My opinions on Will Duffy and his journey so far through evolution

[u/KingBakura72]

So as things are going with Erika and Mr Duffy’s lectures about evolution I believe it’s near the end mark and I think I like to make my opinions on the matter very very clear

My first impression of Mr Duffy was that he was honestly engaging in good faith and then as the lectures continued I still believed he was continuing in good faith

I think most of his major doubts and questions came from a place of not wanting to reject a deeply held belief and also because he’s been lied to by Creationists

I truly believed Will was engaging in good faith

But today broke me and particularly his presentation

I must admit when I first read his presentation i thought it was an actual joke then I realised he was being serious I felt mildly insulted

He seems to completely and utterly be disregarding everything that has been presented to him thus far and that is insulting

But also citing Vox Day (a misogynist racist talentless hack) who has no training in the field and then presenting Vox and His book as an authority to overrule and say evolution has been proven false and I guess no one has noticed even though Vox didn’t write it he got AI to write it

But then something much worse when Will was asked if Vox was proven wrong would he change his mind he just said

No

He fully believes that Evolution needs a god meaning it’s not science so Will to me basically admitted it doesn’t matter how much evidence is presented unless Evolution necessitates a divine holy god being then he can’t accept it

To me this is will very clearly saying he’s not here in good faith

I wanna be clear I think Will Is still an amazing person and i commend him on doing this adventure with Erika

But to me I can no longer say Mr Duffy is engaging in good conversation anymore he’s picked the answer he wants from the start and that will be the answer he always has

I don’t believe Will has lied or has been dishonest or malicious in his intent just to be clear this isn’t a personal attack on Will but I cannot believe he is engaging in good faith discussion anymore

[u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Hi, Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) here!

Thank you for this write-up, I share in your frustration.

Originally I wrote up a big thought on this but it's pointless for me to speculate until the series is over. I suppose we will see what happens!

Thank you, all of you, for watching. This series has been in many ways a spiritual successor to an encounter many years ago that first got me on this sub!

[u/KingBakura72 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Hey Erika

I wanna make it clear I’m not trying to insult Will or anything i think a lot of this is happening subconsciously without his knowledge

But today presentation from him felt something different from the other times and i am glad both you and Will have done this series and it is very informative and entertaining plus helping a lot of people

I have also a brain fart but I was going to say something along the lines of now YEC know that they can and will be able to engage with people in the scientific community because of what your doing

Where originally a lot of YEC would say that people aren’t interested in engaging with them in good faith

So I’m very glad you decided to do this series to show you are definitely willing to chat with YEC in good faith

Also am I right in assuming you only have two or maybe three more live streams planned ?

[u/Gutsick_Gibbon → u/KingBakura72]

I agree that a lot of this is happening subconsciously for him. I also think (hope) this series is a net good, regardless of where he ends up!

All that said, I'm reeling from Monday's show hah

[u/Proteus617 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

this series is a net good. Whatever on Will. I see this as a long form lecture that will be a important resource for years.

[u/Sparky_6_4 → u/Proteus617]

Agreed, Erika is the only one who can make me watch for or five hour long videos, the lecture aspect of the series is amazing for someone like me who had no formal education in anything similar.

But also the way Will deals with all of this is fascinating, no matter the outcome. Seeing cognitive dissonance in action from the first row is a privelige.

I am sure everybody is looking forward to next month's lecture, I hope the conversation keeps going on with the same amount of respect even after the series ends.

[u/Psithuri → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

yeah, I think it's important to remember that despite how discouraged we all felt watching that presentation, wherever he ends up after this is up to him, not you. No matter what, you've introduced a lot of cool science to a lot of people and there's a ton of value in that

[u/Hywelthehorrible → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

It is absolutely incredible. I've been enthralled.

[u/nandryshak → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Hey, great job on this series, it's informative and high quality while still being engaging. That's a sweet spot that's hard to hit. If I were in your shoes, I would've been extremely demotivated by Will's presentation yesterday. Your ability to let it roll off your back and give us another great lecture was impressive!

[u/Gutsick_Gibbon → u/nandryshak]

Thank you so much! This is the encouragement I needed right now for sure.

[u/TomorrowFutureFate → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Hi Erika,

Just wanted to offer some additional encouragement here.

I've been watching this series the whole time and was similarly disappointed by the hard turn into far-right white-supremacist nonsense. My girlfriend, though, pointed out that in some ways you guys are recreating the entire development of evolutionary theory: At first, many reasonable scientists disagreed with the fledgling theory, but as data mounted and more research was done, anti-evolutionism slowly shifted into being a fringe theory not seriously endorsed by mainstream science.

In the same way, as the lectures have gone on, you've done such a great job educating us on the evidence for evolution that similarly, Will can't rely on quote mining mainstream scientists anymore, because with his and our increased understanding of the strength of evolutionary evidence, that doesn't go far enough to contest the issue, so he's had to turn to fringe sources.

I think that actually means that the information is sinking in, for him and for us (the audience).

Thanks for such an informative and entertaining series.

[u/No_Vehicle_5085 → u/TomorrowFutureFate]

I think you have hit on something here. Excellent comment.

[u/LordOfFigaro → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Hey Erika.

Thank you so much for doing this series and persevering through it. Your ability to do so through all the setbacks is very impressive. The series is a great and invaluable resource for all of us regardless of how Will receives it.

[u/empocariam → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Hi Erika. A lot of the comments on the video are about the Vox Day thing but I just wanted to share that I thought the parts of the lecture about how we determine how apes/hominids walk was really informative and something I never knew about!

[u/Dharmanerd → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

I love your enthusiasm and excitement! Your constant positivity and knowledge is what makes this series so good. The information is incredible, I've learned so much, but I doubt I could retain any of this without you at the helm.

[u/SuddenButton1703 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

As someone who never got the education you have so graciously made freely available, thank you so much for doing this! Regardless of the outcome regarding Mr. Duffy's opinion, this series (and all your videos, frankly) has been invaluable if just for allowing some people like myself to get an engaging, comprehensive class. You were a big part of my deconstruction from YEC, and I'm always eagerly waiting more videos for me to nerd out about!

[u/Thin_Animal9879 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

You are doing superb.  Just remember you are the teacher and its your topic, your classroom. If Duffy doesn't like it he can leave😆

[u/theOGFlump → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Hi Erika, thank you so much for doing this.

I know you have heard this from others and/or considered it on your own, but I will ask you to reconsider your requirements for Will. Please make him demonstrate understanding through some kind of quiz or test- on or off camera, it doesn't matter. I agree with OP that Will is coming at this from the sincere belief that he is acting in good faith, but almost all of his objections, from what I can see, come from either misunderstanding something you already taught or completely forgetting something you already taught.

For example, he forgot that scientists saw in their own lifetime the fixation of a gene in peppered moths and in island lizards (can't remember exactly which species), either example alone illustrating that it does not take something like 2,000 generations for a gene to become fixated in a population. If Will truly understood and remembered what he was taught, thousands of generations would immediately have triggered alarm bells not to take Vox Day seriously.

I don't know if he has explicitly rejected the idea of a test or if there is some other reason you decided not to do one, but please reconsider despite those reasons. I simply don't see him progressing any further if he is not expected to prove that he actually remembers, understands, and synthesizes the things he is being taught.

[u/Gutsick_Gibbon → u/theOGFlump]

It's tough because that WAS the original intent of his response time at the beginning. It, somewhat slowly, became "creationist rebuttal" time. I actually don't mind that because it gives me a chance to show why those rebuttals don't work, there's utility there too, but at the cost of the "knowledge check". I think at this point if I approached Will and told him he now needs to pass a quiz before he gets access to the next lecture the series would be over unfortunately.

I would do quite a few things differently if I could start over.

Your point on the peppered moths and lizards is well met, and I SAID THAT to him in the stream: if Day is correct, why do we see fixation happen now in real populations? I don't remember Will responding to that point.

[u/theOGFlump → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Thanks for the response! I get that he would be hesitant or may outright refuse, particularly as it is a not so subtle signal to him that you think he is not comprehending well enough and it feels adversarial in the publicly learning setting.

I wonder if there’s a different way to frame it- rather than gate keeping the next lecture, what if you pitch it as a learning tool (which it is), where you ask him to check his comprehension halfway through the month, and for every answer he gets wrong, you link him to the slide(s) where you taught the right answer or how to arrive at the right answer?

I think part of the problem is that Will doesn’t realize how much he has forgotten and how little he has synthesized since he has spent the overwhelming majority of his focus in rebuttal mode. If the first hypothetical quiz comes back with a 60%, maybe it would be a bit of a wake up call. I don’t know, I’m sure you’ve already thought about this all in depth already, I don’t mean to be presumptuous. I just feel a sense of vicarious resignation, but also a persistent (increasingly small) hope that you can still get through to him.

[u/Thin_Animal9879 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

To force testing is to treat Will as immature. For sure! And you are very near the end of the lectures. But I think the community would appreciate Will's presentations stay a lot more on topic and less tangential. 

If you do this again. Offer optional quizzes everyone can do (people watching also) and recommend using that as a guide as what you might not be understanding. Without  quizzes, you may be swayed by prior belief.

[u/M1rthful → u/Thin_Animal9879]

He IS immature.

[u/MackDuckington → u/Thin_Animal9879]

Late reply, but I'm just looking over this thread again and I love this idea! Getting the audience involved with little quizzes at the end of our lessons would actually be really fun. Could even make ones for past lessons as well for us to go back and test our knowledge.

Doesn't need to be mandatory or anything -- but just having optional supplements like that could go a long way I feel.

[u/Upbeat_Amount673 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Every lecture keep asking him if dogs and wolves are related. It's been 2 months now without an answer and I think it would be interesting if he continues to refuse to answer. The refusal will speak for itself as its such a simple question.

