How Evolution Is Scientific Part 4: Open to Criticism

[8698gil]

That classroom scene, with all the students hooting and jumping, was that for real? I can't believe that really happened. How do kids today get so brainwashed? When I was growing up, I learned about evolution in school, and no one in my school ever refuted it. I never saw one student question the truth of evolution. This was in the 70's, it would seem education is taking a giant step backwards.

[shanedk]

@8698gil There is some doubt about that, so I took it out of the second edition.

[StarSpanglishBanner]

666th like =)

[attemptingtobehumble]

The movie expelled was used because the producer, director and host are all zionists. I believe the motive was to indoctrinate people because they need more Christians to believe in the fairy tale that Israel was given to the Jews by God. If more of the country becomes atheistic they will say hey wait a second, why are we giving all this aid to Israel and getting nothing in return?

[shanedk]

@attemptingtobehumble I used the movie Expelled because CMI (in the article I'm rebutting) used it.

[attemptingtobehumble]

@shanedk Yes I understand, I was just giving my two cents on why I think people like Ben Stein are promoting these insane ideologies. Men like him are too intelligent to believe the nonsense they are peddling.

[Painfulldarksoul]

Poor monkey, he was compared to creationists!

[Surhotchaperchlorome]

Want to hear something ironic?

The people on that website bitch about how "science isn't open to criticism", while many other sites on creationism whine and bitch about how "science always changes its mind!".

[Korkzor]

@Surhotchaperchlorome Oh the irony of that. That is so sweet, I can almost taste it !

[Korkzor]

I think the reason Expelled worked so well and become so popular is because the target audience is mostly fundemental christians where in many of those have a persecution fetisch. Persecution is a badge of pride so anything that appeals to that area is taken in without criticism.

Yelling persecution is also an easy way to deal with criticisms, which is incidently what they do. I´d recommend Philhilliness newest video "crucifixion: 21. century style

[shanedk]

@Korkzor Expelled became popular???

[Korkzor]

@shanedk Well, ye, amongst creationists. I suppose I should have specified that. In pretty much every creationist channel I see there is this hint of "we are being persecuted for promoting ID" and quite a lot of comments make indirect hints at this topic as well.

I find the most likely explanation that it comes from this movie.

[shanedk]

@Korkzor Oh, that predated Expelled by a long time.

[klute007]

Again, Nice piece!!

K

[TomSFox]

That's spelled "unorthodox."

[DahStranger]

I am not sure why the scientists actually lost their jobs, but for the sake of argument, let's say that Ben Stein was right. Allow me to apply this argument to mathematics.

"2+2=5"

"You are expelled."

"Why are you persecuting my beliefs? The idea that 2+2 is 4 is dangerous. Hitler used that mathematical formula all the way to 6 million, and you know where that lead."

I am also wondering why is the W in the quote like this [W].

[shanedk]

The brackets indicate that the W was not capitalized in the original text.

I go over why they were "expelled" (most of them weren't) in both my book and my lie-correcting subtitles for Expelled.

[PlanetBongoSan]

SHANEDK you are the sun and the light of the world, is your mom a virgin? 5/5 keep up the great work

[Subfightr]

favorited! thank you for your hard work, you are just what we need!

[anglicantian]

Shane, you're one of my favorite youtube rationalists/skeptics. I'm hoping to see more great stuff from you in the future! 5/5, cheers.

[Farksisten]

@ 3:20 - Benjamin Linus from LOST! :P

[VoteNixon2008]

you know that protest video was really from the onion right?

[shanedk]

No, it's not from The Onion. I verified that.

[KKM121]

Did this video always have a 4 stars rating? or did it use to have 5 stars but got a vote bot attack?

[shanedk]

All my videos got vote-botted.

[Otokogoroshi]

Psssst, that's a gerbil not a mouse :x

Some one else might have mentioned it.

Great vid though! Fiver!

[shanedk]

RaymondDundas: I removed two of yours as well. I know you were just responding to zzxzqwq, so I'll let you off with no warning, but your posts crossed the line, too.

[shanedk]

zzxzqwq: character assassination is not allowed on this channel. Your posts were deleted. First warning.

[RaymondDundas]

Don't love Pinochet. But he's preferable to Obama. Though I ought to chastise you for worshipping Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Ceausescu.

[deprofundis442]

What was that classroom clip from?

[shanedk]

It's the only surviving piece of footage from a documentary made about the Cobb County, GA evolution/creation controversy. The whole documentary ended up being so embarrassing to the county, so they made them destroy it, but this clip somehow survived.

[WORLDTHREAT01]

A more probable explanation IMO is that the clip's a fake. It doesn't look genuine to me.

