a distinction he failed to mention is that it has never been observed one species mutating enough to become a different species all the differences are within the same species as i see it the mutation ability is something God made to make us adaptable to our enviroment because He knew it would change over time because that was how He built the earth but He made every species that is needed so He didnt put in the ability to create new species
A theory is an explanation of the general principles of certain phenomena with considerable facts to support it A theory remains valid only if every new piece of information supports it
If a single piece of available information does not support a theory, then the theory (as proposed) is disproved. The Theory of Relativity has stood the test of time, until recently. Any idea why?
Hey Dean. Growing up in the bible belt states I never even sat through one evolution course in grade school, yes even this day in age. I have became rather curious lately. Is there any books you could recommend for someone starting this subject?
It's called the "law" of gravity, because it's been scientifically proven, unlike the theory of evolution. It's funny how evolutionists always turn out to be the ones that don't know anything about science.
we wont get rid of any stupid people or anything like that unless we extinct them ourselves because there are no predators so they can survive and pass on these genes because of the society we live in...!
@XGamezOnlyX LOL. Actually about 40-60% of American's don't follow the evolution religion. The bible doesn't tell people to be open-minded, and even if it did, "open-mindedness" is no excuse for believing something as stupid as evolution.
@fmilluminatus 1: 40-60% of Americans don't accept evolution? Damn. 2: Evolution religion? wut. 3: what's you're point. Cause u seem to be contradicting yourself.
@fmilluminatus But believing some greater entity where there is no proof of it's existence is intelligent. You religious people always go on about no proof evolution is real or the big bang actually happened yet you can't give any proof to back up your on claims.
@fmilluminatus I'll give you proof. The purpose of Noah's arc was to prepare for the great flood which was need to cleanse humanity so essentially get rid of evil. Odin said he would rid the world of Ice Giants. I don't know about you but I don't see many ice giants, yet I see allot of evil.
@mroberts1030 There have been none. Selection always leads to a decrease in genetic diversity. The process by which genetic diversity increases through mutation is a fairy tale that's never been observed scientifically ... ever. But don't let the fact that the primary process by which evolution supposedly happens is imaginary shake your faith in the evolutionist dogma!
Evolution is science, cause evolutionists say so! It you don't agree, you must be too "religious".
only 30 dislikes... that means the number of evolution believers is growing... finally people have learned to ask themselves the questions "why ?" and "how?"
Evolution just means "to change". The natural theory of evolution or Darwinism is a very attractive sounding, but failed notion based on Charles Darwin's observations of Finches and strain adaptation in the Galapagos Islands.
Eugenics was a form of animal husbandry based on Darwinian ideas from "The Decent of Man". The idea was to breed a better humanity. It was tried by the Nazi's in the 1930s, found to be unpopular and abandoned after WWII.
Eugenics>"Eu"+"genes" ("good/well"+"born"). What I said by "evolution is eugenics" was just a joke related to the fact that only those who have the right mutations to survive in their environment will actually survive. It doesn't matter wether a species needs mutations that increase functionality or just give fancy looks. It's just who is more likely to procreate and ensure the survival of the next generations.
Therefore... Evoluiton IS eugenics (in it's rightful meaning).
@dennisrules94 It's actually called atom attraction. 'Heavier' atoms have a bigger attraction force. More atoms increase that force. Earth's core is quite dense and has a lot of 'heavy' atoms.
Time is not a dimension, but a tool of putting the different states of space in some order.
I don't think we ever had any type of evolution. My reason being is, we have never found a "caveman". It was said we are made in god's image. Meaning if we are made from god we would be the evolution of god. Also before you go and say that can't happen other wise we would be able to do god like things. Evolution dosen't ever have to be a a Improvement. Also no one knows what powers god has(if god exists). Please do not think i am right without finding information and deciding for your own self.
@demon3203 posted, "we have never found a 'caveman'". Folks who claim to know such things say we started as homo-afarensis, then became homo-africanus, homo-erectus, homo-hablis, then homo-sapien. Their evidence are a few partial skeletons which could all fit into one coffin. Individual variation exceeds the distinctions between specimen. The claims made concerning fossil records are from the discipline of logic (reason), not science (experimentation).
Darwinism is not a scientific law and has never been a scientific theory. If has been accepted as scientific "fact" since the day Darwin published "The Origin of the Species", because it is a logical seeming alternative to Genesis. Dear Dean is bit confused as to what evolution is not. Canus Lupus was bred into many breeds through the use of normal dominant and recessive genes, not mutations. Varied eye color, beak type, long monkey arms and the like are part of the normal species genome.
Everyone spends the next hundred years of so trying to disprove the new scientific theory and if all fail, it is eventually accepted as a scientific law. The scientific law will eventually be proven false, as scientific truths are the most fleeting.
@IMJW1000 The problem is, evolutionist's have spend over 100 years trying and failing to prove evolution. Failing to prove evolution for 150 means the theory is wrong any everyone still trying to prove it is a desperate lunatic; that doesn't make it scientific "law".
@SuperXpress2 posted, " I don't understand...". In science, one makes an observation and from it, forms a hypothesis. He tests the hypothesis by with an experiment, the results of which is a fact. He publishes. Others read his methods and results and perform similar experiments, based on a similar hypotheses. After decades or centuries of facts are gained through experimentation, a great mind comes along and puts the facts together, and forms a scientific theory.
@IMJW1000 Maybe you should re-read what I just replyed to you. You are right about the science methode. Most of it. A theory is when you try to to form a I guess you can call it a "story" of what possibilty the question or problem might be. And then you test it. You make an experement. And if it goes well, then its a proven unmessable fact. Like I said, evolution has been proven. (twice actually, there's even a world record in the 2011 Guness World Record book. Go check it out. :) )
@SuperXpress2 posted, "evolution has been proven". By what experiments? The scientific journal name, experiment name and date? I have followed evolutionary theory my whole life. To my knowledge no one has ever been able to produce a mutant multi-celled, viable strain in the last 130 years which persisted more than 4 generations. Not part of the species genome, mutations fade quickly when bred with normal mates. Darwinism doesn't function, because the laws of genetics do not tolerate it.
@IMJW1000 Like I said, check the 2011 guiness world record book. They have found evidence. I'm not an expert in this. I can't tell you everything about it, but check the world records book.
@SkyceAngel posted, "how about all the fossils?' The fossils only show that some creatures lived on Earth and died off many years ago. The fossil record does not point to Darwinism. In the "Cambrian explosion", many thousands of species suddenly appear in the fossil record, with no predicating species. The records show long periods of stable species populations punctuated by sudden bio-extinctions. Darwin's theory says this cannot happen. Recommend you read, "Origin of the Species".
@IMJW1000 "The records show long periods of stable species populations punctuated by sudden bio-extinctions. Darwin's theory says this cannot happen" i am assuming your talking about mass extinctions that have happened in the earth's past. if you are let me just tell you that extinction and mass extinctions play a huge role in evolution and do not negate the theory of evolution. i have also read the origin of species a few time and have not seen this anywhere in the book.
ON THE ABSENCE OR RARITY OF TRANSITIONAL VARIETIES.
