The Great Transitions in Evolution

[SuperDogbrown]

i enjoyed this vid

[SuperDogbrown]

good work here

[sydtocreation]

CREATIONISM promotes pedophilia, rape, incest, racism, child sacrifices, sexism and bestiality. How is that the better alturnative. Better a animal than a monster.

[ScottyDavid1964]

@tnafguy You need to improve your grade 2 education,you ignorant hill billy!!!!

[zencat999]

shubins lecture actually starts at about 5:45 or so.

too bad about all the intro....wast of time.

[BOULDERDP]

As usual, the only people who don't believe in Darwin are people who's power and $ is threatened by it (ie organized religion getting followers and donations)

[oneki]

a bit painful. can someone explain the etiquette of intorducing someone one who introduce soneone who introduces someone who finally introduces the real speaker. it is painful,but get repeated over and over again.

[AveryStover]

@saynotodarwin Doesn't matter if you're educated, You're still retarded.

[AveryStover]

@saynotodarwin You... Are quite retarded....

[sage0857]

still no christian can answer my question, why is it scientist can find fossils millions of years old yet they cant find a six thousand year old boat or better yet a two thousand year old cross.

[sandykramer1]

@sage0857

I will try to answer your questions: The dating methods used to date fossils are erroneous. While there are purported to be myriad transitional forms and fossils, the cross to which you are making reference (that of Jesus) and the boat (which I assume is to be Noah's ark) are unique. Allow yourself the opportunity to peruse some writings explaining intelligent design.

[TomFynn]

@sandykramer1

The cross and the ark are unique BS.

Intelligent design is religion dressed up in vaguely scientific sounding mumbo jumbo.

Allow yourself the opportunity to peruse some writing on evolution. Jerry Coyne, PZ Myers, Richard Dawkins.

PS: All dating methods are erroneous. According to Grotzinger et al. (1995), the Precambrian/Cambrian boundary 543 million years ago can only be estimated to within 1 million years.

[MrTruthAddict]

@sandykramer1 Go watch Dr. Francis collins' video called "The Language of God." Betting on ID is a major fail

[BillA1016]

@sandykramer1 Lol, yeah, the dating methods are erroneous... Do you honestly believe that ID has more evidence than evolution? Evolution has TONS of evidence; ID has absolutely nothing. ID is a myth being promoted by religious groups on a completely false premise.

[psofic]

Great stuff !

*very annoying that people with no interest in the subject post nonsense in science videos

[flounderize]

@saynotodarwin I am still waiting for the post where you admit you have been pulling everyone´s leg for months and made all of us believe you are three centuries behind in your approach to the physiology of life... C´mon, admit you are joking (using that name, to start with)

[jdquarg]

@saynotodarwin Whatever dude, submit a paper for peer review, get a name for self in the field of academia, then you are off for your Noble prize. Otherwise you just just talking trash.

Many of the Anti-Darwin camps, have no college, no body of work, no creds. With the wonder of Youtube it has given some fame, empty, clueless, fame, but then research is quite hard, and cutesy remarks like yours only reveal your true character.

[beebobox]

@jdquarg he's clearly a troll, he tags himself as a science professor, at an ivy league collage and his interests is evolution science.

he's either trying to annoy overzealous atheist commentors or to lure in the religious crowd, sorta lame either way :)

[jdquarg]

@beebobox

I quite agree!

[gamesbok]

@saynotodarwin Apart from Eosimias sinensis, the Aegyptopithecus zeuxis, Proconsul africanus, Afropithecus turkanensis, Turkanapithecus kalakolensis, Sivapithecus indicus, hecus bambolii, Lufengpithecus lufengensis, Sahelanthropus tchadensis, Orrorin tugenensis, Ardipithecus ramidus, Australopithecus afarensis, Kenyanthropus platyops, Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus bahrelghazali, lopithecus africanus, Paranthropus aethiopicus, Homo Erectus and Homo Habilis?

[colourmegone]

Wonderful, I can envision the transition actually occurring. This fish must have been a bottom feeder which spent most of its time moving along the mud. Eventually it would develop 'feet', that is its forelimbs would adapt to pulling along rather than propelling it through the water, rather like the Walking Catfish. Since this is an extant creature it might serve to give an actual, living example of evolution in action.