[TheBronzeDog]

Next stop in the playlist. And you keep delivering stuff worthy of my five star votes. Glad I plugged your channel over on my blog.

Another thing I should shove into a Creationist's face sometime: Creationism isn't allowed in the classroom for the same reason that homeopathy's miasma theory of disease isn't taught in health class.

[abhish1313]

I can't believe I found this channel only today.

[Surathan]

same here abh

[AlexKincaid]

Me as well.

[somechick73]

I have friends who think none of this stuffs proven. Because they're god-freaks so they are afraid to accept the truth now.

[Surathan]

Somechick

Tell your friends

The Truth Will Set You Free but lies will get you kicked in the shin

:-D

[somechick73]

LOL I shared, trust me.

[philip1201]

About 2:00 - my biology teacher pretends to be an open-minded creationist who we have to convince, when he's talking about evolution.

[AncelDeLambert]

Does anyone else want to hurt those kids? And I mean REALLY hurt them.

[shanedk]

What are you talking about?

[AncelDeLambert]

at 2:17

Pissy little puerile runts. Throw them in a zoo where they belong.

[shanedk]

I think the proper punishment would have been to make them wear leashes and collars in class for at least a week, until they learn that they have, in fact, evolved.

[AncelDeLambert]

Nono, put them in a funny suit and have an organ grinder in the back of the class. And film it.

[shanedk]

That's for assemblies.

[RaymondDundas]

The best example I could think of before was Lamarckism but this one is quite compelling too.

[zzxzqwq]

Fuck off you ignorant CUNT. Once again more right wing bull shit.;

[RaymondDundas]

Holy Hell. You think that Lamarckism comment was "right-wing"? Are you stalking me? Wow, you are one obsessive little botched Nazi abortion. Go away, preferably to an isolated area or a minefield.

[stenchinator]

MMMmmmmm I love HD!

[Walabio]

¡Excellent!

[chick5581]

The killer must run from the killer barker. Not nalts doing the stunts!

[rockandrock44]

Evolutionary Developemental Biology sounds very interesting. I'll have to look into that more.

Thanks for pointing it out.

[jussts]

rockandrock44

You should read "Endless Forms Most Beautiful: The New Science of Evo Devo and the Making of the Animal Kingdom" by Sean Carroll. It's a wonderful introduction to evo devo and fairly easy to understand.

[Chick6517]

Yasmin did you go with your father After seeing your rainbow hat I really wanted to see his argyle sweater!

[Pandamonk69]

Do you use a de-esser? Sounds like your voice is missing a lot of the top end. Also, you could make your voice louder in comparison to the background music in future videos.

Very good video though.

Sorry, I'm a sound engineer :)

[shanedk]

No, no de-esser, although my computer generates some noise I have to eliminate, and that may take out some of the sibilant frequencies.

I'll try to make it louder relative to the music. I think YouTube does a bit of dynamic compression on it when it reencodes it for some reason.

[Pandamonk69]

That could be it. What is your recording setup? A mic into the mic-in of your soundcard? This would certainly generate noise. I'm sure I asked before, but can't remember the answer.

Yeah, it could be youtube's dynamic compression.

[shanedk]

Yes, the mic in on the front panel. I tried the one in the back, but it's just as bad.

I'd like to find a good cheap USB mic I can use. Or a USB mic input, one.

[Pandamonk69]

USB mics aren't great, but are probably the best you'll get for a really low budget.

This is probably the cheapest USB mic I'd recommend: sureneeds. com/at2020usb. html

[shanedk]

Thanks; it'll be awhile before that's in my budget, though.

[Pandamonk69]

Ok. Why not ask you subcribers to donate $2 each? I've happily donated to, and helped out (with suggestions), others, such as andromedaswake and donexodus. I'd donate $5 for your new mic.

This could help bring down the cost of the mic for you or even pay for it in full (maybe even pay for something better!).

[Pandamonk69]

Make sure you get a pop-killer/filter with it, or keep it at a distance (although this will pick up more room noise) and think about acoustic treatment (absorption). A free way to get a "dead" (non-reflective) environment is to setup duvets, pillows, etc. around the mic, or speak into a closet full of clothes. This will give a clear "up-front" sound to your voice.

[jebus6kryst]

On my campus, there is a creationist movement. Their biggest gun is that they are going to showing Expelled free for two nights.

I am standing against it, along with many other people on my campus.

[shanedk]

You could always bribe someone in the A/V club to sneak in the lie-correcting subtitles. ;^)

[jebus6kryst]

I have thought about that. I work in the Student Union Build that holds the place they are going to show the movie in. I might run that by the people I am working with.

[shanedk]

Make sure you go download the latest one; I've made quite a number of changes to it.