As natural selection acts solely by the preservation of profitable modifications, each new form will tend in a fully-stocked country to take the place of, and finally to exterminate, its own less improved parent-form and other less-favoured forms with which it comes into competition. Thus extinction and natural selection go hand in hand.
Hence, if we look at each species as descended from some unknown form, both the parent and all the transitional varieties will generally have been exterminated by the very process of the formation and perfection of the new form.
But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?
It will be more convenient to discuss this question in the chapter on the imperfection of the geological record; and I will here only state that I believe the answer mainly lies in the record being incomparably less perfect than is generally supposed. The crust of the earth is a vast museum; but the natural collections have been imperfectly made, and only at long intervals of time.
As can be seen, Darwinism requires a long period of time for one species to evolve into another one. Changes due to mutation come only occasionally and most of the time, they are not beneficial. The fossil record should show an extinction, followed by very few species for millions of years, as new ones evolve to replace the ones extinct and it should show countless interim forms, between species. It does not.
It shows a completely new set of creatures replacing the extinct ones, almost immediately. No time to evolve into these new creatures. They must have come from somewhere else. Were you to argue they were seeded from some external and alien source, it would make sense and the fossil record would agree.
@IMJW1000 As for your last point,there are many instances in the fossil record after extinctions of new organism taking over niches left behind by the extinct organism the K-T extinction is a perfect example of this, the dinosaurs die out and we have mammals taking their ecological niches in some places and birds in other places. Also there are many intermediates forms maybe not a lot in the species level but much more in higher taxonomic levels.
@IMJW1000 “Darwinism requires a long period of time for one species to evolve into another one” your right evolution does take long periods of time but its not one species “evolving” into another its rising of new species “Changes due to mutation come only occasionally and most of the time, they are not beneficial” not true most mutations are neutral and depend on the environment to be beneficial or harmful.
@mimarp478 posted, "most mutations are neutral". Well, the most common mutation among the fruit flies subjected to radiation is an extra set of wings. These flies cannot fly, but must walk. Not a benefit.
@IMJW1000 in that environment not flying was not beneficial but in another environment in may be helpful. its all about the environment yes some mutations will always be harmful but most are neutral this is a fact.
@IMJW1000 Also mimarp478 is correct in stating that most mutations are neutral. The average human has more than 100 mutations in their genotype. Due to the stable nature of DNA, the majority of these mutations have no affect on a persons phenotype. These mutations are classed as neutral. Harmful mutations are by comparison rare, with beneficial mutations are even rarer.
However mutations are actually slow in evolutionary terms when compared to the real drive behind evolution, which is sexual reproduction. It took almost three billion years for single celled organisms to evolve into multicellular organisms through asexual reproduction, however once these more complex organisms began recombining their genetic material in sexual reproduction it took only 800 million years to get to where we are today.
@mimarp478 posted, "“Darwinism requires a long period of time for one species to evolve into another one”.
If true, then Darwinism cannot be studied by science, which uses the scientific method. Darwinistic evolution may or may not be a valid reality, but it is not a scientific one, and should be removed from science classes. From the arguments made, it belongs in the philosophy department.
@IMJW1000 "The fossils only show that some creatures lived on Earth and died off many years ago" um not really fossils can tell us things such as how the organism died,what it ate, the habitat it lived in and more In the ""Cambrian explosion", many thousands of species suddenly appear in the fossil record, with no predicating species". in geological terms it was sudden 10-50 million years and there were predecessors to the Cambrian fauna not a lot since most were soft bodied.
@IMJW1000 Look up one of the key laws of evolution. Its called punctuated equilibrium. It states that during periods of environmental stability evolution occurs very slowly, if at all. However when the environment, and therefore by extension environmental pressures, begins to change the evolutionary process happens comparatively rapidly. Keyword being comparatively as it still a process taking potentially dozens if not hundreds of generations.
@evejunkie1942 posted, "Look up one of the key laws of evolution." Huh? The notion of evoution is not even a scientfic theory. How can there be evolutionary laws? I am hearing a lot of impressive sounding statements of evoutionary this and that, but I am seeing no science.
What experiments have been done on what hypothesis? What were the results? Were any of those experiments recreated? What legitimate conclusions can be drawn from the factoids produced by those experiments? Science!
@IMJW1000 Evolution is a scientific theory. It has been for 150 years. Just about every theory has laws that it explains. Evolution is no exception. Natural selection, gradualism, punctuated equilibrium, Dollo's law of irreversibility. I know there are more but I can not remember them off the top of my head. Never in the history of science has a theory stood up to as much criticism as evolution. And it is still accepted by the overwhelming majority of the scientific community.
Evolution is a model which has been shown to be capable of making predictions, which are capable of being falsified. A great example of this is in modern medicine. If evolution was completely incorrect, then almost everything we know about germ theory would be entirely guess work. Micro-organisms mutating to be immune to antibiotics and vaccines is something which was predicted by evolutionary theory.
@IMJW1000 A law is something that you have to follow. I don't understand how can you call gravity a law. Its a fact and it has be proven. If you don't believe me, then take a pen and let it go. You'll see what happens. And evolution is not a theory, its a fact. (again) It has been proven. Its not a hypothesis of any kind. Just do some research and you'll see for yourself.
Then why aren't some half-evolved, or half-monkey human, think about it. We have apes, we have humans. Yet none are in between? The missing link is missing.
@Tony1130 we did not evolve from monkeys mate, we evolved from a common ancestor to the monkey.. ever ehard of Ida? aka-darwinius masillae. the closest thing in history we have found to share common decent with the ape. get your facts right before you comment.
@Tony1130 Because they evolved...... Thats exactly what he explained in this video....
If for example a species of birds migrates to an island where there are only big nuts, the birds with the bigger beaks will have the highest chance to survive, and thus to mate. So over a long time, the average beak among that species will get bigger, untill the average beak has a size which is perfect compared to the nuts. And thus the species as a whole changed, and there is no "link" left
@Tony1130 We evolved from a common ancestor, not from apes. And life branches off all the time. Just like he said. And btw, it took millions of years to evolve. Do some research yourself. Everybody hates when someone thinks he knows everything when he doesn't. And even if there are missing links, at least we found an incredible amount of evidence so we have a huge idea of what actually happened. But religion on the other hand, has never found any little bit of evidence at all.
so if evolution is controlled by natural selection then how does a species with no natural selection evolve does it stay the same or does it just get weaker from mixing in all the mutations
this video reminded me of the racing pigeon sport! let the flock race in long distance.. those who returned home will become good breeders. keep the good birds and cull the weak birds or those not determined to go home.
@Ibbiy1 How can you say or believe anything like that? That's the stupidest, most ignorant, most primitive, ridiculous thing in the world. Moreover, Have some respect for the other religious retards, be sure to include God, Jehovah, Thor, Satan, Zeus, and Craw The Warrior King.
@Ibbiy1 because you were born in a muslim upbringing, you believe in allah. you were taught to believe in allah, but bro.. not everyone was. people's ideas about their place in the world and the reason for our own existance and the existance of the universe varies depending on geographic and social factors! so don't tell me the secular/theist rest of the world is going to hell for not believing this god of yours (aka the abrahamic god). cool story bro ;)
ps. it is called a law of gravity. The theory part could still be proven incorrect (and once again based on humans believe on how something works), however the law has been proven as fact. i.e. Gravity exists
@DaClan008 Evolution has more evidence than gravity. For the current theory of gravity to work they have to invent stuff like Dark Matter just so it makes sense.