[gamesbok]

@saynotodarwin • You mean the Eosimias sinensis, the Aegyptopithecus zeuxis, Proconsul africanus, Afropithecus turkanensis, Turkanapithecus kalakolensis, Sivapithecus indicus, hecus bambolii, Lufengpithecus lufengensis, Sahelanthropus tchadensis, Orrorin tugenensis, Ardipithecus ramidus, Australopithecus afarensis, Kenyanthropus platyops, Australopithecus afarensis, Australopithecus bahrelghazali, lopithecus africanus, Paranthropus aethiopicus, Homo Erectus and Homo Habilis?

[themeangirl333]

@saynotodarwin

Done... that comment is buried.

[Munro1Man]

Grow up silly.

[Munro1Man]

Hell was invented to scare children and fools. Still working after over 2000 years.

[ScientiaVeritasEtLux]

wow, actually dozens of specimens, and thousands of individual fossils have been found which demonstrate a mosaic of non-human ape and human traits. You've got your head in the ground.

[coffinperson]

EVIL - LUTION - How Embarrassing! (More Questions Evos Cannot Answer): watch?v=5W763lQR0tU

[ScientiaVeritasEtLux]

lol. evolutionary biologists can answer those questions. Except when comments are blocked like they are on that video. Then they can't. Censorship is not a valid form of argument

[krrrruptidsoless]

@saynotodarwin

Animals are smarter than evolution. Since they recreated humans.

[krrrruptidsoless]

I still can't figure how they can live on a planet that is full of dirt and yet not realize all the dirt came from death of plants and animals. And that all the planets are now dormant except earth. When earth dies another planet will have life. How long in between planet life is a ?

Earth is falling behind on technological advantage over other planets because of religions and sciences backed by governments. This argument is solved yet these people that argue it are demeaning truth and life.

[Cyraside]

@saynotodarwin We've been through this before with you religious idiots who need an imaginary surrogate parent or who'll self destruct. The Sun does not revolve around the Earth. Nature does not revolve around man. We weren't intended nor will anything miss us when we're gone. The stars look down, they don't care. Original sin never happened, thus rendering your fairy-tale worldview inaccurate and nearly useless aside from allegorical literature. It's best to realize your mortality now. Peace.

[krrrruptidsoless]

@Cyraside

Original sin was when humans took on breeding for themselves. Instead of continuing to be born from the animals that made us. That is also blasphemy. Our original surrogate animal is extinct. Which is the reason no one can find god. Monkeys and apes were the first experiments in the animals breeding trying to re create us. Neandrethals and such are from backbreeding. The second sin is when we turned against animals and started hunting and eating them. Whatever. Yaks, musk ox

[sephirotXD]

hahahahahaha....

what an ignorant.

[chuyaventuras]

I can´t almost believe that such stupidities are taught at University of California Berkeley, it is unbelievable, what a shame, what a way to loose time

[jdquarg]

@saynotodarwin

I am quite sure your intelligent and capable of writing a paper where you can give an alternative to the theory of evolution." In consideration of the comments you have left in previous videos you must have at least a full entire book of useful insight.

I don't know why you allow yourself to be handicapped by the 500 comment limit. I would think a person of your intellect could easily write a paper that can peer reviewed by your peers to prove your theory.

Go for it!

[Gnamakala]

every religion is a bullshit!! fear is the creator of them. throughout our history we always explained things we couldnt understand wid god... and if somebody had a logical answer, he was killed in the name of god... and later on mankind ALWAYZ found out that those people were right. literally everything has a logical answer and SCIENCE will answer them all sooner or later. its just the matter of time

[krrrruptidsoless]

@Gnamakala

Some day they will find they are wrong. How many grains of sand do we need to find. In the right place and right shape. To complete the knowledge so we can get out of the whys and why nots. Technology needs to advance. All these arguments are slowing technology.

[Gnamakala]

'evolution doesnt exist'...

stupid primitive uneducated jerks! i feel very sorry for you. you are failure of mankind

[krrrruptidsoless]

@Gnamakala

Why do humans all look different then. They haven't quit evolving. Deniers and believers are in the same boat. Neither one knows.

[jomen112]

Before saying "evolution does not exists" why not find out what it is about first?

Evolution is the idea that design is possible to achieve by "bottom up" means, i.e. finding a solution to a problem from below by iteration with a dumb mechanical search process.

That such process exist has been shown in empirical observations, stated as mathematical facts. It has been tested in simulations and as a result it is now used in R&D to improve design beyond human capabilities.