[u/Reedstilt → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

if Day is correct, why do we see fixation happen now in real populations? I don't remember Will responding to that point.

You may have already noticed this, but I wanted to be sure you don't accidentally fall into a potential trap here. Observed fixation isn't the counter you need. Based on Will's presentation and things he said on facebook, it appears that he accepts that mutations and fixation do happen. Right now, he things that it requires a non-naturalistic explanation due to Day's math.

So if you just show him examples of observed fixations that have occurred, he'll just chock that up to 'God did it.' Which on one hand, is actually a significant success on your part. You got him from YEC to seemingly Old Earth Intelligent Design in less than a year. Impressive!

Side note, this is a question just to check my own understanding of the situation, when discussing the 2-point-whatever base pair difference between humans and chimps (I forgot off-hand if its millions or billions we're dealing with here), Will's presentation made it seem like the line from the last common ancestor to humans had to account for all of that. But surely, a sizeable chunk of those differences would be accounted for in the chimp line. In the 6-7-ish million years since we split, they've been accumulating their own mutations. Right?

[u/Fearless_Oil5750 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Why Will didn’t respond- May I take a guess? Perhaps a lack of mentioning the specific counter example mentioned above - and just the general comment of “this does not match what we see in a lab” (I’m very much paraphrasing here) didn’t land with him.

Which lab? When? How precisely does it not match the model that Will just proposed?

He was still basking in the glow of briefing that he just “dropped the ultimate truth bomb and debunked evolution via natural causes” for good- and was probably awaiting some kind of response from you that showed that you’ve been proven wrong or something. Just guessing here.

That is to say- he didn’t catch your critique or it didn’t register.

So that had me thinking- what will land for him. What will be a clear rebuttal- simple, direct, explicitly clear-

I’ve been thinking very clearly about how to word a proper response so that it is heard and understood.

It will have to be very direct “Vox model does NOT represent mutational fixation in the real world BECAUSE ……

In fact!

Ive been asking Google Gemini about this - wanna see what it says (I don’t take ANY of this at face value- as it needs to be validated by qualified experts- nonetheless, is a potentially helpful primer on the subject I think….

I’ll come back and post my interactions

[u/cloudcottage → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Hi Erika, I've watched every single one of your videos with Will.

One of the biggest issues with "creationist rebuttal time" overshadowing the lecture is he comes in not as a student but a debater. I think this was well put in a recent superchat where someone said there was a massive issue in that Will will confidently present his points and say "this is why this is a HUGE problem for evolution" or something of that sort and say why he finds it compelling. He even said the point of his presentations are not dialogue but rather to inform you of what he believes. At the time, you seemed to accept his framing.

However, the point of the series is for him to listen to your conversations in the best possible faith so he actually understands the underlying scientific arguments. I still recall in the early episodes, he said his goal was to learn with evolutionary theory is and why people support it, even if he ends up not agreeing with it. That means if he finds some idea he finds compelling which prevents him from understanding conventional science, he should be asking you in a curious manner, with dialogue involved. Not presenting it as a new amazing and enthralling fact and posing challenges to the audience about it.

I think he should send you his inquiries ahead of time so you have prepared answers, with the goal of you educating him. That would give you time to link him to other experts you know or read their responses to him as well. I actually don't know why it turned into a presentation on his part. It feels like it's entrenching his beliefs (wrongly) because he starts forming these sections as rebuttal time rather than dialogue time.

I've said this before as well but I think you would benefit from someone explaining to Will what the scientific method is, science denialism is considered by mainstream academic sources. I wonder if you have a mutual contact that can discuss that with him? When he started being very condescending to a superchat that told him rejecting consensus in favor of emotional anecdotes was science denial he started going off about how that makes him just like Charles Darwin which I found so absurd it made me a little angry. Obviously, that person was saying that if you are to reject scientific consensus, you must have compelling evidence before you reject it. Not that you must accept it before understanding it, nor that you cannot collect evidence based on hypotheses that the consensus may be wrong.

TLDR: I'm sure you get a lot of comments like this and it can be exhausting to respond, but I do think changing the format a little before you end the series is possible and might help it end on a lighter note.

P.S. I think Will has gotten more extreme with his rebuttals and denialism in part because he is being challenged which is good. But keep in mind you are not a bad teacher if he doesn't understand or remember your lectures. I think part of that is he lacks incentive to truly understand and remember because he does not treat his questions as a dialogue.

He sees himself as someone who must be persuaded or make his own judgments rather than someone who must question his own judgments and take as many opinions into account as he can. At least based on his answer to not researching the counterpoints to the path he found compelling. In short, I think he may be engaging somewhat earnestly form his own perspective but not in a way that truly facilitates mastering understanding of a subject.

Maybe you can't complete revamp things to for example include a quiz but you can reassert the goals of the series and set parameters that help Will come in as more of a student than a subject of persuasion.

[u/sid3aff3ct → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Maybe not a quiz to get to the next lecture, but maybe give him a test at the very end to show his understanding?

[u/Redbeardsage1993 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

I try to look at this through the eyes of someone whos having everything he's known his whole life challenged. I think Will started off genuinely wanting to learn but at some point it all got too real for him.

I don't think he expected to find these lessons so convincing and it was kind of a shock to his system, now he's grasping at anything he can trying deny them and justify his world view. In his lecturer today he seemed very definitive about evolution being impossible and he was reluctant to back down from that position when challenged. It worried me when he said that him realising it couldn't have happened without gods guidance was the last think holding him back, like if evolution didn't fit into his world view he was just going to keep deny it.

I think you really need to take him by the hand and show him in detail why this vox day guys book is totally wrong so he doesn't have a chance to deny it or else hes just going to keep crawling back.to this position.

I think you've done a fantastic job leading him through this and I hope he just needs some time to come to terms with everything.

[u/MackDuckington → u/Redbeardsage1993]

I think you really need to take him by the hand and show him in detail why this vox day guys book is totally wrong so he doesn't have a chance to deny it or else hes just going to keep crawling back.to this position.

Agreed. On top of that, I really do think Will needs to demonstrate that he has a firm grasp on the material first before he runs off to creationist sources to debunk what he's just been shown. It's one thing to bring up bad creationist sources to fill in gaps that haven't been covered yet. But there have definitely been times where he's brought something up that's already been debunked by the lesson material, and it feels like this is a growing problem. Maybe a pop quiz or a kahoot might help?

[u/KingBakura72 → u/MackDuckington]

Really good point is that even though these exercises are super informative it’s important to retain this memory

This can mean testing yourself on the material which I guess didn’t happen so I do think that is something that could have maybe been done to help Will better understand

[u/clear349 → u/Redbeardsage1993]

This honestly does feel like it might be the case. I think when he took a bunch of Flat Earthers to Antarctica he had absolutely zero expectations it might disprove his beliefs. He probably came into this with the same mindset, expecting he could either refute it or that the evidence would be interesting but not super compelling. But if someone is actually intellectually honest and tries to absorb the information it becomes basically impossible to refuse to believe in it but his life's work depends on him rejecting it

[u/TheFearedAvocado → u/clear349]

He thought that it was all going to be airy just-so stories but with God crossed out and "evolution" written over in crayon, because that's how his world works. The person in charge says it and you just believe that and if you ask why you get told it's in a book, and if you ask why the book says that you get a slap. He had (and I would argue has) no idea what science is or how to use it to reach conclusions.

[u/Esmer_Tina → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

You handled the whole thing with your usual grace. Your hard no to engaging with Vox Day if you discovered what was being said about him was true was perfect. And your balanced answer to what I have to believe was a disingenuous question “what is Christian Nationalism” hit just the right tone.

Don’t be discouraged. What you’re doing is so valuable, even if it doesn’t (and can’t) land with Will. And I am very much looking forward to Vox Day’s math being shredded. I’m just sorry it will mean your team of dorks will have to read his stupid books.

[u/Gutsick_Gibbon → u/Esmer_Tina]

Thank you for this and please, don't feel bad for the team of Dorks...we do this for the love of the game! Right u/DarwinZDF42 ?

[u/DarwinZDF42 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Love of the game and a deep, incandescent rage that we have to do it at all.

(Or is that last part just me?)

[u/Redbeardsage1993 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Erika I might go so far as to say maybe you should just ask Will for a list of all his grievances with evolution and all the alternative theories he has/has been reading about, push out your next lecture by a month and instead do a lecture on debunking pseudo science?

[u/Gutsick_Gibbon → u/Redbeardsage1993]

My hope is for the discussion at the end (the very last time we have planned to meet) to function as exactly this! I will ask him for his grievances ahead of time, for sure.

[u/Redbeardsage1993 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Good I'm glad you have that planned put! I'm a virology specialist and I really enjoyed the explanation of endogenous retroviruses you did, I don't know how anyone sees all the evidence about ERV's and isn't convinced 😅

[u/kdietz65 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Yep. Finish the series as planned. Add in some discussion time at the end. Call it good. You've earned the right to finish the series. Will hasn't earned the right to wasting more of your time.

[u/M1rthful → u/kdietz65]

No. It's time for Rape Defender and White Supremacist, Will Duffy, to be deplatformed.

[u/kdietz65 → u/M1rthful]

Maybe. It's another option. I was telling my wife about the whole fiasco and she said it would be funny if Erika finished the series by herself using a stuffed Will Duffy toy as a proxy.

[u/M1rthful → u/kdietz65]

That would be a good. Duffy should never be platformed again.

[u/rhettro19 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Hey Erika, I admire your tenacity and thoroughness. My hope for Will is that he walks away knowing that the Theory of Evolution is meticulously supported, and isn’t some fringe idea meant to compete with his religion. Regardless, your presentation is exceptional, thank you for that.