@Gman308877 It would be quite interesting to find out what proven evidence there is? i have not come accross any that is not based on theory. And once again please do not confuse this with micro evolution or mutations which does exist. And don't tell me carbon dating which has it own set of flaws!!!... so I guess this will be just as hard to proof as creationism it merely poses an alternative to the believe. Get me someone to time travel 7 bil years and I will believe you :)
@DaClan008 It is actually called Gravitational Theory. Law of Gravity refers to the fact that we have tested the idea that all objects that have mass are pulled towards each other due the high rate of positive testing and to my knowledge it has yet to be proven false in any case. The theory comes into play because we do not know how or why this happens only that it does happen.
@fmilluminatus Sigh. The LAW of Gravity states that all mass in the universe attracts every other point mass with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses. We know this to be true.
The THEORY of gravity explains HOW this happens to the best of our knowledge according to the evidence.
Please stop being a pompous, willfully ignorant asshole.
Well, I believe it is called a theory as a posed to fact, because like any other theory it can not be 100% proven. Thus making it a believe very much like creationism. However be very careful to confuse micro evolution (mutuations)[your prove] with macro evolution (not proven). But what about cosmic, stellar, chemical, biological evolution? Not to mention where information comes from and is stored. Evolution is a hoax if you can think systematically about it, you'll agree.
Just a note here on Christians that don't believe in evolution.
I went to a baptist school in the south, they taught two types of evolution: one being the type that involves natural selection only as in this video (they called it "micro-evolution") The other type was the "evolutionist origin story" Which begins with the big bang goes to single celled life forms from random chemical reactions over an undoubtedly long time and attempted to explain evolution of man from protists to primates.
are you serious, though? some people don't know this stuff? are they also unaware that the theory of evolution has not a thing to do with origin of man?
@LovergirlBeautifull Not all mutations are bad, some are neutral, some are beneficial. You say that mutations affecting aesthetics shouldn't be able to get sifted out, which isn't true. Did you know at one point all humans had brown eyes and I believe brown hair as well, a genetic mutation caused some to have blue eyes. Some of them are sifted out some aren't.
@toktokk666 Darker skin is dominant , WHite is recessive. So basicaly over time if things keep the way they are now , THere wont be white ppl in the future.
@LovergirlBeautifull Why don't random mutations create deformities affecting aesthetics only? Because that isn't how mutations work. They can affect aesthetics or more. i.e mental disability . not sure what point you are trying to make.
@Joebob01010 Well they make the exception because they think we're all just so terribly advanced. If you've ever seen what humans do lost on the wild you can easily say that advanced brains don't help much at first. I saw an Evolution chart once that made me laugh. It was the usual line of human evolution, but the last one in the row was carrying a cross. Owls have better eyes, dogs with their noses, and some microscopic organisms make us look very simple.
@Joebob01010 Yeah, so you know I can just as easily say and be more literal by saying "I am the evidence." instead of religious nuts using that as a last resort. Ask them, why would god give some humans tails if we were always as we are now? Or why whales' entire anatomy shows that it was once a land mammal.
@Joebob01010 I heard that the beneficial genes are the ones that are most common among those who reproduce the most once a species is not under a constant threat. Shit, this means the scientist with one kid is spreading less genes than Creationist hicks with twenty kids.
BIOLOGISTS, STOP WHATEVER YOU'RE DOING AND MAKE BABIES
@Joebob01010 That's especially fitting for me....I was born with a tail...apparently the genes which cause it exist in many humans. Almost all human embryos develop a tail but it's almost always absorbed into the rest of the body. But mine had no vertebrae and was cut off, so much for being like Chandre Oram. :(
If Theory is the closest thing to certainty, then explain laws. Gravity is a law, not a theory. Evolution is near fact, but it is not fact however close. I personally don't believe in evolution, but I respect those who do and I find it to be very fascinating. Love your vids :]
@TheAntiochus Laws are applicable to anything, gravity has still not explained what makes things attracted to one another, so in terms of explanation, it is not as good a theory as evolution, but in terms of experimental observations, gravity is much more evident than evolution. Simply because evolution on the macro scale takes a long period of time for the new genomes to be duplicated and made more beneficial since it requires much accumulation of benefits made with natural selection.
Hey Dean, I have a good understanding of evolution and natural selection which leads me to this thought:
It seems that natural selection does not really apply to humans anymore. We can deal with most genetic defects (defects that a wild animal would likely die from). Therefor we survive to pass them on.
this leads me to wonder what this means for our species. Are we going to evolve to become weaker?
This has been on my mind lately and I was hoping you (or anybody) had some input.
This will probably disperse the urban myth of cow-tipping but bovine herds are only as fast as their slowest members but in times of danger the faster members sprint and leave the slow behind. A cruel but effective way to remove the "slowness gene" from the herd. This has the side effect of making herds run from anything not a cow. And because they all ways have at least one awake at night it is impossible to sneak up on them. The only way to cow-tip is to set up the whole scenario
If what you say is true that by natural selection animals evolved over time to suit their environment, and popular belief is that man evolved from monkeys. How do you explain the existence of monkey's today? Should they not be extinct?
@mainakoshi Humans didnt evolve from monkeys, Evolution says we came from a primate ancestor, not a modern monkey or ape. (Some modern primates are: chimps, gorillas, baboons, lemurs, gibbons, and humans. None is a descendant of another.)
@mainakoshi We didn't evolve from monkeys. And monkey is a very general term. Our closest relative in the tree of life are chimpanzees, but we did not evolve from them. It's like a family tree. Chimpanzees and humans are brothers, if you will, and we had one common ancestor which evolved into both of us. And that common ancestor that we and chimpanzees share had a brother species which later became gorillas and orangutans, it goes on like that so the species list goes like 1>2>4>8>16>32>64>etc
@Alastor359 You don't have to believe in it, but that does make you fall into the deliberately stupid category. Like I said before - what would you think of me if I didn't 'believe' in gravity, or didn't 'believe' the earth goes around the sun, or didn't 'believe' that the earth is round.
Adaptation within a species, and loss of gentic information that leads to some unique capabilities does not prove evolution. In fact that's backwards. Show me a poodle turn into a wolf, and then you'll have my attention.
Evolution is a grand theory... but have you ever noticed that evolutionists kept looking for the missing link until they 'found' it? Creationists are the ones being brainwashed? We are so taught to believe in evolution.
I suspect that the new genome work will reveal a mechanism that shows how the environment affects the expression of genes and ultimately inheritance. What will you believe then? Hint... the answer must start with an "E"...
@yassodude Who made god? Saying a god is eternal is just as rational, if not less, than saying that our universe is eternal. Our universe does not need a God for everything to play out the way it is.
@cooleobrad1337 Dude , dont be so close-minded , if you keep an open mind you'll see something's wrong with evolution , ok , so who made the Single Cell organisms with such complexity that made them able to evolve in to us ... ok you dont like it , Who made the Big Bang , .. Who coded our DNA . who created our DNA to be Coded , who designed our digestive system , who designed our anatomy , who made sure that trees give oxygen so we can breath , who made sure theres everything we need on earth?
