Good Response Man! I left two comments on his video! SO HAPPY you mentioned Human's genetic ancestry that goes back to Africa. I wanted to joke about how he was forgetting that Black Grandma we all share. as an African american to me its very telling when some one talks about "Race" in the overly simplistic context of colors like Black Brown White Red Yellow. Like we are all fucking crayons! then he uses it as an argument against human evolution. Face to Palm!
what about the 4% neanderthal gene. africans dont have it? this alone fucks up your theories. And at worst we evolved from apes yes, whites evolved from blacks yes. so we are different to blacks yes. thousands of years of evolution cannot simply be disregarded. your view is just jew propagande to promote race mixing. the same as nazi propaganda was to keep races pure. whos in power gets to control the science for its political views. many scientists disagree with u includin most of china
@OMAN88HH all people are evolving at the same rate, so all people are equally evolved. just because white americans are descended from europeans doesn't mean that europeans suddenly stopped evolving. evolution is NOT a ladder. all species alive today are equally evolved.
they arnt all "white" i thought you knew what you were talking about till you said that. Races exist, its a fact and someone have to be retarded to ignore it. but we should not make a judgements about it...
SOL I REMEMBER WHEN YOU POSTED THE VIDEO ABOUT YOUR FIRST POT JOURNEY.....NOW YOU HAVE BONGS EVERYWHERE IN YOUR ROOM WITH A REEFER MADNESS POSTER...HAHAHA GREAT SHIT
First of all you should seriously consider putting your bongs up before recording. Secondly I want to know why we would develop lighter skin when it is a well-known fact that light skinned people are more likely to get skin cancer. If mutation is about better survival then this isn't a very good example.
The fact that humans are animals means that to some degree our behavior can be document and predicted. So what could the reason for racism and other divisive behaviors be. I think it has to do with our innate desire to compete with the world around us. In the modern world though our need to dominate seems to take on the form of mentally calming our great genetic superiority over nature and even other people.
u are intelligent man i take of my hat for u. people are so ignorant. how does this idea of race benifit us as humans instead of concentrating on curing aids or developing space travel people waste thier time on this filth." humans are wasted potentials inthat we dwell on redundancies that dont better our lives. How can we even call our selves developing races if our thinking is primitive. and what really costitutes the use of the word races coz were all the same " macman 101
The existence of a 15 point disparity between the mean score of African Americans and Caucasians is no longer regarded as contentious, only the extent to which this deficit is caused by genetic factors. The Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study, while not conclusive, does seem to suggest that the genetic hypothesis may be correct.
For further information, please review "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns" by the American Psychological Association and the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study.
Let's avoid committing Lewontin's fallacy. Modern conceptions of race correspond closely to clines, or rigorous genetic definitions of populations. The mechanism responsible for producing the various sub-populations of humans will cause speciation if given enough time, and I'm referring specifically to reproductive isolation.
When a population diverges geographically and gene-flow is reduced or terminated between those two populations, genetic differences will accumulate as a consequence of genetic drift and unique selection pressures. These genetic differences translate into phenotypic differences. General morphology, sex hormone concentrations, mean IQ, rate of physical maturation and a number of other traits that distinguish the races (there is overlap of course) arose from this process.
"How come are parrots able to talk more human than apes or monkeys?"
That's a good question. But why are you that asking some random people on the Internet? Why not ask an expert on parrots? Why not ask an ornithologist? Why not ask a biologist? Is it because yo are afraid that asking them will provide you an answer that would make Jeebus sad in the pants if you accept it, you poor brainwashed sap?
"Man is not an animal, but has DOMINION over them."
According to whom? To your favorite book of bronze age-myths? Try better, you poor religious drone.
"No question that someone being spoon-fed evolutionism"
Oh, a religionist drone who takes Kent Hovind seriously talks about being "spoon-fed". This is a bit like Kim Jong il calling Thomas Jefferson "tyrannical". It's just a tragedy that your mind has been so badly poisoned by the god-drug to see the irony.
What you are talking about is exactly what fueled Hitler's racist ideas.
The difference from him is that you've decided to be a "tough cookie". Though that's not really making sense.
Darwin said "The Origin of species OR the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life."
If there is no loving God who created us all equal, then why should eat be wrong to eliminate your black neighbor, if you're believing in a myth that says you're higher than him? For survival of the fittest?
"What you are talking about is exactly what fueled Hitler's racist ideas."
Hitler was a creationist. But even if it were true, it would not prove evolution wrong. Your attempt to link the theory of evolution is nothing more than a despeate religionist ploy to salvage your precious dogma. But of course, unable to provide tangible evidence against evolution, your will resort to the typical creationist behavior of mendacity, lies and projection, like the good religionist drone that you are.
"If there is no loving God who created us all equal, then why should eat be wrong to eliminate your black neighbor,"
Err, I don't know... Maybe because I don't want my black neighbor to eliminate me? Are you suggesting that without your belief in your magical sky-daddy you would do that? if so, then please stay a thousand miles away from me and everyone I care about, you twisted piece of religious mortal garbage.
I think Atticana just instinctively rejects the idea that skin-color and some facial attributes can change so visibly within only 50000 years (I read UV-radiation levels and certain vitamin reception is crucial) - evolution can be quite "counter-intuitive".
It's really astonishing how quick species change by natural selection. Wolves in contact with ice-age humans became dog-like within a few hundred years even before deliberate breeding created all the (curiously) diverse dog races.
@eltamin1966...I might upload another video dealing with your point re: canine evolution. Can I also point out that what you are saying contradicts what SolRosenberg84 said about racial divergence, namely that it was a slow process. You two guys aren't reading from the same script!
" ...what you are saying contradicts what SolRosenberg84 said ..."
You see, even the agnostics/atheists are not one mass of uniform ugly creatures like the soldiers of Mordor in "Lord
of the Rings" ;-)
I'm joking, I know that religious people are not that uniform either - see my comment on Sol's video "Potential Flaw in the freethinking community". My religious grandfather would have praised you as a "pious man".
