Open Mind Closed

Racism May 2nd, 2008 Invest In Food

This whole week was about having an open mind.

Uh Oh! No video. You will need the Flash player and Javascript enabled to watch this show.

This whole week was about having an open mind. Due to the time limits and video limits and money limits, occasionally we had to paint with broad brush strokes.

We can’t possibly cover every point of every argument in under six minutes. Thanks for understanding!

So we did it! We blasted through some of the most controversial and complex subjects out there. Now stop the flame war for a second and ask yourself this: How did you do? Did you keep an open mind? Some of you did. And some of you might have come late to the party and missed the first video. At least that’s what I’m hoping.

To those of you that didn’t agree with some of the things we said… And we’re pretty sure we offended everybody at some point. What happened in your head as you watched? Did you experience a – I have no clue what word you meant here – reaction?

These are some sensitive issues. Issues that people feel very strongly about. How dispassionate we’re you able to be? Maybe your blood’s boiling again and you’re thinking: Having an open mind doesn’t mean I have to agree with you!

You’re right, but we never asked you to! Instead, we tried to get you to objectively look at the other side. To dispassionately see if there was any merit to the argument they were making, no matter how strongly you felt about the subject. And once you’ve done that, then feel free to disagree.

And to those of you who nodded your heads and smiled at what we said: Did you remember the Nietzsche-quote? Did you start by doing any digging of your own or verifying the numbers or quotes we gave you? Did you really try to find the other side of the issue and look at it in its best light before you jumped on the band wagon?

Whether you’re comparing religion, politics or scientific theories, you need to compare bests with bests.

It’s easy to show another point of views weakest arguments and then match that to your strong points. But it’s your job as a listener to objectively examine the information you’re given. We’re so quick to agree with things we believe and so quick to condemn things we haven’t considered. And when we voice our opinions with contention and anger the search for truth ends and only the flame war remains.

For those of you who kept an open mind: I wish the world were full of people like you. Because you understand, it’s okay to amiably agree to disagree.

For those of you who flamed us or others this week and then had an eye-opening experience after seeing this video: We hope it’ll be something you remember.
For a long time.

And finally! To those who continue to close your minds to different opinions and the ideas of others, who continually argue with belittling statements: I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.

Transcribed by: Sandra

Double Post Day

Don’t miss the last video from “Open Mind” week on Racism. Today was the first time we have put up two shows in one day.  We heard you Mr. Q!

Share the show:

Copy this code onto your site or blog:


  • 3/29/11 @ 10:59


    Agreeing to disagree is a copout. How can one resolve anything if one just walks away? Ag. to disag. is another way of saying you're wrong and I'm right. Rather one should hear (as opposed to the popularly misunderstood "listen") what is the other's position is and ask then ask himself, "why am I write" and "why is he wrong?" Then propose your analysis to the opposing side to which he must do ... (more)
  • 3/10/09 @ 15:35


    From my personal perspective we do have enough evidence to support gradual adaptation, which on a long enough time scale can be regarded as evolution. The examples that prove this to me are 1)corn. In the 1500s it was documented for reaching the stupendous length of 6". These days its a foot and a half. It also comes in more varieties now. My 2) is strawberries. They originally adapted to being bi ... (more)
  • 11/9/08 @ 15:09


    To the death.. huh?

  • 8/25/08 @ 10:43


    I would like to say that i love your site a lot
    now.. back to business hehe
    I cant say that fully agree with what you typed up… care to explain deeper?

  • 8/15/08 @ 13:40

    Science Avenger

    Phil, Hardly. That is just another example of the games the IDers play. The articles you list are either about another topic but claimed by the IDers as their own, or published in poorly thought of places like Rivista which will publish just about anything, or do no science, or were not peer reviewed. One so-called peer reviewer of Behe's book never saw it, and another panned it. Arguing so ... (more)
  • 8/1/08 @ 9:28


    It’ll take a lot more than this to close my mind as its pretty empty already.