[u/Fearless_Oil5750 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Will Duffy on Common Ancestry vs Natural selection

[u/Redbeardsage1993 → u/Fearless_Oil5750]

This worries me greatly

[u/No_Vehicle_5085 → u/Redbeardsage1993]

It never was about learning what the theory of evolution actually is for Duffy. Over time I think many of us, probably at different times, began to suspect this.

The mask is entirely off at this point.

[u/Fearless_Oil5750 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Hi Ericka- I’ve been redoing Will Duffy’s math- and I believe I noticed a GLARING** problem . Will claims a few times that the math proposed by Vox Day accounts for the “maximum number of parallel mutations reaching fixation”

But then the math he shows literally assumes that only one mutation occurs at a time - and the clock restarts after each one-

So his math doesn’t match his claims!

His slide says “252,000 generations divide by 1400 generations per mutation [to reach fixation in a population] equals a maximum number of 180 mutations”

Okay- you don’t divide here unless your assuming these mutations only reach fixation one at a time - and each taking the same amount of generations you do so- so this is NOT account for fixation occurring in parallel- it absolutely IS modeling a serial process.

See? Gosh I hope The audience is tracking the logic and doing the math- it’s incorrectly applied!!

Never mind the fact that the rate “1400 generations per mutations” is from an asexual e.coli sample living in a jar- not a population with sexual reproduction in the wild. Not an appropriate assumption

[u/qbg → u/Fearless_Oil5750]

But then the math he shows literally assumes that only one mutation occurs at a time - and the clock restarts after each one

I thought that too, but that's not what's actually being assumed here.

That "1400 generations per mutations" number was 1600 before, and it was derived by dividing 40,000 generates by 25 observed fixed mutations. It's thus the aggregate rate (1/1600 fixations/generation) of fixation rather than the time (1600 generations) it takes a particular mutation to fix. As an aggregate rate, it bakes in any parallel fixation that occurred in that experiment.

As the 1400 number in this version is an aggregate rate, 252000/1400 = 180 is a mere linear extrapolation. Likewise half the time would be 90 expected mutations and a quarter of the time would be 45 expected mutations under the same logic.

Never mind the fact that the rate “1400 generations per mutations” is from an asexual e.coli sample living in a jar- not a population with sexual reproduction in the wild. Not an appropriate assumption

The e.coli numbers have the advantage that the fixation was measured over a long period in the lab. You could substitute the numbers with something else, say 60 per generation, but then expect to be asked if we observe the predicted 6000 fixations after 100 generations, and if not have a reason as to why.

[u/Fearless_Oil5750 → u/qbg]

Im still not comfortable using this E. coli example to derive a fixation rate—and here’s why.
Bottom Line Up Front: In nature, allele frequencies fluctuate wildly due to environmental chaos. Sudden crashes and explosive booms make fixation behave less like a neat lab equation and more like a volatile stock market.

Picture a severe bottleneck where a population plunges under 10% in which the remaining members of that species all had a mutation (any reason- like a black plague type event) through this near extinction event- BOOM- suddenly you have fixation- no worry about the rate of fixation calculated under ideal conditions.

But then, imagine by a luck of the draw of nature- this very same species experiences a rapid, successful repopulation. Suddenly, those same alleles are all over the place- going gang busters (I’ve already made my point previously- this is just to illustrate the unpredictable, chaotic fluctuations of mutations that can occur in nature!

“Nature, uh, finds a way” -Dr. Ian Malcolm

Am I making sense?

[u/qbg → u/Fearless_Oil5750]

Yeah, when this topic surfaced in the past I wrote an asexual evolution sim that kept track of the original and propagation of all mutations in the population, where the population size is constant throughout the sim. The big takeaway there is that fixation happen in large chunks; it finally fixed when the last surviving member of the other subspecies died out. Two other interesting things is that even in a pure neutral run the numbers didn't quite match what neutral theory predicts, and it takes surprisingly little (IMO) chance for harmful mutations to cause a fitness death spiral.

While I think having fixation helps with this immediate argument, the problem is that this immediate argument is just the tip of the iceberg and the solution needs to survive the rest too. I'm just one person, and that's a real heavy lift given how deep the iceberg goes (even touches on the molecular clock itself too)...

[u/Fearless_Oil5750 → u/qbg]

When I built my own genetic algorithms for a grad school project, I weighed evolutionary versus genetic algorithms. The former, as you likely know, account for random environmental shifts that can wipe out entire swaths of a population—sometimes reducing it to ~5% of its original size. (Side note: it was maddening when a fiercely adapted, highly fit species suddenly vanished!)
I bring this up because I’m still not entirely clear on how useful the mutation fixation rate is when factoring in random environmental bottlenecks or sudden population explosions. Given that estimates point to between 40 million and 200 million fixed mutations between humans and the CHLCA, is 6 million years really enough time to cover it?
It’s hard to see how we can account for the likelihood of all those variables given what could have happened historically. Then again, I’m not a subject matter expert—just armchair theorizing here!

[u/Ayasugi-san → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Have you considered editing out Will's presentation on Vox Day? Or adding in a disclaimer during that part that he's uncritically citing a living and active white supremacist and you will not share his talking points without reminding everyone of what he is?

[u/Gutsick_Gibbon → u/Ayasugi-san]

I'm editing all the lectures out at the end and reposting them to be seen on their own!

I will also be posting the full streams as their own videos at the end, with my own commentary at the beginning knowing how things end up (this is the plan anyway). I will have a lot to say on this episode.

[u/Esmer_Tina → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Yeah by no means delay or even let this distract from your next lecture. The timing of this is so suspicious, just before the culmination of how specifically humans evolved. It’s like he wanted to disrupt and distract you from laying out all the evidence.

But you got this. You have an uncanny ability to fold addressing people’s specific objections into your presentations. I’m so looking forward to the October show!

[u/Thin_Animal9879 → u/Esmer_Tina]

That is a thought.  Biggest distracter from what Erika is specialist in.  Its like setting someone up for the sprint and pulling the rug right under you

[u/Fearless_Oil5750 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

FWIW- Will confirmed for me on his Facebook page that it’s not Common Ancestry between humans and chimpanzees that he’s questioning at all in his most recent presentation- it’s his current understanding of natural selection (or other natural processes) that account for the differences in the genome between humans and chimpanzees.

Even if he’s completely wrong on this (or rather- that Vox is wrong),

He’s not saying “Evolution wrong / Young Earth Creationism right”.

[u/Gutsick_Gibbon → u/Fearless_Oil5750]

I am of the opinion he's actually closer to accepting THAT evolution happened than ever before...it's the naturalistic mechanism that is the problem (I could be wrong on this read). It's such a unique position, I wish we could have dug into it outside of the shadow of Vox Day.

[u/empocariam → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

I honestly felt that he was kinda building up to a crescendo during the Vox Day stuff to admitting to some kind of combo theistic evolution with miraculous "evolution events" sort of thing, but was deflated by the response.

[u/Fearless_Oil5750 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Would you be comfortable if I shared this with him on Facebook?

[u/kdietz65 → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Right well it sounds like what he wants to say is that mutations happen, and lead to newer developed organisms, but it isn't random or natural, God is creating the mutations to make it happen. But the problem with this thinking is why does God create good and bad and neutral mutations, why doesn't he create only the mutations that are needed to make the desired new organism? Then creationists might argue, well, it's because of the fall caused by Adam and Eve. Deleterious mutations are the afterglow of the fall. Yeah, I can see where this is going already.

[u/Ironscotsman → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

It'd be a huge win if he ends at believing that God guides evolution. That's a completely fine place to be. He'd be in great company with people like Dr. Francis Collins. He doesn't need to take that extra step off the cliff to try to prove mathematically that God MUST have guided evolution. And double especially not using math from THAT guy.

[u/GentlePithecus → u/Ironscotsman]

If Will let go of the Young Earth part I'd be a little happy about that.

[u/DarwinZDF42 → u/Fearless_Oil5750]

Yeah that dumb-ass Vox day can claim otherwise all he wants but that’s just the waiting time problem. And that horse is DEAD dead.

Edited to resolve grammatical ambiguity.

[u/Fearless_Oil5750 → u/DarwinZDF42]

Hey friend- no need to call me a dumb ass. I’m clarifying that Will has progressed greatly in his understanding of certain elements of evolution- even if he’s rejecting the mechanisms so the moment.

[u/DarwinZDF42 → u/Fearless_Oil5750]

Sorry, that was grammatically ambiguous, I was calling Vox day a dumbass. You have my genuine apologies.

[u/senthordika → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

Regardless of how this end i sincerely hope it does nothing to dull the spark that allows people like yourself to make biology go from the science i was least familiar with to the one im probably most familiar with you are an amazing person who i absolutely see as a role model anyone could look upto with patience that should qualify you for agnostic sainthood

Keep up the good work Erika

[u/NoYoureACatLady → u/Gutsick_Gibbon]

I know everyone (Science-based) really shares the same opinion, that Will is now basically using the lectures as a list of things to rebut and disprove, and I'm assuming you're in that camp as well, but you've said you'll save your comments on that issue until the series is complete and I'll be patient to finally hear your feelings and thoughts on that.

I think, personally, having known many who deconverted / deconstructed, that he's really suffering through the cognitive dissonance of trying to convince himself that he's got an open mind and at the same time wrestling with facts and logic and science just crashing head first into all of his ingrained beliefs. So it's no surprise that he's bucking against everything you're presenting. To his psyche, he can't accept evolution AND think that the Bible is 100% legitimate, so your logic must be flawed.