But frankly I don't see that I'm so far apart from Sol, he refers to the knowledge renowned scientists have gained from DNA. And since you questioned that humans could turn from "black" to "white" in only some 10000 years, I quoted the wolves to illustrate how quick evolutionary changes may occur.
You speak of "no proof" and "supposition of a common ancestor", stating missing fossil records (I can't judge that, being no expert), but you're totally leaving out the DNA-based evidence.
@eltamin1966...I'm preparing a second instalment of my response to this video, which will address the DNA issue. Concerning your points re: canine evolution my understanding is that dogs were only domesticated c. 15,000 years ago. Before that, in their wild state, there was hardly any divergence.
"my understanding is that dogs were only domesticated c. 15,000 years ago. Before that, in their wild state, there was hardly any divergence."
I'm sorry to say your understanding is wrong. There's at least a dozen distinct species under the genus "canis" (Seven of which are commonly called "wolves": Lupus, Rufus, Lycaon, Simensis, Brachyurus, Indica, Himalayaensis) and thousands of breeds of wild animals among those... not including the extinct ones. "Dogs" are in the "Lupus" category, BTW.
@eltamin1966...and I do not accept that any meaningful comparison can be made between the intensive, highly selective breeding of dogs by humans and the random relationships between wandering groups of primitive human nomads. I'm pleased though that you respond to my points with rational arguments rather than the ad hominems that so many people throw my way. I hope you'll watch my next response to SolRosenberg84, hopefully to be uploaded next week sometime.
Unless you f*** anything that walks, selective breeding is still in play - just not proactive, intentional selection. Can we call it... "natural" selection?
If you think about it; who do most people find the most attractive? Health, beauty, social success (celebrities), etc. This is not a coincidence... selection is selection and ultimately the only difference between humans and dogs is intentional breeding and time.
... the ad hominems that so many people throw my way
Of course there is often emotion and "partisan thinking" in internet threads like this - "we" versus "them" - and Sol's forum has definitely an atheist/agnostic majority. But compared to religious fanatics atheists rarely go beyond verbal attacks and ridicule.
Sol, You chose to imitate the person you were responding to by doing an offensively ignorant Amercian southerner riff. My reaction (check out one of my vids and you'll understand why) was to wince and think "goddamnit, please don't tell me the guy has a southern accent." In fact, the numbnuts has an English accent. So, could you please try not to stereotype all southerners as inbred, sheet-wearing, confederate flag waving, ass-scratching, nose-picking, fece-chucking gibbons? Thanks.
Wasn't trying to be offensive. I can't pull off a convincing cockney accent, which would have been the best one for this, so I used what popped into my head at the time. Sorry.
Do you think maybe the Amish and other Isolationist groups might eventually speciate due to the self-imposed "islands" they've secluded themselves upon?
As far as I know, if they're completely isolated, it's possible, but I don't think humans need to speciate very much as we tend to evolve technologically to suit our environments before natural selection has a chance to do it's thing.
I don't know if you were replying to somebody here, but you got my brain cranking, so whatevs
SolRosenberg84 was responding, sort of, to my video 'Human evolution and religious discourse'. I hope that you'll watch it. Also, I hope that you'll watch my video response to this video by SolRosenberg84. Who knows, I might get your brain cranking? Or else, steaming with rage! I ask only that you keep an open mind.
Because we didn't evolve from modern fish, mammals, apes, or monkeys. We share common ancestors with all these different animals. Our ancestor responded to different environments than their ancestor did, and became different species because of it.
Also, your question seems to rest on this idea that evolution is a ladder - and everything leads to intelligence. It isn't. There is no ladder. We are equally evolved as everything else, they just evolved to different conditions than we did.
1) I knew much of what you said and agreed with all of it of course, but you might want to add info in your sidebar like articles or references so that those who oppose you have a reference other than your word.
2) The term you were trying to find around the middle is "endogenous retrovirus"
@Sol No problem, man. Just want to avoid ignorant people claiming you have no proof for the things that you talk about. We all know creationists have extreme difficulty in using Google when it comes to scientific topics.
what the hell you little coward you moved my video response just because you disagreed with it. there is mountains of evidence that the race have different mentalities and dismiss it on a whim.
Yes they do. Over 1,000 scientists within the fields of psychology, sociology, cognitive science, education, and genetics were surveyed and it was found that 53% of them thought that the black-white IQ gap was racially genetic in origin. Only 17% thought that it was entirely environmental. (The IQ Controversy, by Rothman and Snyderman)
You cannot enslave an entire race of people. Keep them isolated from mainstream society for over 400 years, practice institutionalized racism to break down their psychology, refuse to educate them equally, completely DENY them an education for the first 350 yrs in the U.S (under penalty of death). AND then give them an IQ test based upon the culture they were EXCLUDED from for over 400 yrs.
That may produce some differences in IQ among blacks and whites...hmmmm...
@TheMagickScene You've demonstrated yourself to be ignorant of psychometrics. Modern IQ tests are engineered with the explicit intent of measuring raw cognitive functions that are common to our species as whole, not crystallized intelligence. Cultural contamination has long since been eliminated and studies concerning racial differences in IQ normally employ Raven's Progressive Matrices or some variant.
It's also important to note that IQ tests derive validity from their ability to produce accurate predictions that persist cross-culturally. Generally, an African American with an IQ of 105 points is just as likely as an average Asian American to succeed educationally and professionally.
I would have been far more appreciative of the information given, if it had not been accompanied by insults. I am black. I consider myself a very intelligent person. IQ 142 (tested by MENSA a LONG TIME AGO). I am aware that MENSA does not give scores anymore. I usually do not keep up with developments in IQ testing because it has not been an interest of mine. In the future, I would appreciate any correction in my perceptions and judgments to be delivered without insults.
@TheMagickScene I'm accustomed to engaging people in an aggressive manner on YouTube, as most tend to be thick-skulled. Pardon me if I offended you, and I wasn't implying that you have an IQ of 105 (if that's what you thought).