  • 7/16/08 @ 3:46


    And will you succeed? You will indeed! (98 and 3/4 percent guaranteed.)

    What does it mean???

  • 6/24/08 @ 17:09


    my mind is open =o its bleeding!!

  • 5/28/08 @ 18:20


    Love the open-mind week video’s – amazing work guys!

  • 5/23/08 @ 2:25


    “Show me such an argument in a peer-reviewed math or science journal, and I’ll take a look at it.” — Science Avenger

    Despite the shortness of the list, I suppose the following should keep you busy for a while:

  • 5/22/08 @ 20:55


    Science Avenger, I guess, then, that Douglas Erwin’s “Macroevolution is more than repeated rounds of microevolution,” Evolution and Development, Vol. 2(2):78-84, 2000) needs to be explained.

  • 5/16/08 @ 14:59

    Science Avenger

    Sure Steve O, the information is all over the place if you really want it. First of all, dispense with the notion that micro and macro evolution have different mechanisms. They don’t: macro is just a lot of micro.

    For my money the best source is here:

  • 5/8/08 @ 19:56

    Steve O

    Science Avenger, You say, "...the facts decided this subject long before you and I were born." And also, "The people who oppose evolution aren’t concerned with the evidence..." I'm wondering if you can answer a serious (and sincere) question for me: If you accept that (macro) evolution has been proven, when did that happen and what was the proof? Even if this is an accumulation of e ... (more)
  • 5/7/08 @ 19:34

    Jonathan Bartlett

    Great video! I thought I would clarify one thing, though. While in general the exact parameters of what is evolvable are not known, there are some parameters of what isn't which are fairly well spelled-out. The most important one, I think, is based on Godel's incompleteness theorem. Basically, a self-referential code should not be able to arise from a non-self-referential code without the input ... (more)
  • 5/6/08 @ 15:48


    A-Team: Your "speciation" is no more a new species than our generation is because we’re taller than our grandparents’ generation. The only mention of species in the article is dealing with the already known lizard; never stating it was new. Shall we delve deeper? Some portion of an "intelligent" species decide it's a good thing to move some lizards from one geographic location to another (l ... (more)
  • 5/6/08 @ 9:40


    Wow Brothers Winn, good week…how are you going to top this…and FrootLoop, thanks for the quotes from the good doctor, I guess you must be the only one who got the real message this week….V.V.

  • 5/5/08 @ 22:16

    Science Avenger

    Sorry Frootloop, but you see, there are lots of people out there who understand nothing about biology, and yet are trying to foul up science education in our schools. So no, we can't all just get along. And Phil, your argument makes no logical sense at all. Let people lie about you, and misrepresent what you say, and claim you are responsible for things like the holocaust, and see how nice you ... (more)
  • 5/5/08 @ 20:21

    Phil Walker, MD, MPH

    If the neo-darwinists on this blog had the abundance of evidence that they claim they have, they wouldn’t have to use the crass and belittling language that they use and they wouldn’t even be interested in writing on this blog.
    Way to go Professor. You are most eloquent (and also correct).

  • 5/5/08 @ 18:21


    And to the Winn Brothers, I echo the words of the great Dr. Suess "You'll be famous as famous can be, with the whole wide world watching you win on TV. And will you succeed? Yes! You will, indeed! (98 and 3/4 percent guaranteed)". Good job guys. Way to create some sparks to get people thinking. For everyone else the good doctor also has some wise advice: "You have brains in your head (hopefull ... (more)
  • 5/5/08 @ 18:04


    Can’t we all just get along? ;) Seriously, why does everyone feel so obligated to “enlighten” everyone? IMHO, all that really matters is that YOU know what YOU believe and why.

  • 5/5/08 @ 15:20

    The A-Team

    Oh, and for the record, you’re going to have to update your arguments as we have observed actual speciation occur in a human lifetime:

    Oops, you lose.