@yassodude I don't consider myself close-minded and I certainly don't try to be. And you still didn't answer my question, "who made god" You are so hung up on who made all these things, but you can't explain the creation of the creator. You could be entirely right but, imo a god does not exist. No one made us, we can't explain how or why our universe was created, or why anything even exists. But slapping "god did it" to everything you don't understand doesn't mean you are right.
@CascadeZ omg! dude , thats the point , nobody created god , we cant and wont know anything about it and thats the big idea , i wont rant and Glorify gd now so people wont call me a preacher but the idea of GOD is that he is above time , anyway concenrning your comment , it only proves my idea , if you ask who made god , then you agree with me , something had to make everything , you cant expect life to just pop up , so in a way , even if you dont agree , were on the same side .
@yassodude Life never popped up out of no-where. I don't even want to know where you heard that. If everything has a beginning, then where did god come from? You can't say that he was always there. How do you know that the universe was always there? And there has never been any evidence presented of him. You have to have evidence for extraordinary claims. Its how everything works.
@SuperXpress2 im sorry but it just makes you look stupid when you deny something i said without rectifying or justifying it , "Lije never popped out of no-where' , ok then enlighten me , where did the first single cell organism come from , and wtf are saying god had to start somewhere . IF you believe in god you know he didnt have to start , for you thats another matter though.
@yassodude Well don't ask me that stuff, ask a scientist or biologist. I admit that I don't know the answer. So what? Maybe you don't know what science is. I'll tell you. Science is a process of examining and studying substances or/and theories. Thanks to science, we understand most of the things around us. But rational scientific evidence and understanding doesn't align well with irrational religious faith. What evidence do you have of god anyway? Science proved evolution. Why refuse it?:)
so if we restart life enough times eventually we will have a planet ruled by flying speggetii mosters. (could somthing mutate into pasta :/)
kpg102698 1 day ago
Grade 11 biology...
ZedNassah 2 weeks ago
@ZedNassah
grade 11? i knew this theory at age 13.
Rofl.
The3nlightened0ne 1 day ago
@The3nlightened0ne I knew about genetic engineering when i was 10 but i didn't have the right to say i "knew" it.
ZedNassah 1 day ago
@ZedNassah
no right? where do you live? Middle East?
The3nlightened0ne 1 day ago
@The3nlightened0ne Not talking about freedom of speech, don't take everything so literally. Shows your incompetence, and mental deficiency
ZedNassah 1 day ago
@ZedNassah
Wooah, are you so insecure that you had to insult a stranger?
I did not mean to hurt you :(
Get well soon ^_^
The3nlightened0ne 1 day ago
@The3nlightened0ne Overused, and i chuckle every time.
ZedNassah 1 day ago
@ZedNassah
Overused, yet true.
The3nlightened0ne 1 day ago
@The3nlightened0ne Your theories are underdeveloped. Much like your brain. * INSECURE HERPDEDERP* O.0
ZedNassah 1 day ago
@ZedNassah
jeez, you win man.
did you really have to go that far?
The3nlightened0ne 19 hours ago
a distinction he failed to mention is that it has never been observed one species mutating enough to become a different species all the differences are within the same species as i see it the mutation ability is something God made to make us adaptable to our enviroment because He knew it would change over time because that was how He built the earth but He made every species that is needed so He didnt put in the ability to create new species
the1exnay 1 month ago
WE CAME FROM TURD FLINGING APES GOOD NIGHT
pacman4d 1 month ago
A theory is an explanation of the general principles of certain phenomena with considerable facts to support it A theory remains valid only if every new piece of information supports it
If a single piece of available information does not support a theory, then the theory (as proposed) is disproved. The Theory of Relativity has stood the test of time, until recently. Any idea why?
kimbanyc 1 month ago
Hey Dean. Growing up in the bible belt states I never even sat through one evolution course in grade school, yes even this day in age. I have became rather curious lately. Is there any books you could recommend for someone starting this subject?
civilian4live 1 month ago
@civilian4live Origin of species
Ipowne3g 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
It's called the "law" of gravity, because it's been scientifically proven, unlike the theory of evolution. It's funny how evolutionists always turn out to be the ones that don't know anything about science.
fmilluminatus 2 months ago
we wont get rid of any stupid people or anything like that unless we extinct them ourselves because there are no predators so they can survive and pass on these genes because of the society we live in...!
supermansmokealot 2 months ago
lol, 14 percent of american deny evolution? Damn why doesnt the bible tell people to be open-minded? :/
XGamezOnlyX 2 months ago
@XGamezOnlyX LOL. Actually about 40-60% of American's don't follow the evolution religion. The bible doesn't tell people to be open-minded, and even if it did, "open-mindedness" is no excuse for believing something as stupid as evolution.
fmilluminatus 2 months ago
@fmilluminatus 1: 40-60% of Americans don't accept evolution? Damn. 2: Evolution religion? wut. 3: what's you're point. Cause u seem to be contradicting yourself.
XGamezOnlyX 2 months ago
@fmilluminatus But believing some greater entity where there is no proof of it's existence is intelligent. You religious people always go on about no proof evolution is real or the big bang actually happened yet you can't give any proof to back up your on claims.
b4igetu 2 months ago
@fmilluminatus I'll give you proof. The purpose of Noah's arc was to prepare for the great flood which was need to cleanse humanity so essentially get rid of evil. Odin said he would rid the world of Ice Giants. I don't know about you but I don't see many ice giants, yet I see allot of evil.
b4igetu 2 months ago
@DeanLeysen Can you give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be see to increase the information in the genome?
mroberts1030 2 months ago
@mroberts1030 There have been none. Selection always leads to a decrease in genetic diversity. The process by which genetic diversity increases through mutation is a fairy tale that's never been observed scientifically ... ever. But don't let the fact that the primary process by which evolution supposedly happens is imaginary shake your faith in the evolutionist dogma!
Evolution is science, cause evolutionists say so! It you don't agree, you must be too "religious".
fmilluminatus 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
only 30 dislikes... that means the number of evolution believers is growing... finally people have learned to ask themselves the questions "why ?" and "how?"
ThomasVonThalberg 2 months ago
Comment removed
ThomasVonThalberg 2 months ago
So stupid people are gonna die out in a couple thousands of years? THANK GOD!
Therastaproductions 2 months ago
@Therastaproductions I think there's too many of them, we need a few million years
alynwhite 2 months ago
@Therastaproductions ehm... dude... what God ? :D
ThomasVonThalberg 2 months ago
@ThomasVonThalberg I see what you did there.
Therastaproductions 2 months ago
@Therastaproductions There is no god.
itchygonads 2 months ago
My muslim friend asked me why are there still monkeys if we evolved ?
TheDslide 2 months ago
@TheDslide Because humans and monkeys have a common ancestor. Your muslim friend has been brainwashed.
alynwhite 2 months ago
@alynwhite ok ! I agree his brain is fucked up !