And ignore the comment I tried to send to you regarding Sociology. YouTube is not at its best right now...and you probably only received the second part of the comment. Which wouldn't make any sense without the first part. I am sure you are aware of the information already anyway.
well sol, I do have one problem with your points.
Did we not also directly descend from a primate that extremely primitive thought in comparison to any sort of homo sapiens, and only walked on two legs for short periods of time? Yet you cannot deny that we are vastly different from them.
Our closest hominid relatives who are now extinct did not walk bipedally for short periods. They walked bipedally for the same durations that modern humans walk. Of course if you go farther back in our evolutionary tree, you will find as arms get longer and legs shorter, bipedalism occurs less often. Did we directly evolve from apes that walked on two legs for short durations? No, we did not. Hominids developed bipedalism before our brains grew to the sizes they are.
Our closest hominid relatives were the neanderthals. We did not descend from them, they took a slightly different evolutionary path. Essentially, another branch on the tree.
Yes we DID evolve from a species of ape from africa that did not use two legs exclusively. It was called Ardipithecus.
Please, please, please do some research and attain some knowledge on the topic at hand before you attempt to correct someone. Not to mention, someone who wasn't even addressing you.
Really a very good video, clear and comprehensible.
On listening to Mike another video came again into my mind (I know that I repeat myself)):
watch?v=kCiStLKzivM
The way evolution is "refuted" there is very funny and has great charme. And reading the comments show that many - both creationists ("He right, just exaggerating") and atheists ("Such a dumb idiot") - are taken in by that satire.
Btw a religious holiday allows me this comment at 10:30 (Central Europe) ;-)
I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Yes, we all came from Africa, but that does not mean we come from black people. Races continued to evolve seperately due to geographical seperation. ALL humans share a common ancestor. Homo sapiens share a common ancestor with chimps, but that does not mean that we came from chimps.
I do not know who said we come from chimps. Sol said it was our closest living relative (which is true). He never claimed we came from chimps. Evolutionary theory has always claimed we share a common ancestor with the great apes, not that we are directly descended from any of the living ones we see today.
No, I'm comparing what he said with what a lot of uneducated people seem to think about chimps. White people did NOT come from black people, but we share a common ancestor, and due to geographical seperation, we continued to evolve to suit our environment.
Probably dark... Who knows. The point is, they would not have looked like your typical african, if you look at a human evolution chart, you will see that homosapiens began to leave africa around 0.1 million years ago. If in that time, homosapien managed to divide into several sub species that look different from one another, the ones that stayed in africa would have also changed in appearence. My point is that we did not come from black people, we share a common ancestor.
It's hard to keep up the delusion of "superiority" when science bitch slaps you in the face with facts isn't it. Fight on Jethro...your kind are being proved wrong everyday.
Says who scientist? Scientist who predicted Armageddon from global warming? If you can give me any proof that white people evolved from monkeys I'll believe you. Personally I think whites are descendants of dolphins not monkeys. We command the sea are great swimmers brilliant hunters like killer whales and dolphins.
The whole concept of race has been recently rejected since we are all one race (homo sapiens sapiens), in the way that all domestic dogs are the same species yet look different.
We are not one race, but one specie with sub-species. Since human races have more outgroup variation and less ingroup variation than both cat and dog breeds, the sub-specie classification of humans is more legitimate than dog breeds and cat breeds.
I am not going to explain why race is no longer considered a scientific classification among human populations and culture groups. Look it up for yourself.
It still is consider a scientific classification within the scientific community, but the media is giving us a false view.
A survey of American anthropologists found that 69 percent of them accepted the concept of biological race (Leiberman and Reynolds, 1996).
They fear it may lead to a possible holocaust.
Look it up at AAA. Im not kidding. It doesn't have to do with science as humans in regards to racial classification is more legitimate than with dogs or cats.
The percentage of cultural and physical anthropologists who do not think "race" is a valid biological category has been consistently dropping. Also, the 69% of the American and Canadian physical anthropologists in that study you are quoting were disagreeing with the statement "There are biological races in the species Homo sapiens."
I also rechecked the 69% figure and found that my statement remains correct and that it indeed was you who were misrepresenting the figures and not I, as you later claimed. If you've found a contradicting article stating otherwise, I would like a link to it so that I can refrain from my statements.
The full article you referenced is available online - along with more recent ones done by the exact same researcher, not to mention several others which use his findings.
That is wilful misrepresentation, and judging by your profile you don't care about the evidence. Too similar to a creationist. If I show the creationist the flaw in his argument, and he simply repeats it, I ban him. Since you have demonstrated the same wilful ignorance, enjoy your ban.
>I would like to have that statement backed up by a link
You posted the name of the researchers and the date of the study. I went on google and actually scanned over the article to discover it was wrong. Google it you lazy bastard.
Different breeds of dogs are all part of one species. The differences between diffferent human races are far less pronounced than the differences between different breeds of dogs.
SolRosenberg84, there's no point in name-calling. I did look it up and found that my statement was accurate and that your statement about it not being accurate wasn't.
Regarding your comment about dogs. But that's where you are wrong. The same haziness applied to human races are also applied to several other species, even more so than with human races. Dogs are one of them. They are far more similar to eachother than human races. They have less outgrpup variation and more ingroup variation.
So you think that blacks, whites, asians, arabs, are all sub-species of homosapien. You are truly an idiot. Let go of your delusions and try to find value in your life beyond the mindlessness of thinking you are superior because you have less melanin in your skin.
Wow Sol, this really is a good video with a lot of interesting examples of evolution that I haven't heard before... I wish there was more accessible info out there like this for people to be exposed to..
Im reading Richard Dawkins latest book and most of it so far is boring and the same old stuff... I think he should do something more like this video where he could give example after example of the many genetic links of our evolution.
I found the book to be a little bit dry also, maybe you should hunt down the audiobook. He swaps reading duties with his wife and also the turns of phrase added emphasis and occasional quirky inflection bring to all to life.
haha actually thats what I've been doing - listening to the audio book. It is dry at times but I havent listened to the whole thing. I'll finish it this weekend.