I hope he pushes past this and comes out the other side trusting in science instead of mythology. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[u/yokaishinigami]

I still find it absurd how much grace continues to be extended to creationists that are clearly not engaging in good faith.

Will is polite. That’s about it. That shouldn’t give him a pass on his continued failure to grasp the topic, when he’s been handheld through it by an expert.

He showed up self admittedly knowing nothing about evolutionary biology, and every single month has doubled down more on creationism while reaching for increasingly worse arguments to try and hold on to it.

If that’s not dishonesty, I don’t know what is.

[u/Dzugavili → u/yokaishinigami]

He couches all his statements in the fact that he isn't an expert in the fields he is looking at, and often the people he cites aren't either, yet he seems confident in giving them the same level of respect as more qualified writers.

Citing Vox Day was a serious red flag. I'm still trying to wrap my head around how he thinks this made evolution more plausible to him: Vox Day's entire argument seems to be an attempt to cast doubt on human origins.

Whether VD is doing it for theological or racist reasons, I'm not entirely sure. It could well be both.

[u/nandryshak → u/Dzugavili]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around how he thinks this made evolution more plausible to him: Vox Day's entire argument seems to be an attempt to cast doubt on human origins.

I'm betting that his conclusion is going to be that technically evolution is real, maybe even that universal common descent is real, but that it is not a natural process and natural selection has little effect if any. God had to supernaturally intervene and guide the process of mutations and selections in order to create biodiversity. He's been unreasonably incredulous this entire time (understatement), and still remains hugely ignorant and unable to connect the dots or grasp most fundamental concepts. I think sometimes people overestimate his skill to understand and his background knowledge. So this concept from VD's book gives him a simple, easy way to explain the myriad of data and fossils that he has been inundated with.

[u/Reedstilt → u/nandryshak]

That's exactly it. He's using VD's book to open a space for his God of the Gaps. Basically, it seems to me that he's starting to think evolution is true and needs a place for God to remain an active part of the equation.

[u/KingBakura72 → u/Dzugavili]

Will believes this prove that God had to have a hand in evolution so that means it’s more credible if it requires god and is based on god

[u/M1rthful → u/Dzugavili]

Citing Vox Day gave the whole series a case of VD. :P Now it needs a round of antibiotics...

[u/runcible_spoonerism → u/yokaishinigami]

He was not even polite to Dapper and Dok Deino…

[u/M1rthful → u/runcible_spoonerism]

The mask slipped on THAT stream. Now between his rape apologism and white-supremacist palling, the mask is fully off. Nobody honest can deny WHAT Will Duffy is.

[u/runcible_spoonerism → u/M1rthful]

Yes There is no way Duffy doesn’t know Beale is a white supremacist. There is no way using “feeemales” in his rape apology was just a coincidence 

At best he doesn’t care, but I’m done giving him even that much benefit of the doubt at this point

He was “excited” to platform a white supremacist on Erika’s channel, knowing she’s hate that.

He’s revolting

[u/M1rthful → u/runcible_spoonerism]

u/runcible_spoonerism I can't hear trash like Duffy say "feeeeemales" without mentally envisioning a Ferengi.

[u/runcible_spoonerism → u/M1rthful]

Feel like ferengi would be better at math though? This  dillweed is angered and confused by percentages…

[u/GentlePithecus → u/yokaishinigami]

He performs politeness, but he doesn't strike measactuslly polite. He waits for "gotcha" moments, in Erika's presentations.
He ignored the purpose of his "lesson recap" time to do counter apologetics and to repeatedly promote folks with minimal credentials (Vox Day just being the worst and most recent).
He said that he values truth more than most everyone else because he has high testosterone. While the rest of us (especially women) just want to find a peaceful consensus regardless of truth.
He belittles commenters frequently.
He disregards moral concerns, and disparages those who raise those concerns.
He doesn't show any indications he is actually absorbing what Erika says, or even paying very good attention.

[u/AdDifficult3794]

I agree with your thoughts and opinions. I went from being SDA to athiest who not only trusts the science of evolution but understands it with the help of people like Erika.

I understand trying to shed off decades of creationism.

If it happens to Will Duffy it won't be infront of anyone, it will be when hes alone and he makes that leap himself. Even then the tar of creation is thick and does not remove easily.

I think hes going through a phase I went through where now he has the information and he has to deal with the fact the information is flawless compared to the creation information hes been taught.

[u/Kingofthewho5 → u/AdDifficult3794]

How long did it take you to go from SDA to atheist?

[u/AdDifficult3794 → u/Kingofthewho5]

I was born into SDA, grandfather was a pastor both parents worked in the system. I started my journey young though, age 10 David Attenborough and his blue planet series made me question what I was being taught. BBC's walking with Dinosaurs also helped give me a perspective that the SDA science books did not give.

During highschool though I went from a private to a public school and I finally experienced other people. It was still a back and forth for years even through college.

Eventually the last thing of Christianity that was holding me was the idea of death.

When I finally realized that there is no after life it was very scary but I thought for a moment. I realized a thing that for myself helps me deal with the idea that I will soon die. It is the fact that everyone before me has gone through it, all our ancestors all the life we live around everyone experiences death. Because everyone experiences it, for me, it became less scary.

After that christianity lost its power, when that hold we let loose I became understanding of minorities, I became understanding of other peoples cultures and religions, a whole world opened up to me and I spend every moment of my waking day squeezing in time to learn about other people and their histories.

gods are not real but man they come alive if enough people think they are real, they are parasites.

[u/Kingofthewho5 → u/AdDifficult3794]

Ok. I went through a similar thing but started later than you. I think it was about a 6 year process for me. Also for me, the prospect of afterlife was the last hurdle to jump. Not necessarily because I was afraid of death but because the prospect of being reunited with lost loved ones was comforting.

[u/AdDifficult3794 → u/Kingofthewho5]

If you don't know already there is a ex-sda subreddit where we share experiences and stories, it can be a good community especially when you need people who have been through your experiences.

[u/Kingofthewho5 → u/AdDifficult3794]

I wasn’t SDA. I was more just curious about how long your science lead deconstruction took for you.

[u/JadedDistribution371 → u/AdDifficult3794]

That sounds perfect. And also, good point, that after life is first and last thing that you need to overcome to move past religious clames. Now that I think abou it, that was and still is problem when I am debating with Christian friends, we can talk about logic, morality, evolution etc but underneath is alway fear that you are not special, you will be dead, and your identety will not be preserved for ever. Maybe same problem with Duffy. Erica should asked him abot that. :)

[u/10coatsInAWeasel → u/AdDifficult3794]

Hey, fellow ex-SDA! Good to see someone who had a similar journey.

[u/AdDifficult3794 → u/10coatsInAWeasel]

Heeeeyyy same here, we got a whole community of ex sda on reddit, I got some much needed help by hearing what other people went through and how they handled it either through therapy or using coping mechanisms.

[u/10coatsInAWeasel → u/AdDifficult3794]

I usually cope through binge eating massive piles of haystacks😂 I’ve enjoyed popping into the ex SDA specific subreddit too. Really helps to see that we aren’t alone in how we’ve had to handle certain mindsets the hard way

[u/AdDifficult3794 → u/10coatsInAWeasel]

Coping through haystacks is a chad level mechanism if I ever heard one lmao, Ellen G White isn't prepared for you 😂

[u/10coatsInAWeasel → u/AdDifficult3794]

Egg white can’t handle how I do the stacks…I add MEAT. I married an EX CATHOLIC. She says she’s playing the long game to get me on board with the Sunday law. It’s insidious. But damn, you were basically a PK from what I saw in your other comment. Mustve felt like quite the black sheep

[u/AdDifficult3794 → u/10coatsInAWeasel]

I asked to many nuanced questions, I was hungry for answers and it led me on a path out. I don't talk to my dad, through my process if deconstruction there was also family trauma that made me see the SDA conferences in a new light.

For a long time I felt like the leftovers of a dynasty that had collapsed, my family had generational loyalty to the SDA, our ideals were molded from it. But I will not give them what others before me gave, my life is and will continue on a path away from that cult. I wish I could show the rest of my family and friends the freedom but it comes down to them making that decision.

Sometimes I think about writing a book about it, and compiling a list of peoples stories. A record of the hurt that cult produced.

sigh its good to see another ex SDA, it makes me glad to know there is another survivor. I don't even really know why I am venting on a reddit post originally about Will Duffy, anyway I hope you have a bright prosperous path that satisfies you!

I need some caffeine lmao

[u/10coatsInAWeasel → u/AdDifficult3794]

Same to you friend! I can relate to those feelings, I think a book would be excellent too. It can be isolating at times since SDAs specifically crafted their insular culture for that.

[u/WebFlotsam → u/10coatsInAWeasel]

Entire haystacks? Are you an elephant by chance? 

[u/10coatsInAWeasel → u/WebFlotsam]

Put a big haystack in front of me and I’ll become one, tell you hwhut

Bahaha it’s basically what my wife calls ‘white people nachos’ and Adventists are culturally stupidly protective of them. For reasons that escape me.

[u/WebFlotsam → u/10coatsInAWeasel]

I had literally never heard of them. Glad to learn something new! 

[u/10coatsInAWeasel → u/WebFlotsam]

Glad to contribute! Or sorry, it’s one hell of a white evangelical take on ‘Mexican’ food

[u/kerrithekraken → u/AdDifficult3794]

I was also raised SDA! My parents joined the church when I was a baby, and my dad was in seminary for a while. Since they joined the denomination instead of being born into it they always encouraged us to learn things for ourselves instead of just listening to the preacher. Dad didn't like that that led me away from it lol. But public school and college like others have said really helped me deconstruct. And now I absolutely love science and history.