[Cyraside]

Only thing you need to be "saved" from is your own gullibility. Santa-Christ never existed. It's a lie to make you feel good. Real historians know.

[amtpictures]

oh thou shall burn-eth in hell-eth. unless thou would want-eth to be saved-eth by the ol' mighty lord-eth jesus christ-eth. praise the lord-ah, for he will come down-ah and save everyone of us-ah! hallelujah hallelujah, praise the lord-ah! let me be rid of sin-ah! ..... hee-hee shawmoan-ah!

[amtpictures]

sayyestodarwin ... you know you wanna !

[FlyingEvolutionist59]

saynotodarwin: Do you ever offer anything constructive to say or troll from video to video offering than a poor excuse for pseudointellectual insight?

[VoteNixon2008]

how so?

[Tony07UK]

Evolution is a pretty outlandish claim! Land animals walking into the sea ... to become whales? Fish walking out of the sea ... to become humans? Yes, read that again - the claims of so-called educated people! The scientific method doesn't even corroborate with any of these fanciful theories.

[RabidApe]

"Evolution is a pretty outlandish claim! "

for the sake of clarity, please identify what you are arguing against. PLEASE, briefly describe the theory of evolution as understood by modern biologists. THEN explain which part of the theory you don't agree with and why.

"Land animals walking into the sea ... to become whales? Fish walking out of the sea ... to become humans?"

Gross oversimplification. Evolution has no foresight or intent.

[Tony07UK]

If 'Evolution has no foresight or intent' ... how can something as complex and functional as the human eye be part of a living being, or the brain which does the seeing. It's like saying a camera has been built by random chance for no purpose.

[RabidApe]

"It's like saying a camera has been built by random chance for no purpose. "

Again, you illustrate your ignorance.

Ignorance is no crime, but you seriously need to do some reading from reliable sources.

MUTATIONS can be random, but SELECTION is not.

Nobody is saying these things "just appeared". Your straw men will do you no good here.

"Dawkins Makes an Eye":

watch?v=lEKyqIJkuDQ

[salinagrrrl69]

The evolution of the eye has been seriously investigated and studied. The fossil record details it now that there is enuff of it to show the story thru a billion years. It started with only light sensitive cells for sensery response giving that organism the advantage in its enviroment and went from there.

[FreeThought10]

Well, of course you are the only one who knows your own subconsciousness, but like I said, the mind is both, because both consist on who you are. The only difference is that you can't control your subconsciousness.

I think it would be an "I" for both, as they are one thing, and that is your mind, or yourself. The problem is that most of the time, the subconsciousness is unknown even to ourselves.

[FreeThought10]

No, we can control the conscious part of the mind, and we can't control the subconscious part of the mind; however, both, the conscious and subconscious, are the the whole mind, or like I call it, yourself. The reason is because we don't have the same subconscious. We can also add the will, where sometime it can't be control.

[RabidApe]

the actual speech starts at 5:50

(do we really need an introduction to the introduction to the introduction...?)

[Tony07UK]

This is science at it's best! A lot of pretentious waffle .. a virtually unending appraisal of scholarships, qualifications and endorsements in an attempt to justify a weak theory with poor evidence. Listening intently to this lecture, waiting for the real 'meat' of the evidence became quite boring - don't know how the audience managed to stay awake!

[RabidApe]

"weak theory with poor evidence."

If you'd only pull your head out of the sand, you'd realize what a fucktard you are.

I have eviscerated your other outlandish claims on this video.

DO YOUR FUCKING HOMEWORK, and address them, or be ignored.

The choice is yours.

Good day.

[Neanderthalcouzin]

@RabidApe Introducers practically bring relish to debates and lectures. After seeing so many damn prolonged intros I decided if I ever do an intro in such a scenario, it will be no longer than 30 seconds.

[Necco34]

Its funny, I argue with my professor all the time about this, finding a unique fossil, or species, and then claiming it is a transitional fossil, with nothing more than a hypothetical guess fueled with a desire to prop up Darwin's flawed evolutionary theory. There is no evidence for it, but we simply agree to disagree about it. I really don't know why all this energy is being spent on such a flawed theory.

[magick205]

"energy is being spent on such a flawed theory" Well for one, while there are things we don't understand, it is supported by a huge amount of data from many disciplines. While creationism, in all its forms is supported by nothing more than the collected oral histories of bronze age herding cultures. This is exactly why it must be taught: to educate the ignorant. The role it plays in everyday life. As a mexican, you see its impact in a much more personal way right now.