You are my favorite youtuber hands down. Your videos are always insightful and make me proud to be on the same continent as someone with your great talent at telling stories. If you could do a video on abiogenisis that would be awesome unless you've already done one, in which case could someone give me a link?
your intelligence is sexy
lilmissannette 1 week ago
Today, let's light a candle for the oxygene making ooze thingys! praise be! Basically we breath/live off ooze excrement!
Paxmax 4 months ago
Good Response Man! I left two comments on his video! SO HAPPY you mentioned Human's genetic ancestry that goes back to Africa. I wanted to joke about how he was forgetting that Black Grandma we all share. as an African american to me its very telling when some one talks about "Race" in the overly simplistic context of colors like Black Brown White Red Yellow. Like we are all fucking crayons! then he uses it as an argument against human evolution. Face to Palm!
mochaboy20 7 months ago
And there is your Bong, right behind you!
TheUnbeen 11 months ago
I have to say that I agree with you. But do you take genealogy? and if you are what are the types of jobs would you do if you have a good degree?
TheMutification 1 year ago
We WERE all once bacteria now we're not = human superiority over bacteira makes sense = we WERE all once black now we're not...
unassumption 1 year ago
Thank you, well done.
cutes22 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
jews think they are the chosen people. you will pay for abandoning the torah.
OMAN88HH 1 year ago
@OMAN88HH
I'm not Jewish, lol.
Sol Rosenberg is a prank call voice from the nineties - its the same voice as "Mort Goldman" from Family Guy. I always loved it.
SolRosenberg84 1 year ago
what about the 4% neanderthal gene. africans dont have it? this alone fucks up your theories. And at worst we evolved from apes yes, whites evolved from blacks yes. so we are different to blacks yes. thousands of years of evolution cannot simply be disregarded. your view is just jew propagande to promote race mixing. the same as nazi propaganda was to keep races pure. whos in power gets to control the science for its political views. many scientists disagree with u includin most of china
OMAN88HH 1 year ago
@OMAN88HH all people are evolving at the same rate, so all people are equally evolved. just because white americans are descended from europeans doesn't mean that europeans suddenly stopped evolving. evolution is NOT a ladder. all species alive today are equally evolved.
robokill387 1 year ago
why is there a bong in the background? and also looks like you have a vaporizer?
TroyxPry 1 year ago
they arnt all "white" i thought you knew what you were talking about till you said that. Races exist, its a fact and someone have to be retarded to ignore it. but we should not make a judgements about it...
Trudgelmer1 1 year ago
SOL I REMEMBER WHEN YOU POSTED THE VIDEO ABOUT YOUR FIRST POT JOURNEY.....NOW YOU HAVE BONGS EVERYWHERE IN YOUR ROOM WITH A REEFER MADNESS POSTER...HAHAHA GREAT SHIT
jamesmurf007 1 year ago
First of all you should seriously consider putting your bongs up before recording. Secondly I want to know why we would develop lighter skin when it is a well-known fact that light skinned people are more likely to get skin cancer. If mutation is about better survival then this isn't a very good example.
crazykaikat 1 year ago
The fact that humans are animals means that to some degree our behavior can be document and predicted. So what could the reason for racism and other divisive behaviors be. I think it has to do with our innate desire to compete with the world around us. In the modern world though our need to dominate seems to take on the form of mentally calming our great genetic superiority over nature and even other people.
Greengrendel1 1 year ago
u are intelligent man i take of my hat for u. people are so ignorant. how does this idea of race benifit us as humans instead of concentrating on curing aids or developing space travel people waste thier time on this filth." humans are wasted potentials inthat we dwell on redundancies that dont better our lives. How can we even call our selves developing races if our thinking is primitive. and what really costitutes the use of the word races coz were all the same " macman 101
thabisonkala 1 year ago
The existence of a 15 point disparity between the mean score of African Americans and Caucasians is no longer regarded as contentious, only the extent to which this deficit is caused by genetic factors. The Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study, while not conclusive, does seem to suggest that the genetic hypothesis may be correct.
For further information, please review "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns" by the American Psychological Association and the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study.
gunman806 1 year ago
Let's avoid committing Lewontin's fallacy. Modern conceptions of race correspond closely to clines, or rigorous genetic definitions of populations. The mechanism responsible for producing the various sub-populations of humans will cause speciation if given enough time, and I'm referring specifically to reproductive isolation.
gunman806 1 year ago
When a population diverges geographically and gene-flow is reduced or terminated between those two populations, genetic differences will accumulate as a consequence of genetic drift and unique selection pressures. These genetic differences translate into phenotypic differences. General morphology, sex hormone concentrations, mean IQ, rate of physical maturation and a number of other traits that distinguish the races (there is overlap of course) arose from this process.
gunman806 1 year ago
TheMagickScene lol damn.
HybridD91 1 year ago
You make me proud to be a geek !
TheMagickScene 1 year ago
You are very smart AND your jacket is gorgeous ! Keep spreading enlightenment, logic, reason, science, and good sense : )
TheMagickScene 1 year ago
This makes me want to do my AP Bio homework.
psychonautpsychosis 2 years ago
How come are parrots able to talk more human than apes or monkeys?
Going from grunting and groaning animals, to well-speaking people takes a GIANT LEAP of FAITH!
fortruth8989 2 years ago
"How come are parrots able to talk more human than apes or monkeys?"
That's a good question. But why are you that asking some random people on the Internet? Why not ask an expert on parrots? Why not ask an ornithologist? Why not ask a biologist? Is it because yo are afraid that asking them will provide you an answer that would make Jeebus sad in the pants if you accept it, you poor brainwashed sap?
Akatam0t0ma 2 years ago
Man is not an animal, but has DOMINION over them.
No question that someone being spoon-fed evolutionism their whole life would come upo with a gross immoral song like this:
"You and I are nothing but mammals
So let's do it as they do it on the Discovery Channel."
Gross!