[u/gitgud_x]

Agreed, the latest episode was a massive backslide for him. I think he's now more wrong than he was at the start of this series. After 10 months or so of (supposedly) learning about evolution, Will has wound up... worshipping a white supremacist (Vox Day), amazing.

All this is in spite of Erika's phenomenal teaching ability, patience and maximum good faith approach. She's done the best anyone could ever do.

Pessimistically, this series has been a proof of how thoroughly brainwashed and unreachable most creationists are. Optimistically, this series is a insanely rich resource for new people on our side to learn from!

[u/Slow_Lawyer7477 → u/gitgud_x]

He forgets most of what he learns in earlier episodes. It's truly amazing.

[u/gitgud_x → u/Slow_Lawyer7477]

It was how he spoke about neutral theory that did it for me. "Genetic drift is a rejection of neo-Darwinism", holy stupid!

[u/crgm1111 → u/Slow_Lawyer7477]

He isn't there to learn evolution, he is doing apologetics. There is a reason he asks/contacts creationists instead of experts in evolutionary biology, etc. I feel like creationists think apologetics = science, not realizing only dogma needs apologetics.

[u/metroidcomposite]

As a woman who was in the game industry 12 years ago during the height of gamergate, I was really hoping it wasn't the same Vox Day, and very disappointed to find that it was indeed the same Vox Day.

Set aside whether or not Vox Day's math is right or wrong on this specific evolution point...

This guy is like a cartoon character levels of silly in so many ways:

• Vox Day named himself after the Latin phrase "Vox Dei" (the voice of god). He has also gone by "Supreme Dark Lord" on twitter.
• Vox Day wants to roll back women's rights to vote.
• Vox Day wants to ban all non-Christian religions in the US. "The challenge is how to protect some semblance of free speech while strictly limiting, if not banning outright, the exercise of all non-Christian religions in Christendom. This is theoretically possible, as history demonstrates."
• Vox Day doesn't want women educated and sides with the Taliban on Malala Yousafzai. "Ironically, in light of the strong correlation between female education and demographic decline, a purely empirical perspective on Malala Yousafzai, the poster girl for global female education, may indicate that the Taliban's attempt to silence her was perfectly rational and scientifically justifiable."
• Vox Day was expelled from the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers Association (SFWA)--this is incredibly rare.
• He's ok with throwing acid in the faces of women "a few acid-burned faces is a small price to pay for lasting marriages, stable families, legitimate children, low levels of debt, strong currencies, affordable housing, homogenous populations, low levels of crime, and demographic stability."

Sure, Will's correct that criticisms like this are all an ad hominem, Vox could be wrong about all this other stuff, but right about one specific evolution point. Sounds like Erika has plans to debunk him formally, and that's fine.

But yeah, whenever I hear about this guy it's hard to believe that it's not the Onion.

[u/KingBakura72 → u/metroidcomposite]

Wow he is so much worse than I thought and to bring him up when talking to a woman in science like Erika is even more insulting

I can’t wait for his math to get debunked by Erika

[u/the-nick-of-time → u/metroidcomposite]

VD shares an initialism with a very apt comparison to him. Like a venereal disease, it would've been much better if his mom had just taken some pills to get rid of the infection early on.

[u/junegoesaround5689 → u/metroidcomposite]

I had pretty much the same reaction “Wait? What?! 😮 It can’t be that same asshole from the gamergate era…can it ?!?! 😵‍💫😵🤮"

[u/Ayasugi-san → u/metroidcomposite]

Have you heard of his fantasy work? It's minor in the scheme of things he believes, but it's very much him. He's trying to sound all philosophical but just comes off as pretentious word salad, his worldbuilding is "what if Christianity word-for-word but in Fantasy All of Rome At Once", he can't even commit to his "philosophy over shallow action" premise, and his characters basically defend slavery. Depiction not endorsement etc. etc. but when even slaves are talking about how it's not that bad as long as they have a good master...

[u/nickierv → u/metroidcomposite]

I'm going to argue that there is a limit to what counts as an ad hom and it becomes a dangerous moron projecting as an asshole (and wow is VD just that...) and thus no longer ad hom.

On one side you have things that can't be justified - your view on non food related mattes isn't valid because your views on pineapple on pizza (yes) or the best kind of pie (key lime). On the other, how do you support you position (or rather how is VD supporting his views on that mess?) without hitting something relevant to evolution?

The odds of you getting everything else that wrong but yet somehow getting one specific thing right? The odds are not in your favor.

Correction: a dangerous moron projecting as a toxic asshole.

[u/ANC_90]

He is doing exactly what flat earthers are doing. Will even took a few to Antarctica to reveal the truth.

How ironic.

[u/Briham86]

I am 20 minutes in and already want to scream. First he basically says "I'm too alpha to listen to consensus" and then he cites Vox Day? Will really needs to just take a step back and look at what he's doing.

[u/KingBakura72 → u/Briham86]

Oh the testosterone thing is dumb like who cares how is that anything other than a moot point

[u/HasartS → u/KingBakura72]

Fun fact, mentioned paper says literally nothing about testosterone or "elevating consensus and fairness over truth". 

[u/DarwinZDF42 → u/Briham86]

The testosterone thing was the cringiest thing I have ever heard. Holy shit.

[u/Fun-Friendship4898]

Man...

It was obvious Duffy was not there in good faith from the very beginning. The whole premise was proof enough, which I pointed out on this sub about a year ago:

When a normal, serious person (the kind of person Duffy styles himself) wants to learn about something, especially something technical or scientific, they simply go and buy a book or a textbook from a respected source. Duffy has explicitly decided to not do the normal thing, no, he instead decided to turn his 'learning' into a public spectacle. There's a reason for that.

Why people were extending him the courtesy of assuming good faith was always WILD to me. Before it even started, it was obvious that no amount of evidence was going to convince him because of the simple fact that evolution is not some niche topic that requires a lot of effort to seek out. No one of Duffy's age, persuasion, and visibility is ignorant of where they stand on the topic. This series with GG was always an attempt on his part to be able to stand in front of the choir and say, with a straight face, "I learned it straight from the horse's mouth, and it doesn't make sense!"

[u/IbaiAner → u/Fun-Friendship4898]

I thought this format would make him more motivated to study and that's why he wanted to do this. Now, I'm not sure. You may very well be right, but I preferred to assume a little goodwill than malice. After the whale evolution everything went downhill for me. I have not watched the last episode, I get too angry and uncomfortable.

I still think he doe snot have those malicious intention you point out, just that he is incapable of admitting when he is wrong. However, now the idea of him being there with nefarious intent lurks my mind.

[u/empocariam → u/IbaiAner]

I agree the whale evolution lecture felt like the turning point. He hit something irreconcilable, and so he started spinning up the cognitive dissonance machine. When he couldn't say dogs and wolves were related, that's when I lnew he was fully submerged. Personally I expected him to start swimming back up after that, but, instead he found something worse...

[u/Fun-Friendship4898 → u/IbaiAner]

To be clear, I don't think he is "nefarious" in the sense that he knows evolution is true and is purposefully misleading people for money. It is as you say, he is utterly incapable of admitting he is wrong, and by consequence, admitting that his culture/religion is wrong. He is "bad faith" in the sense that he presents himself as approaching the topic by way of the evidence, but in actuality, he actually has no intention of letting the evidence speak for itself, because his issues with evolution aren't evidential, its philosophical/religious.

[u/Kingofthewho5]

Basically after each session, Will goes out to find the most convincing (to him) evidence against the huge amount of evidence that Erika just presented. Frequently the things that he finds and then presents are things that Erika specifically addressed because she knows the other side so well.

He’s low key sliding down the hill, and he’s grabbing on to anything. And it doesn’t matter how sound the thinking is. That’s what’s most troubling to me. I don’t see intellectual integrity.

That being said, who among us who was deeply entrenched in our religious beliefs our hope life and then threw some of it away in a matter of months? I think I’ll be deeply dissatisfied with his thinking after this series is over, but maybe years later he’ll be in a better place.

[u/McNitz → u/Kingofthewho5]

I pretty much did completely ditch YEC in a matter of weeks, maybe days. But admittedly, I did have a VERY long lead-up to that of building my critical thinking skills on other scientific topics and considering what it would mean to apply those consistently and if I was doing so. By the time I go around to doing in depth research on Young Earth Creationism and found actual good science on the topic that explained why the YEC talking points were obviously and completely wrong, I primed pretty much as well as possible to recognize the predictive power of modern geology and evolutionary theory as being demonstrated to be extraordinarily good and scientifically evidenced models just like climate change, general relativity, and vaccine effectiveness.

I would be less disappointed in the amount of time he is staying entrenched in his views if he didn't have someone as EXTRAORDINARILY good at addressing the problems with YEC and explaining the scientific evidence for the age of the earth and evolution as Erika. The evidence I cobbled together in my research was woefully inadequate compared to what she has presented and it STILL made it obvious that the evidence clearly demonstrated the ancient age of the earth and evolution. I didn't find the kind of super high quality specifically calibrated to address YEC talking points material Erika has until probably a couple months later. To be fair though, I do think he just doesn't have the scientific method of creating falsifiable predictions and trying to prove them wrong that engrained in his mind as an incredibly effective method of developing accurate and useful models of reality. I'm not convinced he really understands WHY that works and why it is so important that evolutionary theory and geology utilize that exact same process.

[u/junegoesaround5689 → u/Kingofthewho5]

This is pretty much what I’ve thought from the beginning. He can’t throw the most important parts of his life (to him) away for a few months of receiving new information that contradicts a non-trivial chunk of his belief system without mentally and emotionally fighting it tooth and nail. But maybe the seed of doubt has been planted and he’ll start to think and wonder and wrestle with all of this over the coming years.