TheDslide 2 months ago
all girls will be ubér hot in 1000 years thanks to evolution
KOLTON545 2 months ago
I learned more from this than I did all 7 hours of school today.
spy4561 3 months ago in playlist More videos from DeanLeysen
have you considered becoming a teacher?
because this 3 minute video > almost 4 years of biology in school...
pkf0rtzh4arutube 4 months ago
@pkf0rtzh4arutube Roflmao this isn't 4 years of biology.
Nebraskafootballsue 3 months ago
So... Evolution is eugenics?
AresOnYT 4 months ago
@AresOnYT posted, "Evolution is eugenics?"
Evolution just means "to change". The natural theory of evolution or Darwinism is a very attractive sounding, but failed notion based on Charles Darwin's observations of Finches and strain adaptation in the Galapagos Islands.
Eugenics was a form of animal husbandry based on Darwinian ideas from "The Decent of Man". The idea was to breed a better humanity. It was tried by the Nazi's in the 1930s, found to be unpopular and abandoned after WWII.
IMJW1000 4 months ago
@IMJW1000
Eugenics>"Eu"+"genes" ("good/well"+"born"). What I said by "evolution is eugenics" was just a joke related to the fact that only those who have the right mutations to survive in their environment will actually survive. It doesn't matter wether a species needs mutations that increase functionality or just give fancy looks. It's just who is more likely to procreate and ensure the survival of the next generations.
Therefore... Evoluiton IS eugenics (in it's rightful meaning).
AresOnYT 4 months ago
@DaClan008 its actually curvature of spacetime, not gravity
dennisrules94 4 months ago
@dennisrules94 It's actually called atom attraction. 'Heavier' atoms have a bigger attraction force. More atoms increase that force. Earth's core is quite dense and has a lot of 'heavy' atoms.
Time is not a dimension, but a tool of putting the different states of space in some order.
AresOnYT 4 months ago
This....makes sense...o.o
KiLIAcReEd 4 months ago
I don't think we ever had any type of evolution. My reason being is, we have never found a "caveman". It was said we are made in god's image. Meaning if we are made from god we would be the evolution of god. Also before you go and say that can't happen other wise we would be able to do god like things. Evolution dosen't ever have to be a a Improvement. Also no one knows what powers god has(if god exists). Please do not think i am right without finding information and deciding for your own self.
demon3203 4 months ago
@demon3203 posted, "we have never found a 'caveman'". Folks who claim to know such things say we started as homo-afarensis, then became homo-africanus, homo-erectus, homo-hablis, then homo-sapien. Their evidence are a few partial skeletons which could all fit into one coffin. Individual variation exceeds the distinctions between specimen. The claims made concerning fossil records are from the discipline of logic (reason), not science (experimentation).
IMJW1000 4 months ago
Darwinism is not a scientific law and has never been a scientific theory. If has been accepted as scientific "fact" since the day Darwin published "The Origin of the Species", because it is a logical seeming alternative to Genesis. Dear Dean is bit confused as to what evolution is not. Canus Lupus was bred into many breeds through the use of normal dominant and recessive genes, not mutations. Varied eye color, beak type, long monkey arms and the like are part of the normal species genome.
IMJW1000 4 months ago
Everyone spends the next hundred years of so trying to disprove the new scientific theory and if all fail, it is eventually accepted as a scientific law. The scientific law will eventually be proven false, as scientific truths are the most fleeting.
IMJW1000 4 months ago
@IMJW1000 The problem is, evolutionist's have spend over 100 years trying and failing to prove evolution. Failing to prove evolution for 150 means the theory is wrong any everyone still trying to prove it is a desperate lunatic; that doesn't make it scientific "law".
fmilluminatus 2 months ago
@fmilluminatus :D i could bet a million that you have read this in some creationist website and not even checked out the proof for evolution.
Ipowne3g 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Comment removed
IMJW1000 4 months ago
Evolution is sooooo retarted
RishwanVEVO 4 months ago
@SuperXpress2 posted, " I don't understand...". In science, one makes an observation and from it, forms a hypothesis. He tests the hypothesis by with an experiment, the results of which is a fact. He publishes. Others read his methods and results and perform similar experiments, based on a similar hypotheses. After decades or centuries of facts are gained through experimentation, a great mind comes along and puts the facts together, and forms a scientific theory.
continued...
IMJW1000 4 months ago
Comment removed
IMJW1000 4 months ago
@IMJW1000 Maybe you should re-read what I just replyed to you. You are right about the science methode. Most of it. A theory is when you try to to form a I guess you can call it a "story" of what possibilty the question or problem might be. And then you test it. You make an experement. And if it goes well, then its a proven unmessable fact. Like I said, evolution has been proven. (twice actually, there's even a world record in the 2011 Guness World Record book. Go check it out. :) )
SuperXpress2 4 months ago
@SuperXpress2 posted, "evolution has been proven". By what experiments? The scientific journal name, experiment name and date? I have followed evolutionary theory my whole life. To my knowledge no one has ever been able to produce a mutant multi-celled, viable strain in the last 130 years which persisted more than 4 generations. Not part of the species genome, mutations fade quickly when bred with normal mates. Darwinism doesn't function, because the laws of genetics do not tolerate it.
IMJW1000 4 months ago
@IMJW1000 Like I said, check the 2011 guiness world record book. They have found evidence. I'm not an expert in this. I can't tell you everything about it, but check the world records book.
SuperXpress2 4 months ago
@SkyceAngel posted, "how about all the fossils?' The fossils only show that some creatures lived on Earth and died off many years ago. The fossil record does not point to Darwinism. In the "Cambrian explosion", many thousands of species suddenly appear in the fossil record, with no predicating species. The records show long periods of stable species populations punctuated by sudden bio-extinctions. Darwin's theory says this cannot happen. Recommend you read, "Origin of the Species".
IMJW1000 4 months ago 23
@IMJW1000 "The records show long periods of stable species populations punctuated by sudden bio-extinctions. Darwin's theory says this cannot happen" i am assuming your talking about mass extinctions that have happened in the earth's past. if you are let me just tell you that extinction and mass extinctions play a huge role in evolution and do not negate the theory of evolution. i have also read the origin of species a few time and have not seen this anywhere in the book.
mimarp478 1 month ago
@mimarp478
Origins of the Species
Chapter 6 - Difficulties with the Theory
ON THE ABSENCE OR RARITY OF TRANSITIONAL VARIETIES.
As natural selection acts solely by the preservation of profitable modifications, each new form will tend in a fully-stocked country to take the place of, and finally to exterminate, its own less improved parent-form and other less-favoured forms with which it comes into competition. Thus extinction and natural selection go hand in hand.
Page 1
IMJW1000 1 month ago
Hence, if we look at each species as descended from some unknown form, both the parent and all the transitional varieties will generally have been exterminated by the very process of the formation and perfection of the new form.
But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?
Page 2
IMJW1000 1 month ago
It will be more convenient to discuss this question in the chapter on the imperfection of the geological record; and I will here only state that I believe the answer mainly lies in the record being incomparably less perfect than is generally supposed. The crust of the earth is a vast museum; but the natural collections have been imperfectly made, and only at long intervals of time.
Page 3
IMJW1000 1 month ago
My point
As can be seen, Darwinism requires a long period of time for one species to evolve into another one. Changes due to mutation come only occasionally and most of the time, they are not beneficial. The fossil record should show an extinction, followed by very few species for millions of years, as new ones evolve to replace the ones extinct and it should show countless interim forms, between species. It does not.