Simple: Evolutionism = no-God philosophy.
It tells you something - the average person, literally, comes up with the conclusions about the REST of the big picture if evolution is true.
Don't you get it???
fortruth8989 2 years ago
"Man is not an animal, but has DOMINION over them."
According to whom? To your favorite book of bronze age-myths? Try better, you poor religious drone.
"No question that someone being spoon-fed evolutionism"
Oh, a religionist drone who takes Kent Hovind seriously talks about being "spoon-fed". This is a bit like Kim Jong il calling Thomas Jefferson "tyrannical". It's just a tragedy that your mind has been so badly poisoned by the god-drug to see the irony.
Akatam0t0ma 2 years ago
humans are animals, you uneducated retard LOL
evolution is an indisputable fact. it isn't our fault you are too stupid to understand it and too big of a pussy to accept it.
there is no god, you worthless, uneducated little pussy :)
bettyloutumor 2 years ago
fortruth8989's argument in a nutshell:
"This song results from evolutionary theory because I say so! And because I happen to not like it, evolution must be wrong!"
All in all, better to ignore what's most likely Eye2EyeIIIV's sock account, if fortruth8989 can do nothing but parrot his same sad lines.
megagrey 2 years ago
@fortruth8989
Man is classified as Great Apes.
gregrutz 2 years ago
What you are talking about is exactly what fueled Hitler's racist ideas.
The difference from him is that you've decided to be a "tough cookie". Though that's not really making sense.
Darwin said "The Origin of species OR the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life."
If there is no loving God who created us all equal, then why should eat be wrong to eliminate your black neighbor, if you're believing in a myth that says you're higher than him? For survival of the fittest?
fortruth8989 2 years ago
"What you are talking about is exactly what fueled Hitler's racist ideas."
Hitler was a creationist. But even if it were true, it would not prove evolution wrong. Your attempt to link the theory of evolution is nothing more than a despeate religionist ploy to salvage your precious dogma. But of course, unable to provide tangible evidence against evolution, your will resort to the typical creationist behavior of mendacity, lies and projection, like the good religionist drone that you are.
Akatam0t0ma 2 years ago
"If there is no loving God who created us all equal, then why should eat be wrong to eliminate your black neighbor,"
Err, I don't know... Maybe because I don't want my black neighbor to eliminate me? Are you suggesting that without your belief in your magical sky-daddy you would do that? if so, then please stay a thousand miles away from me and everyone I care about, you twisted piece of religious mortal garbage.
Akatam0t0ma 2 years ago
You are smart and funny... but incorrect.
fortruth8989 2 years ago
omg your so smart i love listening to you :D
adamtabest 2 years ago
I just liked the "planet of the ooooooooooooooooooooooooze" part. Well I liked the rest of it too, but that part stood out :)
LaerenMisha 2 years ago
Oh wait, I forgot about the part about testicles and the "balls we all know and love". That ranks up there too. :)
LaerenMisha 2 years ago
I think Atticana just instinctively rejects the idea that skin-color and some facial attributes can change so visibly within only 50000 years (I read UV-radiation levels and certain vitamin reception is crucial) - evolution can be quite "counter-intuitive".
It's really astonishing how quick species change by natural selection. Wolves in contact with ice-age humans became dog-like within a few hundred years even before deliberate breeding created all the (curiously) diverse dog races.
eltamin1966 2 years ago
@eltamin1966...I might upload another video dealing with your point re: canine evolution. Can I also point out that what you are saying contradicts what SolRosenberg84 said about racial divergence, namely that it was a slow process. You two guys aren't reading from the same script!
atticana 2 years ago
" ...what you are saying contradicts what SolRosenberg84 said ..."
You see, even the agnostics/atheists are not one mass of uniform ugly creatures like the soldiers of Mordor in "Lord
of the Rings" ;-)
I'm joking, I know that religious people are not that uniform either - see my comment on Sol's video "Potential Flaw in the freethinking community". My religious grandfather would have praised you as a "pious man".
eltamin1966 2 years ago
But frankly I don't see that I'm so far apart from Sol, he refers to the knowledge renowned scientists have gained from DNA. And since you questioned that humans could turn from "black" to "white" in only some 10000 years, I quoted the wolves to illustrate how quick evolutionary changes may occur.
You speak of "no proof" and "supposition of a common ancestor", stating missing fossil records (I can't judge that, being no expert), but you're totally leaving out the DNA-based evidence.
eltamin1966 2 years ago
@eltamin1966...I'm preparing a second instalment of my response to this video, which will address the DNA issue. Concerning your points re: canine evolution my understanding is that dogs were only domesticated c. 15,000 years ago. Before that, in their wild state, there was hardly any divergence.
atticana 2 years ago
"my understanding is that dogs were only domesticated c. 15,000 years ago. Before that, in their wild state, there was hardly any divergence."
I'm sorry to say your understanding is wrong. There's at least a dozen distinct species under the genus "canis" (Seven of which are commonly called "wolves": Lupus, Rufus, Lycaon, Simensis, Brachyurus, Indica, Himalayaensis) and thousands of breeds of wild animals among those... not including the extinct ones. "Dogs" are in the "Lupus" category, BTW.
Smidge204 2 years ago
@eltamin1966...and I do not accept that any meaningful comparison can be made between the intensive, highly selective breeding of dogs by humans and the random relationships between wandering groups of primitive human nomads. I'm pleased though that you respond to my points with rational arguments rather than the ad hominems that so many people throw my way. I hope you'll watch my next response to SolRosenberg84, hopefully to be uploaded next week sometime.
atticana 2 years ago
@atticana
Unless you f*** anything that walks, selective breeding is still in play - just not proactive, intentional selection. Can we call it... "natural" selection?
If you think about it; who do most people find the most attractive? Health, beauty, social success (celebrities), etc. This is not a coincidence... selection is selection and ultimately the only difference between humans and dogs is intentional breeding and time.