  • 5/5/08 @ 15:01

    The A-Team

    Is this faux-agnosticism really where Evolution deniers are going to sink to now? You've quote mind Dawkins & removed the context. Yes, "doctrine" was an unfortunate word to have used but nobody can be seriously expected to always use the exact words they mean all of the time, and this isolated sentence taken on its own is completely antithetical to Dawkins' otherwise consistent position. Now ... (more)
  • 5/5/08 @ 14:29

    Science Avenger

    You referenced a creationist website and claim you aren't making creationist argument? Whatever... Show me such an argument in a peer-reviewed math or science journal, and I'll take a look at it. That's the standard for such subjects, since they are always too complicated to be debated on blog comments. Otherwise, it is just so much crank nonsense, a dime-a-dozen found all over the web. Whe ... (more)
  • 5/5/08 @ 13:50


    Wow. Am I on the wrong page? I though Darwinism was days ago. Even the Liberals vs. Conservatives flame war managed to stay on one page. I guess we know which topic people are really touchy about now. The evolution debate flared up on the Racism page too. Yikes! Deep breaths people, deep breaths.

  • 5/5/08 @ 13:16


    Science Avenger: - I'm not talking about creationist arguments, why are you? I'm talking about math. And a very small fraction of math organizations around the world have even bothered to comment on "creationist arguments" -- so you are making your "100%" up. Besides, I'm not spewing nonsense. There have been roughly the same number of human organisms in the last 2000 years as there have b ... (more)
  • 5/5/08 @ 13:01

    Science Avenger

    Mathdude, if the best you can do is one crank posting on a propoganda site for ID, you make my case for me. That, and the complete lack of support from the mathematical community for the kind of nonsense you are spewing, once again makes my case. See, you guys want to claim the biologists all reject your arguments because they are somehow biased for evolution. But you can't make that claim ag ... (more)
  • 5/5/08 @ 11:55

    Soul Sister

    I absolutely love everything that's been discussed this week. I think it's great to get everyone watching this show talking--even if none of us will have friends left since we've covered religion, politics, and beyond. :) I've also had a good laugh reading all the 'flaming' posts. I like observing arguments, even though I am horrible at them. It's been really interesting to see how people try t ... (more)
  • 5/5/08 @ 5:48


    This guy is making all these silly videos simply because he has no evidence. That’s just like John Corrigan Wells writing some stupid little book for sub-100 IQ types – no evidence. If our friend had evidence he wouldn’t need to to make 150 videos, just one paper would do.

  • 5/5/08 @ 5:07


    There are so many flawed premises and flaws in the logic of this guy's presentation and arguments that it's made my head spin. If your premises are flawed and your 'logical' extrapolations are illogical, then you can end up with any conclusion you feel like, and most of his conclusions are of that ilk. Lots of long scientific words, strung together and presented in a smart a** manner does not ... (more)
  • 5/5/08 @ 3:14


    People who think he is a idiot or moron keep you opinions to your self please.While he gives the evidence and is likely to be trusted more than the people on T.V

  • 5/4/08 @ 23:55


    Now of all the people posting here in the last couple of days, I declare Professor the least open minded person here.
    Why is it so hard for people to state their minds without insulting others. I stopped reading his post with the words “you morons”, and I don’t intend to finish it. Insulting people is not the way to make your arguments stick and I choose not to be talked to in that fashion…

  • 5/4/08 @ 21:46


    Whoa!.. i’m super late.. but whoa.. i didn’t even know there was a comment section in ur

  • 5/4/08 @ 21:18


    I find the evolution die-hards quite amusing; so distraught over what they call 'falsehoods' in the video. This guy has put together around 150 logical and well researched videos, what have you put out? At least he has the balls to tackle such an issue, which clearly many feel passionate about. I encourage all the flamers to research and put together their own videos, or like the prof says, get ... (more)
  • 5/4/08 @ 21:03

    William Wallace

    Outstanding...almost exactly what I think. 1. ID is not yet science. 2. The (macro) Theory of Evolution is not yet science. 3. Female fruit flies that refuse to mate with males from a different group who eat a different diet do not make a species. How do I embed this video? I would like to blog on it with credit to the authors. Thank you so much for this. -->
  • 5/4/08 @ 18:33


