Whale Evolution 2of5

[crazy77iii]

There is no reason for a Wolf like land Mammal to change it's normal habbits of land hunting into shallow water hunting to support this Stupiod Claim of Whale Evolution... Come one people!??? Quite believing all of the lies here!?

[djarm67]

@crazy77iii Exploitation of an ecological niche is a definite advantage that can be selected for.

[crazy77iii]

@djarm67 Stop trying to find falascious Justification "why" you "Believe" in this Crap! There is No reason for a Land mammal to Venture to the Sea when they have NO preassure to do so! There is NO proof that this would happen other than your "Selection" Belief comment above...........

[djarm67]

@crazy77iii Exploitation of an ecological niche is a definite advantage that can be selected for.

[crazy77iii]

@djarm67 Once again, there was/is/will never be reason for a Carnivorous Mammal to travel to the sea to hunt for food. It's not even typical of animals today to venture that far out of their habitat to look for food. Tey typically find differnt foods to eat in their regional niche. These fossils are all found in areas of desert that once again, is [Assumed] to have been a sea or body of water. There is only proof that there Was Water there once at one point. Doesn't mean a Preexisting Sea.

[confettibrains]

I lol'd when they had to add a growl after revealing each bone they found.

"Then we found a vertebrae"

*RROAARR*

"Then we found a rib bone"

*RRAWWWRR*

"Then we found a collar bone"

*RRAWWWRR*

[vonloessl]

Oh my goodness sooooo over dramatized, It kind of takes away from any scientific confidence I would have had in the video!



[Movies4Christ]

The fact that this animal drank fresh water certainly implies proximity to a reliable fresh water source, as mentioned in the video at 06:00. But by the same token, any reliable fresh water source would remove selective evolutionary pressure, since abundant fresh water would also result in abundant plant life (aka food).

This theory is full of holes...

I'll keep watching...

[Caradepato2]

Well, yes there are some holes in it, i agree. and your point about freshwater is very varied. There are, however, other pressures that can force it in to semi-aquaticy. competition from other carnivores, perhaps, that led to adaptation to that specific charactaristics. then again, this is a theory and like all other science, could be proven to be very wrong. thats what makes it science.

[Caradepato2]

@Movies4Christ i mean valid, not varid. typo.

[Movies4Christ]

What is the skeleton at 08:00 ?

He says its "based on the one he found". What does that mean? Another reconstruction ?

[thespybreaker]

This is nonsense day dreaming. Humans have been swimming and fishing for thousands of years. We should be finding mermaids then..

[TLOZfreak]

@thespybreaker Again, Somebody parading his ignorance as if it were evidence against evolution.. Somehow people think they can dismiss entire decades of biology from the comfort of their computer

[thespybreaker]

@TLOZfreak other than cheap insults, you do not bring up a single counter argument which proves that the only person who is taking comfort of their computer is you.

[oppozed1]

@thespybreaker You don't understand it at all, behaviour does not drive evolution environment does.

Random mutations which are either beneficial in the environment or not. If beneficial and in fact an improvement on the existing animal giving the animal with the random mutation a better chance to survive and breed than that mutation will be passed on to it's offspring.

With this better survival chance the offspring then produce even more offspring and so on till there are many like it.

[crazy77iii]

@oppozed1 ANswer me this.... at 0:08 through 0.12 the narrorator Verbly admits that the Pakicetus was a Slow and Clumbsy swimmer. how would they be able to devolpe the needed evolving if they would have most likley become eatten when in the water like the Video Suggests? How could they have offspring if they were on Land more than water IF they would have been slow and clumbsy? This "Poor Design" as the video states, would ahve prevented Evolution into a sea Creature for fear of Death in water..

[crazy77iii]

@oppozed1 Why would a Creature Contunie going into the water if it would have been slow and clumbsy. These Videos are Such BS! It makes the event seem so seamless in process. Whcih the only thing that this proves is that Science for the TofE will never look at a find from any other perspective than it's part of Evolution. They throw Millions of years ago around like they actually have proof of it!? LOL

[oppozed1]

@thespybreaker In the instance where a random mutation gives a considerably better chance to survive and thus breed then in X amount of time the animals with the mutation will eventually outnumber those without it due to greater survival and reproduction rates.