Smidge204 2 years ago
... the ad hominems that so many people throw my way
Of course there is often emotion and "partisan thinking" in internet threads like this - "we" versus "them" - and Sol's forum has definitely an atheist/agnostic majority. But compared to religious fanatics atheists rarely go beyond verbal attacks and ridicule.
eltamin1966 2 years ago
Sol, You chose to imitate the person you were responding to by doing an offensively ignorant Amercian southerner riff. My reaction (check out one of my vids and you'll understand why) was to wince and think "goddamnit, please don't tell me the guy has a southern accent." In fact, the numbnuts has an English accent. So, could you please try not to stereotype all southerners as inbred, sheet-wearing, confederate flag waving, ass-scratching, nose-picking, fece-chucking gibbons? Thanks.
RHYMEMAIDEN1 2 years ago
Wasn't trying to be offensive. I can't pull off a convincing cockney accent, which would have been the best one for this, so I used what popped into my head at the time. Sorry.
SolRosenberg84 2 years ago
Ya we all know we are retarded monkey, fish frogs get on with it ;)
SleepsAvatar 2 years ago
Hey quick question, sorry if this was asked already, but what province do you live in.
SleepsAvatar 2 years ago
two words:
blind faith.
smartwarlord 2 years ago
Do you think maybe the Amish and other Isolationist groups might eventually speciate due to the self-imposed "islands" they've secluded themselves upon?
sciencemile 2 years ago
Thats an awesome thing to ponder about isn't it?
As far as I know, if they're completely isolated, it's possible, but I don't think humans need to speciate very much as we tend to evolve technologically to suit our environments before natural selection has a chance to do it's thing.
I don't know if you were replying to somebody here, but you got my brain cranking, so whatevs
Norlick 2 years ago
SolRosenberg84 was responding, sort of, to my video 'Human evolution and religious discourse'. I hope that you'll watch it. Also, I hope that you'll watch my video response to this video by SolRosenberg84. Who knows, I might get your brain cranking? Or else, steaming with rage! I ask only that you keep an open mind.
atticana 2 years ago
If we evolved from fish, mamals, apes and monkeys, then why do they still exist along with humans?
cain825 2 years ago
Because we didn't evolve from modern fish, mammals, apes, or monkeys. We share common ancestors with all these different animals. Our ancestor responded to different environments than their ancestor did, and became different species because of it.
Also, your question seems to rest on this idea that evolution is a ladder - and everything leads to intelligence. It isn't. There is no ladder. We are equally evolved as everything else, they just evolved to different conditions than we did.
SolRosenberg84 2 years ago
Ok, i understand. Thanks!
cain825 2 years ago
@cain825 That question is the equivalent of asking "If US Americans came from British lineage, then why are there still British people.
theradioschizo 2 years ago
Not quite! Americans and British people are still both humans, your argument seems to be flawed.
cain825 2 years ago
/facepalm
It's an ANALOGY. Both my example and the real thing we were talking about is about diverging lineages. It's not flawed.
theradioschizo 2 years ago
Two things, Sol.
1) I knew much of what you said and agreed with all of it of course, but you might want to add info in your sidebar like articles or references so that those who oppose you have a reference other than your word.
2) The term you were trying to find around the middle is "endogenous retrovirus"
cheers
theradioschizo 2 years ago
Good idea. I've got to get in the habit of checking my facts and posting references.
SolRosenberg84 2 years ago
@Sol No problem, man. Just want to avoid ignorant people claiming you have no proof for the things that you talk about. We all know creationists have extreme difficulty in using Google when it comes to scientific topics.
theradioschizo 2 years ago
what the hell you little coward you moved my video response just because you disagreed with it. there is mountains of evidence that the race have different mentalities and dismiss it on a whim.
shadowmancer1234 2 years ago
No there isn't. There is no evidence - not genetically, nor atomically. The scientific community does not agree with you.
You are a troll. Banned.
/watch?v=VtSLh3Yq0Lw
SolRosenberg84 2 years ago
Yes they do. Over 1,000 scientists within the fields of psychology, sociology, cognitive science, education, and genetics were surveyed and it was found that 53% of them thought that the black-white IQ gap was racially genetic in origin. Only 17% thought that it was entirely environmental. (The IQ Controversy, by Rothman and Snyderman)
ComradeMaelstrom 2 years ago
Most scientists put the figure at 60-70% of heritable and 40-30% environmental.
ComradeMaelstrom 2 years ago
You cannot enslave an entire race of people. Keep them isolated from mainstream society for over 400 years, practice institutionalized racism to break down their psychology, refuse to educate them equally, completely DENY them an education for the first 350 yrs in the U.S (under penalty of death). AND then give them an IQ test based upon the culture they were EXCLUDED from for over 400 yrs.
That may produce some differences in IQ among blacks and whites...hmmmm...
TheMagickScene 1 year ago
@TheMagickScene You've demonstrated yourself to be ignorant of psychometrics. Modern IQ tests are engineered with the explicit intent of measuring raw cognitive functions that are common to our species as whole, not crystallized intelligence. Cultural contamination has long since been eliminated and studies concerning racial differences in IQ normally employ Raven's Progressive Matrices or some variant.
gunman806 1 year ago
It's also important to note that IQ tests derive validity from their ability to produce accurate predictions that persist cross-culturally. Generally, an African American with an IQ of 105 points is just as likely as an average Asian American to succeed educationally and professionally.
gunman806 1 year ago
Comment removed
gunman806 1 year ago
@gunman806
I would have been far more appreciative of the information given, if it had not been accompanied by insults. I am black. I consider myself a very intelligent person. IQ 142 (tested by MENSA a LONG TIME AGO). I am aware that MENSA does not give scores anymore. I usually do not keep up with developments in IQ testing because it has not been an interest of mine. In the future, I would appreciate any correction in my perceptions and judgments to be delivered without insults.
TheMagickScene 1 year ago
@TheMagickScene I'm accustomed to engaging people in an aggressive manner on YouTube, as most tend to be thick-skulled. Pardon me if I offended you, and I wasn't implying that you have an IQ of 105 (if that's what you thought).
gunman806 1 year ago
@gunman806
No problem.