Page 4
IMJW1000 1 month ago
Comment removed
IMJW1000 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It shows a completely new set of creatures replacing the extinct ones, almost immediately. No time to evolve into these new creatures. They must have come from somewhere else. Were you to argue they were seeded from some external and alien source, it would make sense and the fossil record would agree.
Hope this helps to clarify my position.
Page 5 of 5
IMJW1000 1 month ago
@IMJW1000 As for your last point,there are many instances in the fossil record after extinctions of new organism taking over niches left behind by the extinct organism the K-T extinction is a perfect example of this, the dinosaurs die out and we have mammals taking their ecological niches in some places and birds in other places. Also there are many intermediates forms maybe not a lot in the species level but much more in higher taxonomic levels.
mimarp478 1 month ago
@IMJW1000 “Darwinism requires a long period of time for one species to evolve into another one” your right evolution does take long periods of time but its not one species “evolving” into another its rising of new species “Changes due to mutation come only occasionally and most of the time, they are not beneficial” not true most mutations are neutral and depend on the environment to be beneficial or harmful.
mimarp478 1 month ago
@mimarp478 posted, "most mutations are neutral". Well, the most common mutation among the fruit flies subjected to radiation is an extra set of wings. These flies cannot fly, but must walk. Not a benefit.
IMJW1000 1 month ago
@IMJW1000 in that environment not flying was not beneficial but in another environment in may be helpful. its all about the environment yes some mutations will always be harmful but most are neutral this is a fact.
mimarp478 1 month ago
@IMJW1000 Also mimarp478 is correct in stating that most mutations are neutral. The average human has more than 100 mutations in their genotype. Due to the stable nature of DNA, the majority of these mutations have no affect on a persons phenotype. These mutations are classed as neutral. Harmful mutations are by comparison rare, with beneficial mutations are even rarer.
evejunkie1942 2 weeks ago
@IMJW1000 Cont..
However mutations are actually slow in evolutionary terms when compared to the real drive behind evolution, which is sexual reproduction. It took almost three billion years for single celled organisms to evolve into multicellular organisms through asexual reproduction, however once these more complex organisms began recombining their genetic material in sexual reproduction it took only 800 million years to get to where we are today.
evejunkie1942 2 weeks ago
@mimarp478 posted, "“Darwinism requires a long period of time for one species to evolve into another one”.
If true, then Darwinism cannot be studied by science, which uses the scientific method. Darwinistic evolution may or may not be a valid reality, but it is not a scientific one, and should be removed from science classes. From the arguments made, it belongs in the philosophy department.
IMJW1000 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@IMJW1000 "The fossils only show that some creatures lived on Earth and died off many years ago" um not really fossils can tell us things such as how the organism died,what it ate, the habitat it lived in and more In the ""Cambrian explosion", many thousands of species suddenly appear in the fossil record, with no predicating species". in geological terms it was sudden 10-50 million years and there were predecessors to the Cambrian fauna not a lot since most were soft bodied.
mimarp478 1 month ago
@IMJW1000 Look up one of the key laws of evolution. Its called punctuated equilibrium. It states that during periods of environmental stability evolution occurs very slowly, if at all. However when the environment, and therefore by extension environmental pressures, begins to change the evolutionary process happens comparatively rapidly. Keyword being comparatively as it still a process taking potentially dozens if not hundreds of generations.
evejunkie1942 2 weeks ago
@evejunkie1942 posted, "Look up one of the key laws of evolution." Huh? The notion of evoution is not even a scientfic theory. How can there be evolutionary laws? I am hearing a lot of impressive sounding statements of evoutionary this and that, but I am seeing no science.
What experiments have been done on what hypothesis? What were the results? Were any of those experiments recreated? What legitimate conclusions can be drawn from the factoids produced by those experiments? Science!
IMJW1000 2 weeks ago
@IMJW1000 Evolution is a scientific theory. It has been for 150 years. Just about every theory has laws that it explains. Evolution is no exception. Natural selection, gradualism, punctuated equilibrium, Dollo's law of irreversibility. I know there are more but I can not remember them off the top of my head. Never in the history of science has a theory stood up to as much criticism as evolution. And it is still accepted by the overwhelming majority of the scientific community.
evejunkie1942 2 weeks ago
@IMJW1000 Cont..
Evolution is a model which has been shown to be capable of making predictions, which are capable of being falsified. A great example of this is in modern medicine. If evolution was completely incorrect, then almost everything we know about germ theory would be entirely guess work. Micro-organisms mutating to be immune to antibiotics and vaccines is something which was predicted by evolutionary theory.
evejunkie1942 2 weeks ago
Gravity is a scientific law. Evolution is a natural theory or untested scientific hypothesis.
IMJW1000 5 months ago
@IMJW1000 how about all the fossils? i thought that practically explained the whole evolution theory
(just askin)
SkyceAngel 5 months ago
Comment removed
IMJW1000 4 months ago
@IMJW1000 A law is something that you have to follow. I don't understand how can you call gravity a law. Its a fact and it has be proven. If you don't believe me, then take a pen and let it go. You'll see what happens. And evolution is not a theory, its a fact. (again) It has been proven. Its not a hypothesis of any kind. Just do some research and you'll see for yourself.
SuperXpress2 4 months ago
Comment removed
IMJW1000 4 months ago
Then why aren't some half-evolved, or half-monkey human, think about it. We have apes, we have humans. Yet none are in between? The missing link is missing.
Tony1130 5 months ago
@Tony1130 we did not evolve from monkeys mate, we evolved from a common ancestor to the monkey.. ever ehard of Ida? aka-darwinius masillae. the closest thing in history we have found to share common decent with the ape. get your facts right before you comment.
basscann0n 5 months ago
@Tony1130 the missing link is missing???? no shit retard
MrSuperdude121 5 months ago
@Tony1130 Because they evolved...... Thats exactly what he explained in this video....
If for example a species of birds migrates to an island where there are only big nuts, the birds with the bigger beaks will have the highest chance to survive, and thus to mate. So over a long time, the average beak among that species will get bigger, untill the average beak has a size which is perfect compared to the nuts. And thus the species as a whole changed, and there is no "link" left
Harresd 5 months ago
@Tony1130 We evolved from a common ancestor, not from apes. And life branches off all the time. Just like he said. And btw, it took millions of years to evolve. Do some research yourself. Everybody hates when someone thinks he knows everything when he doesn't. And even if there are missing links, at least we found an incredible amount of evidence so we have a huge idea of what actually happened. But religion on the other hand, has never found any little bit of evidence at all.