Once they outnumber those without the mutation then the chances of an animal breeding with an animal with the mutation are better than even. From there the animal without the mutation will disappear.

Thus they have evolved.

[shadowmax889]

@thespybreaker we do not fish under the water primordialy and we are not fishing in a 1.000.000 years period under the water, like Otters

[thespybreaker]

@shadowmax889 why do you have to choose the magical number of "million" - somehow this vague passage of time proves everything. Evolutionists allows have to put their claims under "millions" of years because there is absolutely no way to prove what happens in these "millions" of years. How convenient.

[shadowmax889]

@thespybreaker We do not use 1 million as magical, if a creature took 1.000.000 years so be it, if another took 500.000, so be it, if anothe took 6.000 years so be it. We just look the evidence for each creature. That is the problem with you creationist you have your conclutions first (bible) and then try look the evidence that fit, we scientist took the eviden and then make the conclusion. Humans do not turn in to mermaids because it was no selective presure for being acuatic mamals like whales

[OrthodoxDarwinist]

Apparently they managed to tell that Ambulocetans natans drank freshwater since salt and freshwater have different isotopic ratios of oxygen, and the fossil teeth from the earliest transitional fossils, making up the evolutionary step towards whales, have lower ratios of heavy oxygen to light oxygen. Later fossil teeth have higher ratios of heavy oxygen to light oxygen, indicating they drank salt water. This supports the idea that whales evolved from terrestrial inhabitants.

[12ock]

id say continental drift.... or water world

[ShalloeThought]

from 50 mil years ago a scrap of bone was found .... one piece of bone cannot be the end of its own fossil record .. it is the beginning and end of the record of itself.... when did one piece of bone disappear ... 

[ShalloeThought]

that rebuilt skeleton seems not to have much in common with the scraps of bones found

[twilightguardian]

@ShalloeThought

The fragments of Pakicetus was found in the late 70's. In 2001 another, more complete skeleton of the animal was found providing more than just part of a skull and part of a jaw. Same goes for other animals. But for those who don't have that much information, they make educated guesses based on what they already know from other animals. If they are proven wrong in their guess when more bones are found, it's not a big deal.

[ShalloeThought]

pakicetus paddles like a dog .... all they have is a bit of anterior scull with a whale like ear bone .... creationist sympathies

[Paumonsu]

@EternalSeptic77 Everything around you is thanks to science. So STFU and accept religion is plain retarded.

[freethinker143]

@EternalSeptic77 The scientists are the people who have worked their asses off to get us where we are today. The Church and people of religious faith have fought them tooth and nail ever since Galileo.Your ignorance is most displeasing. Perhaps you would like to go back to time before modern science ,a time when the church ruled supreme like the Dark Ages.

[ScienceFan1859]

@EternalSeptic77 great name...means "always full of crap" were you trying for skeptic, maybe LOL

[CWJacksBirthday]

One thing I dislike about documentaries like these is their phrasing which often implies that the animal put conscious effort into its evolution.

[Biankito]

@CWJacksBirthday Why not? are you implying were the only ones with a consciousness to drive our future? all animals will do what they can to survive and survival will lead to their evolution if it is so required.

When you deprive an animal of food, it will attempt to look for it elsewhere, no matter where that elsewhere is.

[Siilvos]

People - stop with the complaints of the "dramatic" style of the video. It makes it more appealing to a larger audience which is exactly what the public needs, the solid information is still there. If you want nothing but the bland details, read a science journal.

[Elu112]

The dumbing down and annoying sounds make it almost impossible to watch. It is interesting but the drama pisses me off. They should bring back the old style documentaries like they used to have on the Discovery channel and National Geographic. But instead they create shows about truck drivers, loggers and fisherman. WTF happened.