TheMagickScene 1 year ago
@gunman806
And ignore the comment I tried to send to you regarding Sociology. YouTube is not at its best right now...and you probably only received the second part of the comment. Which wouldn't make any sense without the first part. I am sure you are aware of the information already anyway.
TheMagickScene 1 year ago
Comment removed
TheMagickScene 1 year ago
Comment removed
TheMagickScene 1 year ago
"the balls that we all know and love" hahaha that made me laugh
wardie230 2 years ago
ANNUNAKI ANNUNAKI ANNUNAKI
BipolarBeatBoxer 2 years ago
I'd say there is only one race. Human. There are variations in our race.
Brianswers 2 years ago
Race is a sub-specie classification not a specie classification. Humans (homo sapiens) are not a sub-specie but a specie. This is biology 101.
ComradeMaelstrom 2 years ago
Yes, we are one species AND one race. This is also biology 101.
Brianswers 2 years ago
That was a nice video, thanks!
IceHammer58 2 years ago
well sol, I do have one problem with your points.
Did we not also directly descend from a primate that extremely primitive thought in comparison to any sort of homo sapiens, and only walked on two legs for short periods of time? Yet you cannot deny that we are vastly different from them.
mrbobsevil 2 years ago
@mrbobsevil
Our closest hominid relatives who are now extinct did not walk bipedally for short periods. They walked bipedally for the same durations that modern humans walk. Of course if you go farther back in our evolutionary tree, you will find as arms get longer and legs shorter, bipedalism occurs less often. Did we directly evolve from apes that walked on two legs for short durations? No, we did not. Hominids developed bipedalism before our brains grew to the sizes they are.
bcFiRe12 2 years ago
Our closest hominid relatives were the neanderthals. We did not descend from them, they took a slightly different evolutionary path. Essentially, another branch on the tree.
Yes we DID evolve from a species of ape from africa that did not use two legs exclusively. It was called Ardipithecus.
Please, please, please do some research and attain some knowledge on the topic at hand before you attempt to correct someone. Not to mention, someone who wasn't even addressing you.
mrbobsevil 2 years ago
Stromatolites = evidence that all gods are fiction.
DonQuixotedeKaw 2 years ago
You're fast becoming my favorite youtuber.
melowar78 2 years ago
cool vid
dav956able 2 years ago
Hey Sol. Kinda cold up there? Is your heat not working? That's your college dorm right? What are you studying?
I don't think we'll turn all black, but thanks to interracial sex, we'll all be a nice mocha late color soon enough. :)
DblOSmith 2 years ago
Comment removed
ComradeMaelstrom 2 years ago
Really a very good video, clear and comprehensible.
On listening to Mike another video came again into my mind (I know that I repeat myself)):
watch?v=kCiStLKzivM
The way evolution is "refuted" there is very funny and has great charme. And reading the comments show that many - both creationists ("He right, just exaggerating") and atheists ("Such a dumb idiot") - are taken in by that satire.
Btw a religious holiday allows me this comment at 10:30 (Central Europe) ;-)
eltamin1966 2 years ago
Well, to get picky about stuff, the oxygen was already present in the planet, but was released into the atmosphere by biological processes.
Fjarhultian 2 years ago
That is true. Thanks for the correction.
SolRosenberg84 2 years ago
I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Yes, we all came from Africa, but that does not mean we come from black people. Races continued to evolve seperately due to geographical seperation. ALL humans share a common ancestor. Homo sapiens share a common ancestor with chimps, but that does not mean that we came from chimps.
woodpod 2 years ago
@woodpod
I do not know who said we come from chimps. Sol said it was our closest living relative (which is true). He never claimed we came from chimps. Evolutionary theory has always claimed we share a common ancestor with the great apes, not that we are directly descended from any of the living ones we see today.
bcFiRe12 2 years ago
No, I'm comparing what he said with what a lot of uneducated people seem to think about chimps. White people did NOT come from black people, but we share a common ancestor, and due to geographical seperation, we continued to evolve to suit our environment.
woodpod 2 years ago
What was the colour of the common ancestor?
SolRosenberg84 2 years ago
Probably dark... Who knows. The point is, they would not have looked like your typical african, if you look at a human evolution chart, you will see that homosapiens began to leave africa around 0.1 million years ago. If in that time, homosapien managed to divide into several sub species that look different from one another, the ones that stayed in africa would have also changed in appearence. My point is that we did not come from black people, we share a common ancestor.
woodpod 2 years ago
@woodpod I've been to several parts of Africa. Could you describe a "typical African" for me?
RHYMEMAIDEN1 2 years ago
It's hard to keep up the delusion of "superiority" when science bitch slaps you in the face with facts isn't it. Fight on Jethro...your kind are being proved wrong everyday.
TheMagickScene 1 year ago
Says who scientist? Scientist who predicted Armageddon from global warming? If you can give me any proof that white people evolved from monkeys I'll believe you. Personally I think whites are descendants of dolphins not monkeys. We command the sea are great swimmers brilliant hunters like killer whales and dolphins.
2012HolyRomanEmpire 2 years ago
/watch?v=LrStENrKZa8&feature=related
I now respond to non-sequitors with non-sequitors.
SolRosenberg84 2 years ago
find one scientist who predicted armageddon from global warming. just one.
robokill387 2 years ago
Global warming is fake but there will be world wide wars for the dwindling water supplies that the third world sucks up with their body.
2012HolyRomanEmpire 2 years ago
And where the fuck is all the water gonna go? Is it gonna float off in space?
People like you are so retarded.
mrbobsevil 2 years ago
The whole concept of race has been recently rejected since we are all one race (homo sapiens sapiens), in the way that all domestic dogs are the same species yet look different.
bcFiRe12 2 years ago
Race is a sub-specie classification.
Of what specie are we a sub-specie of?
We are the specie of homo-sapiens.
We are not one race, but one specie with sub-species. Since human races have more outgroup variation and less ingroup variation than both cat and dog breeds, the sub-specie classification of humans is more legitimate than dog breeds and cat breeds.