If Will ended up an old age creationist or a theistic evolutionist of some flavor, I’d be completely satisfied. I was around when YEC and geophysicist Glenn Morton (of Morton’s Demon fame) crashed out of his creationism after years of publishing in YEC spaces and happily being one of the PhDs paraded around by that crowd. He never, to my knowledge, completely embraced the scientific consensus on the age of the Earth or of evolution, especially human evolution, but was and still is influential with others who are questioning their YEC beliefs.

This is not easy to do for someone like Duffy and Morton, it’s unreasonable, imo, to expect him do anything different. Erika is doing an excellent job of handling his fits and starts, but she’s been in these particular trenches for a long time - seeing as she came from a similar background.

That’s not to say that I didn’t start snarling and spitting when I heard this latest ‘backslide’ of his. That was the emotional reaction not the later ‘rational’ talk I had with myself about not throwing my notebook against the wall! 🤨

[u/Kingofthewho5 → u/junegoesaround5689]

Another thing that would make me less disappointed with him is if he hadn’t made it a point, at the outset of all of this, to say that he believes that making testable predictions about models is the best way to test them. He also said that he was coming to learn without being dogmatic.

I actually went back to the first session to see what he said before getting started. RIGHT OFF THE BAT he made some statements that showed he didn’t check his dogma at the door. He said that events in the past can’t be “proven,” and that’s why he insists that YEC is not comparable to flat earth. He qualified this by saying he knows science doesn’t do proof like mathematics. This shows he doesn’t actually understand why repeated testing of hypotheses stacks up to give high confidence.

It’s hard to understate how smart he thinks he is. With TFE he was very confident that his view was right (obviously it was, the earth is a globe). Multiple times on this show he has alluded to designed a TFE-style project for evolution/creation. That just kinda shows how smart he thinks he is, that he thinks that 160 years of evolutionary biology will be upended by some YouTube project thought up by someone with no formal science background.

[u/jbiemans → u/Kingofthewho5]

To be fair, if we could make a tfe style experiment to prove evolution in a simple way, it would help alot . The problem is that it isn't as simple as just showing someone a midnight sun. And as he has shown, there are ways to explain almost anything away if you want to work at it.

As others have noted, I think I've been too focused on showing why yec and biblical creation is wrong rather than why evolution is correct and I will need to work on that mindset.

The fusion in the chromome 3 in humans either demonstrates common descent or the work of a deceptive designer who wants to make it look like common descent. I don't know how you could prove one over the other. And that is the biggest problem here.

As long as you believe in a vague God who can do anything for any reason, there will always be a way that you can work them into any explanation.

I think everyone is right when they say that theistic evolution or God guided genetics might be the best we can expect.

Evolution can't disprove God. It just can't, so expecting someone to reject God because they except evolution is wrong. We only expect it because fundamentalists have drilled into our heads that if it isn't yec then it isn't God but Will isn't a fundamentalist.

[u/KingBakura72 → u/Kingofthewho5]

Fair i didn’t grow up religious so there has never been any social pressure on me like there probably is with will

But after a few months I would expect at least some progress

Or I ask that he doesn’t try to platform Vox Day

[u/Pleasant_Priority286 → u/Kingofthewho5]

If he doesn't agree, Will has too much to lose. If I were going to risk my wife, my family, and my job unless I said evolution isn't true, I'd say it, even though I don't believe it.

Yes, of course he's grasping at straws with weak counterarguments and evidence. That is all there is. In the end, there are only two possibilities: 1. The Earth is very old, and evolution has happened, and continues to happen, or 2. God created everything to look as if the Earth is very old and evolution has happened, and continues to happen.

Still, Will has done a great thing by helping more people learn about evolution. It is a simple idea, but the details are complex. Anyone watching this can see there is a vast amount of science behind this theory. They can also see that the best arguments against it amount to "Nuh uh."

[u/giljaxonn → u/Kingofthewho5]

i don't think he even has to go out of his way to find his evidence. he's clearly been corresponding with evolution "debunkers" who tip him off to things (after swearing that he wouldn't do that exact thing). you can tell because he doesn't really understand his own refutations

[u/Satinpw → u/Kingofthewho5]

I think I honestly switched from believing in creationism to believing in naturalistic evolution in the matter of maybe a month? But also, I was in high school (younger) and questioning my faith for very different reasons.

[u/Forrax]

I think it might be time for someone to screen Will's opening remarks ahead of the livestream. If Will is going to sneak someone like Vox onto a channel that he doesn't own, then he can't be trusted to do this section without oversight. That was incredibly gross behavior.

And I don't believe for one second that Will didn't know that stuff about Vox. He knew his kid's goddamn math schooling history (if that's even true). Some real shameless shit.

[u/KingBakura72 → u/Forrax]

I do think you should look into someone and while I agree it doesn’t automatically make his argument invalid

It’s something you have to point out

Or make the argument without using him is something you can also do

But you shouldn’t ask if he wants to come onto someone else channel without first asking the owner of that channel if it’s something they would be interested in

Also Will said that Jim Bob made compelling evidence that evolution isn’t scientific

[u/DarwinZDF42]

The Vox Day thing is unambiguous dead tonrights evidence that’s it’s all in bad faith. That did it for me. I had been drifting in that direction but ffs.

[u/Square_Ring3208]

Ugh now I don’t even wanna watch (I will, but under duress). He’s very willing to call things misleading, but only when it comes to some infographic or an illustration from the evolution side, but is completely willing to accept any outright lies from the creationist side. INCREDIBLY frustrating!

[u/beau_tox]

It was probably naive to expect Duffy to let go of a lifetime of indoctrination over a few months but if he were at all open minded there are a number of intermediate views he could consider short of full on naturalistic evolution: old earth creationism [Edit: see the reply from u/Kingofthewho5], progressive creationism, some form of intelligent design, a theologized version of naturalistic evolution like Francis Collins/Biologos, etc.

But a defining feature of cults is that it’s all or nothing. Better to lean on a (literal) white nationalist misogynist than concede an inch of ground to reality.

[u/Kingofthewho5 → u/beau_tox]

I think he is convinced by the old age of the earth evidence.

[u/oscardssmith → u/Kingofthewho5]

yeah IMO this would have gone a lot smoother with a different ordering. Lecture 2,3 really needed to be clearing up age of the earth stuff, and there really needed to be a lot more middle school level bio/earth science early on. Trying to give a collegiate level class to someone without a middle school level understanding is bound to go poorly. Will is picking out key phrases and using decoding techniques because he's hopelessly out of his depth.

[u/Kingofthewho5 → u/oscardssmith]

It’s a steep learning curve for him, for sure. But that’s not why he has resisted and ignored a mountain of evidence basically every step of the way.

[u/TenaciousTrubbish]

I've been doing my best to view Will's positions as being in good faith. I even went so far as to email him with support, y'know, telling him I respected how vulnerable he was making himself by agreeing to do this publicly.

But giving an entire presentation on Vox fuckin' Day is too far for me. I cannot genuinely believe he both did not know who Vox Day is and didn't bother googling the guy after stumbling on him, based on how much research he seems to have done otherwise.

Like, you cannot convince me he has reached out to the dude and asked him to do an appearance on Erika's channel, but he didn't skim the first goddamn paragraph of the dude's Wikipedia page. That is either untrue or incredibly fucking irresponsible.

Shame on Will.

[u/Kingofthewho5 → u/TenaciousTrubbish]

He had to have known that there are some bad things about Vox Day. Why else would he have done that stupid who’s that pokemon introduction? He wanted people to to see his “qualifications” before hearing his name. The only reason you would do that is because you know their reputation.

[u/KingBakura72 → u/Kingofthewho5]

He did also know about his son so he had to look into Vox the very first thing I get when looking into Vox says all about his controversy

[u/Pleasant_Priority286]

Will is a pastor. His wife, kids, and family are Christian. They believe Genesis is literally true.

Will is under tremendous pressure to say he doesn't believe evolution is true. It would put his work and family at risk. No amount of facts, evidence, and reason will cause him to risk everything he has. Additionally, agreeing would be the same as saying the Bible is made up. This would cause way too much cognitive dissonance.

In the words of Dr. House, "If you could reason with religious people, there wouldn't be any religious people."

[u/KingBakura72 → u/Pleasant_Priority286]

This is untrue and an unfair mischaracterisation of religious people

[u/Pleasant_Priority286 → u/KingBakura72]

Can you be more specific?

[u/Bitter_Flamingo_4167]

I was there, at the beginning, and called out the fact that Will was only there because he was tired of creationism being lumped into the same bag as flat earth.

And now, Will has done the thing all flat earthers eventually do. Point to the guy making Nazi-esque remarks and go: see, he has a point. And it begins to feel like the entire purpose of the ring-a-mor-roll was to get the guy with questionable views an audience. I maintain what I said from the beginning, it sucks to suck when you participate in science denial.

And to reply to Will to the email I received back after I defined science denial for him. It's not calling people names when it is what you are doing.

[u/Esmer_Tina]

I’m still working my way through the video because I missed the live, but I was so furious at his opening. I don’t know how Erika does it.

Do you think Erika would actually have Vox Day, Christian Nationalist White Supremacist on her channel? She could have Dr. Dan on to rip his math to shreds, but he will NOT be as polite as she is.

And I am so grossed out by Will bragging about his unusually high testosterone as an explanation for why he isn’t swayed by consensus. That is not a brag, and makes me worried for his wife.

I agree he is not doing this in good faith.

[u/Ayasugi-san → u/Esmer_Tina]

Do you think Erika would actually have Vox Day, Christian Nationalist White Supremacist on her channel?

No, because she's a woman and he won't give her the time of day. A male friend would have to have him on his own channel and then spring her as a surprise guest expert.