[puncheex]

@Elu112: I would guess that they finally found out that intellectuals don't buy what their advertisers are selling; truckers and loggers and fishermen do. And teenagers.

[tedhuman7]

This is fascinating and further solidifies the absolutism of Evolution in its imperfect perfection.

[ZukoFireBook]

my vid got stuck AT 1:06 and no refreshing doesn't help

[marinebiobry]

I like the evangelistic message at the beginning of the video. Reaching out to "dilute" the influence of those who think differently and help spread the gospel of evolution. ^_^ Darwin has made you fishers of men!

[jamdowner]

In regards to the 'transitional fossils' what are the order? I went to the national history museum with my son back in 2004 and it said that the mesonyx is the ancestor of the whale. Then this says ambulocetus and the Daily Mail said in 2007 it was the Indohyus. Are the three related? Do they follow each other? Are the the ancestors of three different whales? Or are these all speculation!

[puncheex]

@jamdowner: The exact whale ancestor is still up in the air scientifically. Genetic evidence says it is in the ungulates, specifically the Hippo family; morphological evidence puts it in an extinct group including Synonyx and Indohyus.

[springboy9]

Man. I really feel sorry for Pakisetus. It becomes a slowpoke in water. But there's more where they came from. Now this other one becomes Ambulocetus Natans. And Ambulocetus means "Walking Whale."

[catapracht]

slow and clumsy swimmer but fast enough to catch fish? i think they need to explain that a bit more.

[puncheex]

@catapracht: Consider the otter and the beaver, mammals that are headed down the same road.

[Ubiwator]

"It struck me that we caught evolution in the act here"

Got a pet dog? Congratulations, you caught evolution in the act!

Ever looked into a mirror? Congratulations, you caught evolution in the act!

[DefaultPosition]

Jesus did it with his magic stick!

[anselmo666666]

0:08 "It's a poor design"

Good grief, it's not design!

[DeathSparrow]

rofl i think he just meant no one would intentionally build it that way not that its confirmation of a god designing it, lets hope no one takes it that way XD

[Bobbiethejean]

This is fascinating. Funny comments too. :P It is a bit over dramatic in some places; so hokey. XD

[thewolverineanalyzer]

amazing.

[GuppyPal]

Kind of annoying how they always dramatize everything. Great video nonetheless.

[HumanStrategy]

Now, watch me as I take a bite out of this taco *cue the music* *slow-motion* *tight zoom shot* and.....I'm spent....great day everyone! ^^

I know your feeling. They make it soooo cheesy.

[oggleman]

this is nothing, you should watch march of the penguins. talk about dramatizing nature...

[GuppyPal]

I liked that movie...

Did you watch NatGeo's documentary on "Ardi" this past Sunday? Good fucking grief did they hype the shit out of that. They said it totally changed everything we knew about human evolution. I had to change the channel. I wrote NatGeo and bitched them out. Making ridiculous statements like that do more harm to science than their documentaries do good.

[ggab7768]

I thought the hype for Ardi was fairly accurate. Of course they pushed it a little for TV, but the evidence is contrary to what we expected. Drastically so.

If you get the chance, watch the entire show. There were some very exciting discoveries around that fossil.

Now the Ida hype, that was obscene.

I think that the Ardi hype was pulled back as a direct result of the backlash after Ida.

[wolfwing1]

yeah, though this was still a good series, even if none of their things ever seemed to have fur. *though never watched the bear one as it didn't record fully*

[marinebiobry]

@GuppyPal They have to dramatize it. Otherwise, laypersons won't be interested enough to listen to the atheistic evangelist message. You have to make the bitter pill of hopeless existence easy to swallow somehow. ^_^

[OrthodoxDarwinist]

@GuppyPal

Yeah the soun effects are f*cking annoying!

[dunndudebemelol]

Beautiful, i love evolution

[burnhippiesforfuel]

i absolutely agree! the depth of understanding man has acheived and the promise of discovery is inspiring.