ComradeMaelstrom 2 years ago
@ComradeMaelstrom
I am not going to explain why race is no longer considered a scientific classification among human populations and culture groups. Look it up for yourself.
bcFiRe12 2 years ago
It still is consider a scientific classification within the scientific community, but the media is giving us a false view.
A survey of American anthropologists found that 69 percent of them accepted the concept of biological race (Leiberman and Reynolds, 1996).
They fear it may lead to a possible holocaust.
Look it up at AAA. Im not kidding. It doesn't have to do with science as humans in regards to racial classification is more legitimate than with dogs or cats.
ComradeMaelstrom 2 years ago
Misrepresentation.
The percentage of cultural and physical anthropologists who do not think "race" is a valid biological category has been consistently dropping. Also, the 69% of the American and Canadian physical anthropologists in that study you are quoting were disagreeing with the statement "There are biological races in the species Homo sapiens."
You can find the article right off of google.
SolRosenberg84 2 years ago
I would like to have that statement backed up by a link, a poll, stats, something, before I can consider what you wrote to be accurate.
The reason why this would be, deals with outgroup, ingroup variation am I right?
Well, how would they justify the remaining of racial (breed) categorization of animals, such as deers, dogs, cats, etc, if this is the reason?
Whether it's a valid biological category depends on what scientists from which nations you ask.
ComradeMaelstrom 2 years ago
I also rechecked the 69% figure and found that my statement remains correct and that it indeed was you who were misrepresenting the figures and not I, as you later claimed. If you've found a contradicting article stating otherwise, I would like a link to it so that I can refrain from my statements.
ComradeMaelstrom 2 years ago
The full article you referenced is available online - along with more recent ones done by the exact same researcher, not to mention several others which use his findings.
That is wilful misrepresentation, and judging by your profile you don't care about the evidence. Too similar to a creationist. If I show the creationist the flaw in his argument, and he simply repeats it, I ban him. Since you have demonstrated the same wilful ignorance, enjoy your ban.
/watch?v=VtSLh3Yq0Lw
SolRosenberg84 2 years ago
>I would like to have that statement backed up by a link
You posted the name of the researchers and the date of the study. I went on google and actually scanned over the article to discover it was wrong. Google it you lazy bastard.
Different breeds of dogs are all part of one species. The differences between diffferent human races are far less pronounced than the differences between different breeds of dogs.
SolRosenberg84 2 years ago
SolRosenberg84, there's no point in name-calling. I did look it up and found that my statement was accurate and that your statement about it not being accurate wasn't.
Regarding your comment about dogs. But that's where you are wrong. The same haziness applied to human races are also applied to several other species, even more so than with human races. Dogs are one of them. They are far more similar to eachother than human races. They have less outgrpup variation and more ingroup variation.
ComradeMaelstrom 2 years ago
So you think that blacks, whites, asians, arabs, are all sub-species of homosapien. You are truly an idiot. Let go of your delusions and try to find value in your life beyond the mindlessness of thinking you are superior because you have less melanin in your skin.
TheMagickScene 1 year ago
Ooze?! we were never ooze ye tard!! We were dirt then we were molded in his image! and Chicks are made from rib.
Sheesh do i have to explain everything to ya?
*rolls eyes eats cake*
gingergreek 2 years ago
Can I have another bite of that delicious apple ! LOL ! : )
TheMagickScene 1 year ago
great vid pal. I love the way Canadians say about!
philylennon 2 years ago
I agree! Especially when the Canadian chicks say aboot! Too cute! Long live Canadia! 83
sharkman9k 2 years ago
lol so baked in this video.
nsane87 2 years ago 3
Wow Sol, this really is a good video with a lot of interesting examples of evolution that I haven't heard before... I wish there was more accessible info out there like this for people to be exposed to..
Im reading Richard Dawkins latest book and most of it so far is boring and the same old stuff... I think he should do something more like this video where he could give example after example of the many genetic links of our evolution.
DisforDubby 2 years ago
I found the book to be a little bit dry also, maybe you should hunt down the audiobook. He swaps reading duties with his wife and also the turns of phrase added emphasis and occasional quirky inflection bring to all to life.
fomoran 2 years ago
haha actually thats what I've been doing - listening to the audio book. It is dry at times but I havent listened to the whole thing. I'll finish it this weekend.
oh and I dont think that's his wife. or is it...
DisforDubby 2 years ago
Lalla Ward is his wife (the lucky sod) and she does read parts in hi audiobooks, well the ones that i've listened to.
fomoran 2 years ago
ok I guess it makes sense... I was just assuming her last name would also be Dawkins lol
DisforDubby 2 years ago
"WHAT THE HELL?!?! It was ooze last time we looked!"
LMFAO
gweegwee3 2 years ago 3
Does anyone know the name of that National Geographic show that was about the whole human family tree?
DisforDubby 2 years ago
You're thinking of Endogenous Retroviruses.
Good vid, Sol.
TomConger 2 years ago
the "blending effect" you refer to is what anthropologists call "clines," or variation in a population over a geographical area.
Politicimo 2 years ago
You are my favorite youtuber hands down. Your videos are always insightful and make me proud to be on the same continent as someone with your great talent at telling stories. If you could do a video on abiogenisis that would be awesome unless you've already done one, in which case could someone give me a link?
MrMagneticPelican 2 years ago
good job
miglegtr 2 years ago
Brilliantly stated, aaaaaas usual :)
chessdawgz 2 years ago
primate mammal therapsid reptile amphibian lobed-fish fish cordate sea-squirt multi-cellular single-cell RNA aggragate amino acids organic chemicals carbon supernova vacuum-fluctuation singularity ^_^
PinkProgram 2 years ago 2
"...the balls that we all know and love"
ExiledGuardian 2 years ago 4
"Your Inner Fish" - Neil Shubin
bobster451 2 years ago
HOORAY FOR OOOOOOZE
ccofmight 2 years ago 3