[Necco34]

your lack of insight is only outweighed by your lack of insight. Just because a host of individuals agree with a world view, does not make this world view correct, no matter how white their coats are. This is called an appeal to authority, which many people are still blindly led by. If you honestly spent time in a scientific field you would realize that it really is no different than a religious belief.

[Arfalarf]

How many grammatical errors can YOU find in this sentence?

"your lack of insight is only outweighted by your lack of insight."

I count two, plus one conceptual absurdity.

[Necco34]

Oh so it's a spelling contest, I figure with your English degree you would have realized that the "conceptual absurdity" is actually a literary quote made in a conversation between Emerson and an executive. You show a lack of knowledge on in various disciplines, so how could I even begin to entertain you.

[magick205]

Considering the fact that I do indeed work in the life sciences, the latter half of your argument is render moot. Additionally, since monotheists out number professionals in the life sciences by a wide margin your argument from "authority" also falls flat on it's face. Science, by its very nature is subject to change. Religion, as "revealed" is static and therefore blind. It reveals nothing and calls for a closing of the mind to reality. Just more fail. Got anything better?

[amtpictures]

Necco34, has any evolutionary bioligists stated that evolution by natural selection is a fact...no. They go on this theory because it has the most plausible explanation by any means, they have stated that this is most likely to be the way things happened but they are not 100% fully sure but evidence and fossil data strongly sugests this!

[amtpictures]

Creationists, religious, pagan, cult, sect etc ritiuals all point to astrology psuedo-science as their evidence (im using the word evidence as to represents their theories even though 'evidence' in their world is no more than a series of laughable folk tales outdated by historical facts

[amtpictures]

...which yet again, their age old belief system was based on star signs/constellations etc). Science is constantly testing its evidence and its data, spending billions trying to find answers to the mysteries that surround us. Dont you think the evolution of the human brain has reached a somewhat pinnacle of intelligence in which we are intelectually inquisitive, thriving for answers.... or we can sit back and say "meh... god created everything, thats good enough for me" ????

[amtpictures]

*excuse my spelling mistakes, I was typing that way too fast*

[gamesbok]

@magick205 Herding wasn't their only livelyhood. They also maxed out their credit with the Egyptians and deliberately defaulted. Read Exodus, and Numbers if you want the pillage and looting.

[infinit888]

"i cannot believe into what darwin said......"

Yes we know because you are too stupid to grasp what he said to begin with. Now go promenade your ignorance elsewhere.

[tk0inthefirst38]

Evolution is a lie from the pit of hell.

[FreeThought10]

And hell is a fallacy that religious people create to make you fear.

[jaymighty197]

Do you believe that there is good and bad?Yes or No!Don't respond with anything but yes or no.If you can not do this I will not respond.

[FreeThought10]

Yes there is, but what the heck this has to do with hell. Hell was created for fear and a sense of justice. Nature and reality don't follow such things, only us. Is the same thing saying: "I wish you were dead now." Which can be a reason for hate; however, the reality is that that person you hate will not die now. What we want to believe is not the same thing as the things that we know.

[jaymighty197]

Oh! That's it,one out of every one person doesn't die,now I get it,reincarnation.Faith is not assuming,it's knowing,not vice versa.

[FreeThought10]

There is no evidence of any afterlife, for now. Faith is believing without seeing, not knowledge.

[enigma067]

FreeThought10, Your perspective is one of ignorance. What is the purpose of the brain? Its purpose is to allow something not of the physical to interact with the physical world. When we get angry at each other we often call our selves "God". "God", what did you do that for? It is because we all know on a subconscious level we are part of a collective consciousness.

[FreeThought10]

The brain is just an organ, you mean the mind. The mind is the one who makes us interact with the world, and prove our existence in this materialistic world. Of course, we get angry because we don't have the things we want or things are not the way we would like it to be. But where does the theist god come here? Moreover, we are not gods, we are part of god, if we see it in a pantheistic point of view. Of course is the subconsciousness, as the mind holds both, the conscious and subconscious.

[FreeThought10]

I wish to add:

We are the mind, that's who we are.

[alohawg]

Guess you'll have to wait till you die to get your proof. The draw back is that it's then too late to change your view and you are left to suffer the consequences eternally. Good luck with that smart guy.

[FreeThought10]

Proof after I die? Hmmm, I doubt it. Though I don't really know what happens after I die, I will consider that think you "know". The big question is: "How do you know?"