Let me know if you actually get it shown! Especially if you can get footage of it.

[jebus6kryst]

Okay, I will down load the newest one. And I will see what we can do.

[TheProf1988]

'On my campus, there is a creationist movement.'

you need to conscript the geoscience department to battle them :p

GEOLOGY AND PALAEOBIOLOGY FOR THE WIN!!!!

[jebus6kryst]

I already wrote a letter that was published in our newspaper telling the creationists that our campus has wonderful anthropology, biology, and geology departments. All three of them also have museums on campus for people to look and see the evidence for themselves.

[TheProf1988]

Trouble is that some people are not interested in evidence, especially if they have been misled to believe that it can get them a one way ticket to hell.

I have been defending evolution for about a year now and there is only one creationist that I have ever convinced that evolution is true.

It was not pleasant, I could tell from the way he began typing that he was extremely sad. Whatever his parents or his church told him was simply false and he realised it.

[jebus6kryst]

I do not think I have ever convinced a creationist, but that is not the point of my fighting against it. I am after the people that are still sitting on the fence and do not know what to accept. People that are creationist have already made up their mind and are closed to new ideas. I am after the people that have not closed their mind.

[TheProf1988]

My main aim at the moment is to try and lift the illusion that you must either pick 'god' or 'science'.

so many people have fallen for this false dichotomy because of people like the DI and AIG.

people can believe that a giant orange frog called fred created the universe for all I care. as long as they accept and understand science as well.

[jebus6kryst]

I agree 100%.

[ljtigersbear]

Excellent video, again.

Now if only the creationists were open to criticism...

[TomSFox]

Am I mistaken or does your voice sound different?

[shanedk]

Sinus problems.

[TomSFox]

Oh, sorry about that.

[AlmightScoop]

Loving the mitochondrial merger. Have you read 'Power, Sex and Suicide' - its an awesome book about mitochondria.

[freedomsstain]

Nice work man, I'm glad you brought up gene regulation, it appears to be one of the many fundamental aspects of the genome that Creationists either just do not get, or just plain ignore.

Nature Reviews Genetics 10, 141 (2009)

relevant I think.

[mrlurp]

I just hope their god gets a copy of this video so he knows the lies they have spread. lol

I watched Expelled on my Xbox 360 through Netflix and had a headache from smacking myself in the forehead so much due to my reaction to their stupidity.

Its so nice to watch a video that doesnt do that to me. 5 strz!

[sinxcosxtanx]

Interesting, as usual.

[cyberweirdo2001]

shanedk: your videoes are so well made that it puts so many other videoes to shame :-)

its really great that you do these kinds of videoes. Its important to educate people about facts - so that religion dosent contaminate people with false ideas.

[kleinerstern9]

My friend says the people you show in your video aren't the ones from the expelled movie. How do I find out if he's right? I don't have the movie here to watch it.

[shanedk]

They ABSOLUTELY ARE. Those pictures are STILLS from Expelled.

You can go to ExpelledExposedDOTcom and see not only that these ARE the people, but what the real story is.

[kleinerstern9]

Thank you for your reply I will do that.

[TheProf1988]

'My friend says the people you show in your video aren't the ones from the expelled movie. How do I find out if he's right? '

djarm67 has an excellent 16 part video series exposing the ignorant lies and misinformation that expelled presents.

watch?v=F5ixmLNwF9s&feature=Pl­ayList&p=A3D6C9C847F27E6F&inde­x=0&playnext=1

[82abhilash]

Thanks for explaining evo devo in such a simple and precise manner.

[matthewdoucette]

thank you for these videos...

[grenangle]

Jam packed with sciency goodness. So glad I subbed.

[Retardretroguy]

Are you suffering from sinuitis or bad sound encoding?

[shanedk]

The former.

[theinquisitor]

The irony is that since creationists don't want their ideas to go through the normal scientific process, THEY are the ones who aren't open to criticism of their idea.

Another excellent video.

[lennyhipp]

woah! what happened to your voice in this one?!

[shanedk]

Sinus problems. I actually kind of like it better than my normal voice!

[snownet]

Its funny, the creationist criticism of evolution applies more to creationisms weaknesses then evolutions weaknesses.

[addmoreice]

I've always found it entertaining how many claims creationists make that are ACTUALLY applicable to themselves and not to evolution.

'a cell poofed into being' um... thats not evolution (it's abiogenesis) and um that would be the creationist claim...not science.

'something can't come from nothing!' um....that would be creationists claim. not science.

etc etc etc. the list is staggeringly complete for that.

[TBTabby]

Ugh, that "Students Protest Evolution" video...I wish fundies would act a little more like animals, really. For example, the ones who say "adoption is evil" could stand to be a little more like female elephants.