SuperXpress2 4 months ago
so if evolution is controlled by natural selection then how does a species with no natural selection evolve does it stay the same or does it just get weaker from mixing in all the mutations
beanodonnell 5 months ago
this video reminded me of the racing pigeon sport! let the flock race in long distance.. those who returned home will become good breeders. keep the good birds and cull the weak birds or those not determined to go home.
sykesun 5 months ago
fedaaaaaaaait <3<3
Oohsuger 5 months ago
I would hope that a few billion years could remove stupid dogs such as Chihuahas - hate those things
madviolentchicken 5 months ago
I love how you do everything with a smile!
bukiswe 5 months ago
Comment removed
wiibot15 5 months ago
I don't get it ._. does he believe of evolution.? =/ cuz I know I don't. Allah made us bro
Ibbiy1 5 months ago
@Ibbiy1 Allah = The only god according to Islam
Martinsleep 5 months ago
@Ibbiy1 How can you say or believe anything like that? That's the stupidest, most ignorant, most primitive, ridiculous thing in the world. Moreover, Have some respect for the other religious retards, be sure to include God, Jehovah, Thor, Satan, Zeus, and Craw The Warrior King.
wiibot15 5 months ago
@wiibot15 yea we get it, you're an atheist.
so am i.
now stop being an asshole.
MrGreenblatt 5 months ago
@Ibbiy1 because you were born in a muslim upbringing, you believe in allah. you were taught to believe in allah, but bro.. not everyone was. people's ideas about their place in the world and the reason for our own existance and the existance of the universe varies depending on geographic and social factors! so don't tell me the secular/theist rest of the world is going to hell for not believing this god of yours (aka the abrahamic god). cool story bro ;)
basscann0n 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
god made us
13Wcpj0e 5 months ago
slimme jongen :p
naberbuur 5 months ago in playlist Video's van DeanLeysen
Annunaki are our ancestors.
gekko101 5 months ago
@gekko101 Inform me of this, Im interested
TheJean217 5 months ago
Annunaki are our ancestors.
gekko101 5 months ago
ps. it is called a law of gravity. The theory part could still be proven incorrect (and once again based on humans believe on how something works), however the law has been proven as fact. i.e. Gravity exists
DaClan008 5 months ago 4
@DaClan008 Evolution has more evidence than gravity. For the current theory of gravity to work they have to invent stuff like Dark Matter just so it makes sense.
Gman308877 3 months ago
@Gman308877 It would be quite interesting to find out what proven evidence there is? i have not come accross any that is not based on theory. And once again please do not confuse this with micro evolution or mutations which does exist. And don't tell me carbon dating which has it own set of flaws!!!... so I guess this will be just as hard to proof as creationism it merely poses an alternative to the believe. Get me someone to time travel 7 bil years and I will believe you :)
DaClan008 3 months ago
@Gman308877 1) Dark matter isn't "invented", evidence points to it existing. 2) Dark matter is not required to prove the law of gravity.
A swing and a miss for the ignorant evolutionist... :D
fmilluminatus 2 months ago
Comment removed
TheLeapinGnome 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DaClan008 It is actually called Gravitational Theory. Law of Gravity refers to the fact that we have tested the idea that all objects that have mass are pulled towards each other due the high rate of positive testing and to my knowledge it has yet to be proven false in any case. The theory comes into play because we do not know how or why this happens only that it does happen.
TheLeapinGnome 3 months ago
@DaClan008 Laws describe, theories explain. :)
TheBiAtheist 2 months ago
@TheBiAtheist Laws are proven, theories are not.
fmilluminatus 2 months ago
@fmilluminatus Sigh. The LAW of Gravity states that all mass in the universe attracts every other point mass with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses. We know this to be true.
The THEORY of gravity explains HOW this happens to the best of our knowledge according to the evidence.
Please stop being a pompous, willfully ignorant asshole.
TheBiAtheist 2 months ago 7
Well, I believe it is called a theory as a posed to fact, because like any other theory it can not be 100% proven. Thus making it a believe very much like creationism. However be very careful to confuse micro evolution (mutuations)[your prove] with macro evolution (not proven). But what about cosmic, stellar, chemical, biological evolution? Not to mention where information comes from and is stored. Evolution is a hoax if you can think systematically about it, you'll agree.
DaClan008 5 months ago
do you want to be my science teacher? lolol
kyle2studios 5 months ago
god did it...nough said
101RandomFilms 5 months ago
@101RandomFilms lol that joke gets me ever time.
XtremeWeed 5 months ago
Comment removed
wiibot15 5 months ago
@wiibot15 ...
101RandomFilms 5 months ago
Just a note here on Christians that don't believe in evolution.
I went to a baptist school in the south, they taught two types of evolution: one being the type that involves natural selection only as in this video (they called it "micro-evolution") The other type was the "evolutionist origin story" Which begins with the big bang goes to single celled life forms from random chemical reactions over an undoubtedly long time and attempted to explain evolution of man from protists to primates.
XBLArmory 5 months ago
It's called a theory because we aren't ignorant. Unlike a certain other set of beliefs...
Jabikz 5 months ago
0:00-1:15 MINDFUCK!
UcantResistClicking0 5 months ago
are you serious, though? some people don't know this stuff? are they also unaware that the theory of evolution has not a thing to do with origin of man?
jiiibatsam 5 months ago
@LovergirlBeautifull Not all mutations are bad, some are neutral, some are beneficial. You say that mutations affecting aesthetics shouldn't be able to get sifted out, which isn't true. Did you know at one point all humans had brown eyes and I believe brown hair as well, a genetic mutation caused some to have blue eyes. Some of them are sifted out some aren't.
cooleobrad1337 5 months ago
@ANimouz I thought that crocidiles and Aligators have been around longer then Sharks?!
Southernbell1211 5 months ago
actually there's no "gravity theory", just newton's universal gravitation.
refuseit 5 months ago
Your theory of evolution doesn't explain why niggers still exist today.
toktokk666 5 months ago
@toktokk666 Darker skin is dominant , WHite is recessive. So basicaly over time if things keep the way they are now , THere wont be white ppl in the future.
Ik im scared too.
JosephMorganFPS 5 months ago
you looked like you were about to crack up the whole time :P
CascadeZ 5 months ago
@LovergirlBeautifull Why don't random mutations create deformities affecting aesthetics only? Because that isn't how mutations work. They can affect aesthetics or more. i.e mental disability . not sure what point you are trying to make.
cooleobrad1337 5 months ago
didn´t church aproved the theory of evolution?
leoneko415 5 months ago
thumbs up to save a kitten
leoneko415 5 months ago
I saved a kitten :)
graeme2912 5 months ago
Subbed.
MrDivined 5 months ago
Youre so clever :3
annieisaretard 5 months ago
Great videos Dean ! I love what you do :)
bojo0noja 5 months ago
This video was excellent. You really laid out the concept of evolution so well.
MSarbone 5 months ago
@Joebob01010 Well they make the exception because they think we're all just so terribly advanced. If you've ever seen what humans do lost on the wild you can easily say that advanced brains don't help much at first. I saw an Evolution chart once that made me laugh. It was the usual line of human evolution, but the last one in the row was carrying a cross. Owls have better eyes, dogs with their noses, and some microscopic organisms make us look very simple.
pat5168 5 months ago
@Joebob01010 Yeah, so you know I can just as easily say and be more literal by saying "I am the evidence." instead of religious nuts using that as a last resort. Ask them, why would god give some humans tails if we were always as we are now? Or why whales' entire anatomy shows that it was once a land mammal.
pat5168 5 months ago
@Joebob01010 I heard that the beneficial genes are the ones that are most common among those who reproduce the most once a species is not under a constant threat. Shit, this means the scientist with one kid is spreading less genes than Creationist hicks with twenty kids.