    Yo! Science Avenger... news flash: mathematicians do, in fact, find all manner of difficulty with the probabilities implied in evolution... Here's an argument that even you can follow: The current evolutionary model suggests that a stable population of around 100k over a period of 5M years with a typical generation of 20 ye ... (more)
  • 5/4/08 @ 16:04

    Science Avenger

    Yeah Professor, that's right, in the evolution/creation wars, its the evolution defenders screaming that the other side is going to Hell, and responsible for all the atrocities of the world, while the creationists with all their biology PhDs sit there trying to patiently explain the science. No wait, it's the other way around isn't it? Yep, fact is, rounded to whole numbers, the proportion of ... (more)
  • 5/4/08 @ 14:33


    So does the Professor just have a PhD in Biochemistry/Biophysics or does he actually do science, advise graduate students, teach etc? Or does he work at a diploma mill? But whatever Professor has learned, his knowledge about evolution seems to have been acquired on the cheap, maybe by watching these fatuous videos, or frequenting sleazy websites like Since you think that Darwin "meant t ... (more)
  • 5/4/08 @ 13:48


    I love how supporters of evolution either 1) yell obscenities because they were indoctrinated to be both ignorant and hateful or 2) yell that evolution is true because they were just indoctrinated to be ignorant. Unlike every single one of you on this page, I have a PhD in Biochemistry/Molecular Biology/Biophysics. Now, to the evolutionists on this page, that will just incite you to yell obsceni ... (more)
  • 5/4/08 @ 13:29


    Although I will mention as I left an important part that evolution could easily explain speciation, it's merely a longer process. I was more or less trying to point out that Evolution does happen. The only thing arguable about evolution is to what extent it works, speciation? Well there's no evidence against it, there's evidence for it. And people claim there is a lack of evidence at key points.. ... (more)
  • 5/4/08 @ 12:34


    I don't think he's taken the time to understand the subjects completely, and while trying to sound neutral, he only sounds ignorant. Clearly he doesn't understand that evolution doesn't explain the origin of life, only its diversity. He says evolution is improbable, but doesn't understand that would only be true if the results of evolution had to end up with all the species we have today, which th ... (more)
  • 5/4/08 @ 12:19


    Aw, c’mon Paul. Be a sport. Just one.

  • 5/4/08 @ 11:10

    “What You Ought to Know About Intelligent Design” || Thinking Christian

    [...] This goes along with it. [...]

  • 5/4/08 @ 9:56


    Whoever wrote this needs to study less comedy and more science. So many falsehoods it’s pointless to even bother trying to counter them all.

  • 5/4/08 @ 9:10


    you’re an idiot. talk about something you know about.

  • 5/4/08 @ 0:24


    I love that quote “I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it”
    Loved the shows this week, awsome job…

  • 5/3/08 @ 20:51

    Rabble of Redheads

    Way to Go Brothers Winn!!

  • 5/3/08 @ 10:50


    this was great … pretty darn awesome … this whole week the episodes were just way too goood

  • 5/3/08 @ 10:23


    Loved the open-mind series. I think you should run for president. (well, I’m sort of not kidding. sigh )

  • 5/3/08 @ 8:28

    Mr. Q

    thats bloody awesome thanks and jolly good show wot-wot

  • 5/3/08 @ 0:46


    erm isn’t flaming responsibly another dumb cow ?? (read ox-y-moron(

  • 5/2/08 @ 22:17


    Haaa good point and i keep a open mind but now i cant close it you think you can come on up and close it for me

Sorry, we're getting way too much spam.
You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't already, register here.

Recent Shows

Recent Comments

The Brothers Winn

Just two brothers making a podcast. We both research and write the show.

Get a hold of us here:

Notice: Use of undefined constant - assumed '' in /home/media/public_html/wyotk/show/wp-content/themes/wyotk/single.php on line 87