The Bible is not an answer, as is an edited book. Moreover, the evidence of hell and heaven are very low indeed. Another question that runs through my mind is: "How do you know I will suffer?"

What if this god is not your god, and send you to hell for worshiping the wrong god? I will consider that ironic.:)

[WeedGreenPowerRanger]

"Do you believe that there is good and bad?Yes or No!Don't respond with anything but yes or no."

A loaded question if I ever saw one. People who try to boil your answer down to a "YES OR NO!" without any kind of gray area in between usually aren't smart enough to realize that there is no true black or true white.

YES, I believe that there is a good and bad. However, I also believe that they are simply a point of view. This doesn't negate their existence, it simply removes your fundamentalism.

[ytmoog]

"the transition fossils haven't been found"

Thousands have been found, like Tiktallik as was mentioned.

You also seem lost as to what a mutation is.

A mutation is a mistake made while a cell is copying DNA.

And the majority are neutral, they make no difference.

Which is a good thing as on average there are 140 mutations made in the human genome every time it is copied.

And yes, there are thousands of documented beneficial mutations in many species, including humans.

[Tony07UK]

Mutations in DNA do not produce anything new. Document or give reference to any beneficial mutation which has resulted in something new. If the connections on a computer motherboard are tampered with, however slight and random modifications made ... you're not going to be in business for very long! Damage to DNA by radiation or any other means is detrimental and offspring will not be enhanced.

[RabidApe]

"Document or give reference to any beneficial mutation which has resulted in something new."

Your ignorance is astounding.

Some examples of beneficial mutations:

-peppered moths changing color over time

-lactose tolerance in humans

-nylon-eating bacteria

-the mutation that causes sickle-cell anemia ALSO confers resistance to malaria. This is "beneficial" if you live somewhere where malaria is a serious problem

Those came off of the top of my head, but you can look them up. Will you?

[Tony07UK]

A moth is still a moth .. ha! ha! So what mutations produce a different species .. you don't seem to understand the purpose of DNA or its function.

[RabidApe]

"A moth is still a moth .. ha! ha! So what mutations produce a different species."

And now you're moving the goalpost. You asked for a beneficial mutation. I provided several. You change the subject. Typical.

[RabidApe]

"you don't seem to understand the purpose of DNA or its function"

Non-sequitur, and actually not true.

But for the sake of argument, let's pretend I don't.

What is the purpose of DNA? What is it's function?

(why are those two separate questions?)

Enlighten me, wise one.

[VoteNixon2008]

What do you mean we don't understand DNA? I've got a molecular biologist on one side of me and a regular old geneticist at the lab. Upstairs there's a dozen post docs from various specialties and backgrounds and they would not agree with you.

Hell not even Behe would agree with you

[ytmoog]

"Mutations in DNA do not produce anything new."

They can, do and have done so.

The nylonase gene was a result of two mutations.

The gene itself was new.

[werecow2003]

Oh bollocks. I refer you to the nylon and TNT bugs, bacterial and viral resistance to antibiotics, as well as insect resistance to pesticides and countless observations of speciation in progress in the wild and in the lab. Evolution, as change between successive generations of organisms over time, is a fact. Evolution theory explains it to a tee. Deal with it.

[methinxaweezil]

"the transition fossils haven't been found"

Why didn't you watch the video? Neil Shubin dug up Tiktaalik Roseae, just one example of hundreds... i.e., you are wrong.

"every time there was a mutation it would cripple the mutant"

You can evolve a bacteria's resistance to an antibiotic in a petri dish at home... i.e., you are wrong.

[macnutz]

That is the problem with these ignorant drive by commentators, they don't watch or attempt to understand the things they think they disagree with. Their disagreements are political, personal, or religious in nature so they don't bother with the real world facts. Facts are terribly inconvienent when trying to 'prove' an irrational position.

The slo wit who says "evolution sucks ass" doesn't know enough to put forth a real argument. Yet he/she is certain of their know nothing position.

[methinxaweezil]

"Facts are terribly inconvienent when trying to 'prove' an irrational position."

Haha, well said.

[Tony07UK]

No facts .. just unscientific unproven theories.

[Tony07UK]

A bacteria ... remains a bacteria - it doesn't evolve into a different species.

[ytmoog]

"A bacteria ... remains a bacteria - it doesn't evolve into a different species"

'strain' not 'species'...