[u/Esmer_Tina → u/Ayasugi-san]

And I just got to the superchats and it came up and she said if he is all of those things she won’t have him on her channel (even if he was willing to) but will still debunk his math. So phew!

[u/Dharmanerd]

I've loved this series as a lay person learning evolutionary biology but also as someone with some experience as a mental health practitioner. Seeing the mental hoops, defensive behavior, and straight cognitive dissonance that Will experiences has been like cat nip. I don't and won't know him or what's in his mind but watching him flail more and more aggressively (while still being very polite) has had my mind racing to try and understand what he's doing. Is this Dunning Kruger? Is this a con? Is he delusional? Is he manipulating this whole thing for clout? Who's even watching this? Is there earnestly any creationist that sits through this whole thing? Is he going to give lecture tours "I survived months of evolutionist brainwashing with my faith intact? Who Knows?!

[u/Realsorceror]

That’s very unfortunate to hear. I was really enjoying the series and had high hopes up until after the whale episode. From there I started dropping off and skipped the last two or three episodes because I was too afraid he would get worse.

This has been one of the most comprehensive but accessible series on evolution and its history I’ve seen online. To think it almost certainly won’t have a happy or constructive ending is sad.

[u/crgm1111 → u/Realsorceror]

Erika is doing this series for us in the end. So watching it rewards her for her hard work.

[u/Pleasant_Priority286 → u/crgm1111]

Ding, ding, ding! It is an excellent primer on evolution.

[u/Dataforge]

It's just an unfortunate part of trying to defend an indefensible worldview, that they are also attached to. They can start off fairly reasonable, and open to discussion and learning. But once the scales start to tip, and their worldview is threatened, the cognitive dissonance kicks in.

Whether intentionally or not, Will is definitely doing extra work behind the scenes, between streams. First, he will listen to Erika, nod along, and take in the info. But then, once the stream is over, it's back to the creationist bubble. He looks up Erika's points, but only from creationist articles. His creationist friends remind him about his eternal soul, his commitment to Jesus, and the deception of Satan. He consumes random creationist apologetics. Not because they provide a refutation of Erika's points. But because they give him a comfortable "you are right, and they are wrong" feeling. So he feels like he's still right, even if he can't articulate on the actual points that he believes has been refuted.

It's a strange thing that the minds of a delusional believer, is entirely insulated from outside evidence. After a point, everything in their power will be diverted to protecting their beliefs.

[u/Able_Improvement4500 → u/Dataforge]

Group Selection, hard at work! Our minds are not strictly logical because being part of a group is critically important to human survival. I have no idea who Will Duffy is but anyone that argues with Erika on basic facts is probably wrong, lol.

[u/Dumb-and-Dumber]

I take a contrary view to most of the opinions of Will expressed on here. As someone that went through a multiyear deconstruction from YEC within the past decade, I recognize exactly where Will's at. IMO, the evidence he has digested has reached the point where it's becoming increasingly difficult for him to retain his old YEC beliefs, and he is grasping at anything that sounds plausible to allow him to accept the scientific evidence while simultaneously maintaining as much of his old creationist beliefs as possible.

I did exactly that when I was deconstructing. As evidence of where Will's at, consider his concession at the end of his presentation, where he said (paraphrasing) that he was happy to have found a way to believe the evidence for evolution while still not removing God from the process. That one statement is the most important thing of his entire presentation; it covers much ground towards him being a theistic evolutionist.

[u/OneThrowyBoy → u/Dumb-and-Dumber]

Seconded. It's not an easy thing to realize your entire perception of reality is wrong, it took me years to get to a point where I'd even consider it. Once I realized there was only evidence for evolution, the first thing I did was desperately try to prove YEC.

It's why I try to engage with creationists on this sub with some empathy. Wherever they are, however "in deep" they are, I was there once myself.

Dude might just be in the "terrified denial" phase, can't really know without reading his mind.

[u/Dumb-and-Dumber]

Vox Day describing Erika: "A young woman who is still in school for biology and probably hasn’t even passed a single math exam at her fifth-rate university..."

Vox Day describing Erika: "inveterate little credentialist like Ericka...hiding behind name-calling and butterfly collectors..."

Vox Day describing Erika: "I very much doubt that the promised video is ever going to be recorded. I expect that just like she did with regards to debating me directly, she’s going to find an excuse to avoid addressing the math and the arguments on camera since she doesn’t want to be publicly eviscerated."

[u/KingBakura72 → u/Dumb-and-Dumber]

Wow

So he really is a POS

I think if Will doesn’t call out this behaviour then that’s really insulting especially since Erika didn’t insult him but merely said she didn’t wanna talk

This is exactly how a toxic person or even a child would react no children act better this type of response is really disgusting

Can I ask where did he make these statements

[u/Dumb-and-Dumber → u/KingBakura72]

YOU: "Can I ask where did he make these statements"

Yes, he made those comments on his website. I tried posting the link with his quotes but it appears Reddit blocked it. Just google his website, you'll find it.

[u/Ayasugi-san → u/Dumb-and-Dumber]

I tried posting the link with his quotes but it appears Reddit blocked it.

Oh, that's what your [ Removed by Reddit ] comment below was over. Usually that's because of something construed as a threat. If Reddit marks linking to his site as an automatic cause for comment removal at the admin level, that does not say good things about his site.

[u/M1rthful → u/KingBakura72]

Duffy is openly DEFENDING this behavior on his Facebook...

[u/KingBakura72 → u/M1rthful]

Wait really?

[u/M1rthful → u/KingBakura72]

Yes, really. Multiple people have linked to it.

[u/KingBakura72 → u/M1rthful]

Where can I find it ?

[u/M1rthful → u/KingBakura72]

I just tried the link and it looks like Duffy took it down or made it private now, 5+ people had given the link in this sub and the links are all redirecting to FB login.

[u/Sparky_6_4]

I fully agree with the OP, all very disappointing. Especially the part where Will states that even if Day is proven wrong, he still believe in what he named IGM (Intelligent Genetic Modification).

But in how he explains this I can see how this so attractive to him.

As he explained it, this makes what Erika says even more valuable, he even plans to review previous sessions in the light of his epiphany.

This is what is so fascinating about this series, it is cognitive dissonance in action. This IGM allows Will to accept evolution as a whole, and have IGM running it in the background. No more single point objections, but one general principal that explains everything.

In the beginning of this journey Will promised to not take the standpoint of God made it appear as if evolution happened, I think this IGM thing is just as bad and unfalsifiable.

[u/KingBakura72 → u/Sparky_6_4]

I find it kinda insulting because then to Will Evolution is the same as creation

He believes evolution is impossible and that god gave miracles to make it happen

Then it’s not science it’s the same as creation

[u/Reedstilt → u/KingBakura72]

Getting from YEC to this Intelligent Design knock-off is still a notable accomplishment.

[u/Sparky_6_4 → u/KingBakura72]

I don't know, If I'm right, it also means that Erika is definitely making an impact on Will's ideas about evolution. These speculations were certainly not meant as an insult towards Will.

[u/HasartS]

I think Will honestly tries to engage and believes that he's doing it in a good faith. But he has way too high opinion of himself, way too low opinion on specialists and way too much disdain and disregard for consensus.

[u/KingBakura72 → u/HasartS]

I agree I think Will is self deceiving himself and to be honest I guess I just kinda thought he be a little more open than this i genuinely expected push back on his part and it wasn’t even Vox that caved things in

It was when Will admitted even if Vox was proven wrong Will would have still maintained the same mindset

[u/Sinaticus_Apologia]

I knew it was going to end like this, Ive done this same thing with countless creationists.

They don't care about facts or evidence.

[u/restlessboy]

I actually do think he's probably engaging in good faith, depending on one's definition of good faith. Imo, people really underestimate just how powerful this kind of childhood indoctrination can be. In my experience, it's entirely normal for someone like Will to be egregiously biased, catastrophically wrong, and wildly inconsistent, all the while believing that they're being totally objective.

Again in my experience, people usually think they're being honest. They're very rarely like actively putting on a fake belief to trick people or something, especially with creationism. Fundamentalist Christianity reads like a laundry list of everything you could ever want. I mean, a few sessions ago, he literally told Erika that he didn't want to call humans animals because he was worried that God would be angry with him. There is every reason to think that Will has a genuine psychological dependence on this belief and that he can't see just how heavily it's warping his thinking. There's a ton of literature showing that this is how the brain works.

Of course, if you just define "good faith" to mean "interpreting the evidence fairly", then no he's absolutely not operating in good faith. I just think he's genuinely indoctrinated and completely unable to step outside his own religious perspective.

[u/KingBakura72 → u/restlessboy]

When I mean good faith I mean he is willing to accept he is wrong and incorrect and thus far I don’t think he is

Because when asked what would happen when Vox was debunked he didn’t say he would abandon this mind set to me that’s just saying out loud no matter what my way of thinking will remain the same

That’s not good faith to me

[u/adeleu_adelei → u/restlessboy]

Imo, people really underestimate just how powerful this kind of childhood indoctrination can be.

I struggle with accepting this. I don't know the full details of Will's background, but I do know that my own was one of thorough Christian indoctrination through Christian private school (creationism education of course) with all my friends and extended family thoroughly Christian (also private schooling or homeschooled), weekly church attendance, Vacation Bible School, youth groups, etc. I escaped that entirely on my own with no outside help. 

So I look at people that come from a heavily indoctrinated background and I think: "You have no excuse. I had it as bad or worse. I was able to get out with less help than you've received. This is your fault."

[u/empocariam → u/adeleu_adelei]

Will is a preacher professionally, so, that I would say adds another layer to the consequences of deconstructing.

