probability theory: - Let (M, E) be a directed graph, where E ⊆ M × M represents the "causal edges" between monads. - Let (Ω, F, P) be a probability space, where Ω represents the set of all possible "outcomes" or "histories," F is a σ-algebra on Ω, and P is a probability measure on F. - The determinism and indeterminism of causality can be expressed as: - Determinism: ∀m ∈ M, ∀t ∈ T, ∃f : Ω → S, such that S(m, t) = f(ω) for all ω ∈ Ω. - Indeterminism: ∃m ∈ M, ∃t ∈ T, such that ∀f : Ω → S, P({ω ∈ Ω : S(m, t) ≠ f(ω)}) > 0. Here, determinism is formalized as the existence of a function f that maps each possible outcome ω to a unique state for each monad at each time, while indeterminism is formalized as the non-existence of such a function (i.e., there are some monads whose states have a non-zero probability of differing from any given function). Finally, we can connect this to physics by noting that this formalism is compatible with both deterministic and indeterministic approaches to causality: - Deterministic models like classical mechanics describe the evolution of physical systems as uniquely determined by initial conditions and dynamical laws. - Indeterministic models like quantum mechanics describe the evolution of physical systems as inherently probabilistic, with outcomes determined only probabilistically by initial conditions and dynamical laws. The monadological framework accommodates both perspectives by treating determinism and indeterminism as emergent properties arising from the complex web of causal relations between fundamental monads. In summary, by using tools from logic, math (graph theory and probability theory), and physics (classical and quantum mechanics), we can formalize the both/and nature of determinism and indeterminism in causality within the monadological framework: - Causality is a relational structure arising from the web of causal influences between fundamental monads. - Causality exhibits both deterministic and indeterministic properties, depending on the scale and perspective of observation. - This formalism is compatible with both deterministic and indeterministic approaches to causality in physics. This showcases the potential of the monadological framework to provide a unified language for expressing and reconciling the complex, often seemingly contradictory nature of reality. By embracing a both/and perspective and drawing on the tools of logic, mathematics, and physics, we can develop a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the world and our place within it.

Precision is not Accuracy is a typical mono-dualistic continuous flash-fractal In-form-ation creation of Form following 1-0-infinity instantaneous e-Pi-i Fusion-Fission Function, in which relative-timing determines unique temporal superposition substantiation holography vanishing-into-no-thing Perspective derivatives. Precision identification of unique positioning in Eternity-now uniqueness is WYSIWYG self-defining QM-TIME Completeness Actuality. All of which is a variation on the theme of aspect-versions held by individual POV, in parallel coexistence, not necessarily opposed to Professor Sapolsky's analysis other than in proportion, where it is relevant to do the Sciencing in situ.

the metaphysics of physicalism has nothing to do with science. stop your 8yo level propaganda and get a clue, learn to actually rigorously observe the phenomenon you are talking about ie. mind.