There are different strains of bacteria.

[Tony07UK]

... and none evolve into anything higher up the scale of complex living things. Bacteria remain bacteria ... no advancement to develop limbs, eyes or a brain.

[RabidApe]

No scientist claims that those kind of changes will happen over the course of a single human lifetime.

Are you one of those people who thinks the universe is less than 10,000 years old?

[adolthitler]

=scientists at that time had inmense bigotry=

True Darwin was a christian and held back his theory for many years because of his christian bigotry. Well spotted and pointed out, kaball0d0rad0!

[methinxaweezil]

"he didn't know there were microscopic organisms"

If by microscopic organisms you mean organisms you can see with a microscope... yes he did. The microscope was invented in 1595. Did he know every detail of the cell? No. Do we know every detail of the cell today? No. Does your opinion matter in the face of the overwhelming evidence? No.

[nigerlover18]

Ok, so Darwin obviously didn't know all there is to know. His own words only provide a framework that scientists have since expanded upon immensely with a huge amount of success. Look it up sometime. Being "darwinist" doesnt mean you think the dude knew everything

[mbruck77]

If you have evidence to disprove the theory of natural selection the next Nobel Prize is yours. So go ahead, publish your findings.

[Tony07UK]

There is no evidence to prove the theory of so-called 'natural selection' in the first place. It's only a theory not a proven fact .. because of ... lack of evidence!

[RabidApe]

"It's only a theory not a proven fact"

Spoken like a true ignoramus.

The fact that you say "only a theory" reveals that you either don't know the difference between the scientific and colloquial definitions of "theory", or merely hope that whoever reads your comment does not.

Fail.

[mbruck77]

You are misinformed about how science works. Scientific theories are models that describe the available evidence and make predictions from there. There is no such thing as proof in science, only mathematics deal in proofs.

[Tony07UK]

... we already know this

[fauyd]

This has to be a troll, no one is this stupid.

[S2Cents]

Booo. Ahh you suck. And is that your picture? Too bad, pretty trash. Suck that fag.

[ytmoog]

"that is what i am saying his foundattions have been debunked"

He did not know about DNA either.

But evidence from DNA shows very clearly how evolution works, and happened.

Also at his time there were very few fossils found.

Today there are a massive number which have been discovered.

All of which show evolution over time.

The central idea is correct and has been shown to be correct by a vast amount of evidence accumulated over the last century.

[Tony07UK]

DNA shows that kinds only reproduce after their own kind - the DNA of different species is distinct and separate ... no transitional DNA and no transitional fossils. Evolution theory fails for lack of scientific evidence.

[RabidApe]

"DNA shows that kinds only reproduce after their own kind"

Point me towards, and/or explain yourself, what the scientific definition of "kind" is. Bonus points if the url ends in edu or comes from a peer-reviewed journal.

"the DNA of different species is distinct and separate"

Sure, if you look at the sequence as a whole - but you'll also find similarities.

You can ALSO say "the DNA of different phyla is distinct and separate" or "DNA of different individuals is distinct and separate"...

[adolthitler]

=this theory clearly puts some groups as more evolved=

If we all evolved from the first life form, then we all have evolved to fill our niches. There is no more evolved person, just animals and plants that are evolved for certain environments. The environments change and so we all keep evolving. There will not be a peak where evolution stops.

Chimpanzees live different lives than us in a different environment and thats why they are different.

[Tony07UK]

Chimpanzees live different lives ... basically because of their DNA. Simple!

[mbruck77]

Change their environment and they will change.

Check the Wikipedia entry for 'Mexican tetra' for a good example how that works.

[combatives]

kaball0d0rad0,

You are either an uneducated idiot or a troll. either way I hope you enjoy your intellectual vacuum.

[methinxaweezil]

"he didn't know maggets were spawned by bacteria"

Sheer fractal dumbassitude. So exquisitely stupid it's brilliant.

[macnutz]

Yo, silly rabbit. Maggots are not spawned by bacteria. They emerge from eggs laid, oddly enough, by flies. Maggots are larval flies, not bacteria.

You deny something that you haven't the slightest understanding of. Your racial excuse for your ignorance is laughable.

Darwin lived at a time when "nigger" was said openly, so Darwin must have been a bigot and his work is therefore to be ignored???

That is the single dumbest excuse for ignorance I have ever heard.

[Baronesa1980]

ohhhh fast ape!!!