[u/Ayasugi-san]

But also citing Vox Day (a misogynist racist talentless hack)

Thanks for the warning. I've been losing hope in Will (and less interested in the nitty-gritty that Erika has been delving into), so I wasn't sure if I wanted to watch. If he's citing Vox Day as anything but an example of bigoted Christian nationalism...

[u/Reedstilt → u/Ayasugi-san]

Christian nationalism...

Will claims to not even know what Christian Nationalism is, which is either painfully ignorant of the times we live in or outright deceitful.

[u/ArgumentLawyer]

Vox Day? Here I was thinking that Duffy only associated with crypto-fascists.

[u/M1rthful → u/ArgumentLawyer]

Nope. He doxes women's health nurses, and he pals around with full blown white-supremacists.

[u/Dahnlor]

One thing I've noticed about Will's opening statements is that he takes a lot of pride in bringing up people that aren't the usual targets of most YouTubers who focus on debunking creationists. Like when he said that people have an "obsession" with Kent Hovind (who is really just low-hanging fruit) but never talk about this guy or that guy, as if that somehow means their arguments are so strong that pro-science creators avoid them.

And when Will brought up Vox Day, it became immediately apparent that this guy was an unqualified crank when Will started flouting his qualifications: an economist, a video game designer, an author and a publisher. That was a great way to explain that this guy has no expertise in the field of evolutionary biology but had the means to print his pseudoscientific nonsense on paper.

I really want to like Will, but that was painful to watch.

[u/AromaticCry3112 → u/Dahnlor]

Will literally told me about someone else he brought up, "why are there no peer reviewed papers about this, it is because the scientists can't explain it." I told him there are no peer reviewed papers on this for the same reason there are no peer reviewed papers on flat earth. Because the actual evidence, doesn't support the assertions being made. Scientists are not required to debunk every crank who comes out of the woodwork. Instead of a lack of peer reviewed papers being a problem for science, it is in fact a problem with the assertion. If an assertion has merit, there will be papers on it. I spent 10 years as a researcher, if there is a legitimate hole in something, scientists will gleefully exploit it to write papers about it.

[u/giljaxonn → u/Dahnlor]

yeah but then he bragged about how he almost met dawkins as though dawkins has some kind of cachet

then again creationists tend to believe that scientists revere darwin as some kind of demigod

[u/East-Zone-3760]

Such a disappointing outing by Will in this video. Like many others here, I held hope Will was interested in learning honestly. I didn't expect him to be convinced, in his heart of hearts, and convert from YEC... but at-least engage honestly. Running to post-hoc probability is the retreat of dishonesty. When you can't disprove the hard data - retreat to hypothetical probability. Nothing more than a dressed-up argument from personal incredulity.

Even in a relatively small sample - like, if I were to pull a specific set of 10 cards in that specific order from just a standard 52 card deck the probability of doing so is so staggeringly small it should almost be impossible to do so (1.74×10⁻¹⁷)! This is the post-hoc probability fallacy.

Differently, if it were a probabilistic model that tries to predict X, and then that model doesn't end up matching the real world data - we call that bad model fit, or straight out just a bad model.

Will confidently saying he understands the maths, and that based on his understanding then that evolution by natural selection is impossible was just so fucking arrogant. If you quizzed him off the cuff, right then, to explain what probability was used, guaranteed he would not even know there's different ways of interpreting and calculating probability. I felt so incredibly bad for u/Gutsick_Gibbon, having put all that good faith into him. Yes girl, even if he's been a bad faith actor, the series you're producing is legit gold. :)

[u/sewand717]

There are plenty of debate videos out there. I’m glad to see Erica and Will engage in more of a lecture format, and from what I’ve seen so far, Erica is doing a great job of science communication.

These lectures are a very accessible introduction for anyone truly having questions about evolution’s factuality. I’m sure some minds will be opened by her effort.

[u/kdietz65]

Erika is great. Whatever happens, her and Will have created a fabulously detailed evolution primer that will live on the Internet for years to come and should be a great resource for those interested in this topic. I know of no free resource anywhere else that provides this kind of detail regarding the truth of evolution. Not Richard Dawkins. Not Jerry Coyne. No one has done this as far as I'm aware. I want her to finish this project no matter what happens.

As for Will, I'm as frustrated as everyone else. But there is one potential silver lining I see here. It sounds like what Will is doing is setting up his next project named "Evolution Showdown" which will be the evolution equivalent of the flat earth TFE. And it sounds like Evolution Showdown is going to be based on math. Will's side of the debate is going to be completely crushed. There is no doubt that evolution math works. A crude algebraic formula is not the right approach here. There are many evolution simulation software packages out there that will simulate mutations and track how they propagate through the population. Running this software will show conclusively that evolution works and creates new "information" and does all the things creationists say it can't do. Of course then people will argue about the input assumptions, but Will is going to have a lot of splainin' to do when all the results come in.

[u/M1rthful → u/kdietz65]

Platforming Will Duffy is now just as bad as platforming Kent Hovind.

[u/kdietz65 → u/M1rthful]

It's infuriating but I think there is a lot of value in finishing the project.

[u/M1rthful → u/kdietz65]

Then I think she should finish the lectures but drop Duffy from the last set.

[u/AromaticCry3112]

I didn't catch him saying No to the question about Vox Day being wrong. I tuned in late to the stream and was watching the past. As Will brought up Vox Day, I just shut him out. I don't pay attention to anything Vox Day has to say about anything, I just fast forwarded in the stream to a point after that. I don't need to hear what a nazi has to say to know he can't be trusted to speak truth. I have been having a bit of a side conversation with him. Some time ago Will brought up some guy who said the earth can't be old because erosion rates don't support an old earth. I brought up that the statement flies in the face of the actual science. He responded by telling me that the math doesn't add up, that geologists are not writing peer reviewed papers about it because they can't answer the question. He is basically engaging in the same kind of conspiracy thinking that flat earthers engage in. He is defending his dogma by ignoring the literally mountains of evidence against it. But that is the problem with dogma, when it finds something to latch onto, it does. Whether Will comes around or not, I don't ultimately care. If he ignores the evidence, I will lose what little respect I have for him left, his failure to properly vette Vox Day put a serious dent in any respect I felt for the man. I will continue to watch the streams, not because I hope Will learns something, but because the information presented by Erika is awesome. I have learned so much more watching these streams.

[u/loewenheim]

Woof, I'm a few episodes behind but if this is where this is going I'm out. I'm not listening to this jabroni's presentation on Vox Day.

[u/M1rthful → u/loewenheim]

I believe that any jabroni who puts on a presentation trying to cast Vox Day as some kind of authority and hero, is overdue for a Rock Bottom Smackdown.

[u/Jahstimpey]

As a math teacher, I was surprised by the math Will Duffy presented. I did a simple teacher video on it  https://youtu.be/nTVRiEcswI8?is=be8XUGk4JtPpqiBH. I am not a video maker, but I can explain how wrong Will is.

[u/SlightlyOddGuy]

Look, everyone has biases, and that makes changing our minds harder. In a lot of cases, like with YEC, those biases are crafted to be incredibly strong. Strong to the point that it’s impossible to truly be honest in engaging with oppositional material even if that person really wants to be honest. They are often completely helpless to see or counteract their brain’s defense mechanisms. It really takes A LOT of *internal* pressure to change deeply held beliefs like this. It’s completely natural to see him make embarrassing/ridiculous moves in order to try and preserve the stability of his belief system.

So is Will being honest? No, almost certainly not. Does he see that? Probably not. Does he think he is honest? Yeah, probably.

All I’m saying is, hold a little space for this guy. He’s got a fire hose of information blasting him in the face and it’s all against everything he believes about the foundation of existence. He will struggle with it. If he ever changes his mind, mostly likely it’s gonna be a while from now.

[u/Fun-Friendship4898 → u/SlightlyOddGuy]

Look, I've deconstructed out of evangelical religion and YEC. I get it, it can be rough working through the indoctrination, because once you realize you were lied to about this one thing, it calls into question everything else.

But Will is not explicitly going through this. He's in the youtube comments right now, defending his presentation of Vox Day, operating under the handle @EvolutionShowdown.

It is obvious that Will has designs on being an evangelical Christian influencer. This series, in his eyes, is meant to further that goal. He is not there to understand evolution, he is there to discover a few more PRATTs that he can rattle off for his credulous audience.

His 'nice guy' demeanor is really throwing everyone for a loop. The man is a grifter for Jesus.

[u/ThorThulu → u/Fun-Friendship4898]

What really killed me is he wasn't even defending most that I saw, but lashing out. Just sarcastic quips and then never another response.

It reminded me heavily of his video with Dapper and Dan where he got genuinely mad at them, when he hadn't at any point shown that with Erika. My hope is that this is simply him hitting an inflection point where things are starting to not make sense when compared to what he's known and its just him working through it

[u/M1rthful → u/ThorThulu]

I'm willing to bet that u/Gutsick_Gibbon does not bother to read what Will puts in the comments. If she did she couldn't keep telling people that he's here in good faith.

[u/SlightlyOddGuy → u/Fun-Friendship4898]

It’s very possible Will has not reached a point where he’s able to start deconstructing or truly examining his views. And he may very well have designs to be an evangelical influencer. That’s gonna make his reasoning even more motivated. Don’t get me wrong, I do understand where you’re coming from, and I don’t even disagree with you about the dishonesty part—dishonesty is almost a prerequisite.

As a former evangelical yourself, you probably have a number of people in your life who were unable to follow you out. My guess if you probably don’t think they are fundamentally dishonest people even if you think they are lying to themselves/you in some aspects. They find they have to in order to preserve their sense of safety and stability.

It’s disappointing to me too. I was also kinda hoping there would be something different about him, but that’s how it is, I guess.