BIOLOGISTS, STOP WHATEVER YOU'RE DOING AND MAKE BABIES
pat5168 6 months ago
@Joebob01010 That's especially fitting for me....I was born with a tail...apparently the genes which cause it exist in many humans. Almost all human embryos develop a tail but it's almost always absorbed into the rest of the body. But mine had no vertebrae and was cut off, so much for being like Chandre Oram. :(
pat5168 6 months ago
If Theory is the closest thing to certainty, then explain laws. Gravity is a law, not a theory. Evolution is near fact, but it is not fact however close. I personally don't believe in evolution, but I respect those who do and I find it to be very fascinating. Love your vids :]
TheAntiochus 6 months ago
@TheAntiochus Laws are applicable to anything, gravity has still not explained what makes things attracted to one another, so in terms of explanation, it is not as good a theory as evolution, but in terms of experimental observations, gravity is much more evident than evolution. Simply because evolution on the macro scale takes a long period of time for the new genomes to be duplicated and made more beneficial since it requires much accumulation of benefits made with natural selection.
pat5168 5 months ago
i fucking hate the people who dislikes, i would like to ask them what they think about this term.
Zenemigg 6 months ago
Hey Dean, I have a good understanding of evolution and natural selection which leads me to this thought:
It seems that natural selection does not really apply to humans anymore. We can deal with most genetic defects (defects that a wild animal would likely die from). Therefor we survive to pass them on.
this leads me to wonder what this means for our species. Are we going to evolve to become weaker?
This has been on my mind lately and I was hoping you (or anybody) had some input.
henrytargett 6 months ago
@xXDjRiffRaftXx because they can fly from predators ?
unowhat2do 6 months ago
Subhanallah
CasinoJohnson 6 months ago
This will probably disperse the urban myth of cow-tipping but bovine herds are only as fast as their slowest members but in times of danger the faster members sprint and leave the slow behind. A cruel but effective way to remove the "slowness gene" from the herd. This has the side effect of making herds run from anything not a cow. And because they all ways have at least one awake at night it is impossible to sneak up on them. The only way to cow-tip is to set up the whole scenario
004rd 6 months ago
If what you say is true that by natural selection animals evolved over time to suit their environment, and popular belief is that man evolved from monkeys. How do you explain the existence of monkey's today? Should they not be extinct?
mainakoshi 6 months ago
@mainakoshi Humans didnt evolve from monkeys, Evolution says we came from a primate ancestor, not a modern monkey or ape. (Some modern primates are: chimps, gorillas, baboons, lemurs, gibbons, and humans. None is a descendant of another.)
belal81195 6 months ago
@mainakoshi We didn't evolve from monkeys. And monkey is a very general term. Our closest relative in the tree of life are chimpanzees, but we did not evolve from them. It's like a family tree. Chimpanzees and humans are brothers, if you will, and we had one common ancestor which evolved into both of us. And that common ancestor that we and chimpanzees share had a brother species which later became gorillas and orangutans, it goes on like that so the species list goes like 1>2>4>8>16>32>64>etc
pat5168 6 months ago
@xXDjRiffRaftXx
they had no natural enemies
I like how you look smart by actually being stupid, it's evolution I guess.
"Flamingoes get their pink or orange color from the carotenoid pigments found in the foods they eat."
ubiozmiec 6 months ago
yo
soondooboo1 6 months ago
@Alastor359 You don't have to believe in it, but that does make you fall into the deliberately stupid category. Like I said before - what would you think of me if I didn't 'believe' in gravity, or didn't 'believe' the earth goes around the sun, or didn't 'believe' that the earth is round.
OccasionallyEpic 6 months ago
i have a third nipple mutation. hopefully nature will favour me. the girls seem to like it.
catalazer 6 months ago
Adaptation within a species, and loss of gentic information that leads to some unique capabilities does not prove evolution. In fact that's backwards. Show me a poodle turn into a wolf, and then you'll have my attention.
mrwagler23 6 months ago
We know so little.
Evolution is a grand theory... but have you ever noticed that evolutionists kept looking for the missing link until they 'found' it? Creationists are the ones being brainwashed? We are so taught to believe in evolution.
I suspect that the new genome work will reveal a mechanism that shows how the environment affects the expression of genes and ultimately inheritance. What will you believe then? Hint... the answer must start with an "E"...
Maybe Bert just made it that way.
tomson600 6 months ago
Well who made the monkeys that evolved personally i believe in Creationism followed by Evolution...Cause let's face it ... it had to start somewhere
yassodude 6 months ago
@yassodude Who made god? Saying a god is eternal is just as rational, if not less, than saying that our universe is eternal. Our universe does not need a God for everything to play out the way it is.
cooleobrad1337 5 months ago
@cooleobrad1337 Dude , dont be so close-minded , if you keep an open mind you'll see something's wrong with evolution , ok , so who made the Single Cell organisms with such complexity that made them able to evolve in to us ... ok you dont like it , Who made the Big Bang , .. Who coded our DNA . who created our DNA to be Coded , who designed our digestive system , who designed our anatomy , who made sure that trees give oxygen so we can breath , who made sure theres everything we need on earth?
yassodude 5 months ago
@yassodude I don't consider myself close-minded and I certainly don't try to be. And you still didn't answer my question, "who made god" You are so hung up on who made all these things, but you can't explain the creation of the creator. You could be entirely right but, imo a god does not exist. No one made us, we can't explain how or why our universe was created, or why anything even exists. But slapping "god did it" to everything you don't understand doesn't mean you are right.
cooleobrad1337 5 months ago
@yassodude your point completely contradicts itself... who created God?
CascadeZ 5 months ago
@CascadeZ omg! dude , thats the point , nobody created god , we cant and wont know anything about it and thats the big idea , i wont rant and Glorify gd now so people wont call me a preacher but the idea of GOD is that he is above time , anyway concenrning your comment , it only proves my idea , if you ask who made god , then you agree with me , something had to make everything , you cant expect life to just pop up , so in a way , even if you dont agree , were on the same side .
yassodude 5 months ago
@yassodude Life never popped up out of no-where. I don't even want to know where you heard that. If everything has a beginning, then where did god come from? You can't say that he was always there. How do you know that the universe was always there? And there has never been any evidence presented of him. You have to have evidence for extraordinary claims. Its how everything works.
SuperXpress2 5 months ago
@SuperXpress2 im sorry but it just makes you look stupid when you deny something i said without rectifying or justifying it , "Lije never popped out of no-where' , ok then enlighten me , where did the first single cell organism come from , and wtf are saying god had to start somewhere . IF you believe in god you know he didnt have to start , for you thats another matter though.
yassodude 5 months ago
@yassodude Well don't ask me that stuff, ask a scientist or biologist. I admit that I don't know the answer. So what? Maybe you don't know what science is. I'll tell you. Science is a process of examining and studying substances or/and theories. Thanks to science, we understand most of the things around us. But rational scientific evidence and understanding doesn't align well with irrational religious faith. What evidence do you have of god anyway? Science proved evolution. Why refuse it?:)
SuperXpress2 5 months ago
@SuperXpress2 Actually something can come from nothing.
xProdiigyy 5 months ago