[OuroborosChoked]

You forgot an arrow in your flowchart for science. "Good for you" should point back to "Do more research and testing". Anyone who knows about science should know that ;P Research doesn't stop after you make it into books...

[joemarklawson]

OuroborosChoked@

"Research doesn't stop after you make it into books"

If it did, 90% of postdocs would be out of work. Nothing pulls down the grant money better than "refining our understanding of foundational principles" or crack-finding, as I like to call it.

Look at the Central Dogma, it's been rehashed so many times, that a good research plan in the 80's would have been to pick a step and find out why it's not always true.

[Beefstew2011]

Stephen Jay Gould criticized some very central aspects of the Modern Synthesis and was one of the most respected biologists of all time.

[CartCollector]

Best. Flowchart. Ever.

[oojamaflipper]

yo shane, arent you a partner yet? if not thats friggin criminal!

[farvision]

5:10 The flowchart is flawed. The scientist keeps testing their idea even after it has failed every test! There

has to be a point when they will abandon the idea,

another line on the picture.

[shanedk]

That's why I didn't make it a terminator, but I had to put SOMETHING down under "Yes."

Now that I look at it again, I regret not making the "No" on the creationist side read, "Of course not!"

[farvision]

Oh, you made the chart! Cool - so you can revise for next time ... (if there is one). Just to be clear, on the

'No' branch of 'Did the idea pass the test?' you can

have an additional branch 'Give up on the idea?'

Yes leads to termination, no leads to 'do more research

and refine'.

[shanedk]

I don't want to get it too complicated. It should be something people can look at and get the idea, while still listening to what's going on.

[farvision]

Good point. Some people put lots of reading that conflicts with the music and what they are saying. I don't feel like listening 3 times, so I just give up. Your videos have a good balance!

[Libertarianist]

If I may recommend a change to the video, the black and white picture of mitochondria in the middle of the video really blogs down the player for some reason. I recommend you change the photo or remove the motion effects.

[farvision]

Libertarianist, it was ok for me. Maybe your video

didn't load fully and the player caught up to the buffer in your computer at that point. How about trying to let the whole video load and then let it play through and see if it still 'sticks' there?

[mrkurt13]

Have they responded to any of this? How do so many people just willingly and blatantly ignore how flawed their position is.

[wimscheers]

EvoDevo. That made me smile.

[thunderpants10]

5/5, again

[NeonKnight88]

The reason that the argument for evolution is rather weak (compared to the argument for the earth being round for example) is that it is an inductive argument as opposed to deductive.

Deductive science is stronger.

[shanedk]

If there were no inductive reasoning, there'd be no science AT ALL, and we'd still be thinking the Earth is the center of everything and disease is caused by evil spirits.

[ProcInc]

"is that it is an inductive argument as opposed to deductive."

Science needs to be both

evolution is.

Creationism is neither

[NeonKnight88]

Thats not true. Math is purely deductive for example.

That doesn't necessarily mean evolution is false. I am just observing that deduction is stronger.

[shanedk]

Math is a tool that helps us with inductive reasoning. If we make a certain set of observations, we can use mathematics to conclude that other things unobserved must have happened as well.

[NeonKnight88]

Math can only be derived through deduction. No one went out into the world and tested that 2+2=4, they just used logic to work from what they know to what they dont know. Same with things like the angles of a triangle adding up to 180 degrees, etc.

[shanedk]

Not so. Induction is a VERY important part of mathematics, going all the way back to Pythagoras.

Think about forensics. Although there is a lot to forensics that is deductive, very powerful aspects of it (such as DNA identification) are VERY inductive.

[NeonKnight88]

There is absolutely no possible empirical basis for concepts like zero, negative numbers, irrational numbers, etc. But those are still perfectly valid examples of deductive science.

[shanedk]

Imaginary numbers are inductive. There's nothing in the real world that leads us to them, and no way we have of comprehending them. Yet, they're the only way to explain a lot of things, including electronics and many other practical applications. But we couldn't come to it from a deductive direction.

[doloafing]

The argument that the Earth is round is not deductive. We've collected much evidence on the matter, and now, actuallly been up there and seen it. A good portion of our society now rests on this fact.

We know deductively that the Earth should be round, given our understanding of gravity, which is inductive.

The body of evidence is certainly compelling, but so is the evidence for evolution. Comparing them is like comparing the mass of two galaxies to see which will spawn stars.

[NeonKnight88]

The argument for the earth being round is partially deductive. Some Egyptian mathematician (forget his name) around ~200 BC who lived in Alexandria had a friend who lived in a city due south of Alexandria.

On the vernal equinox, his friend noted that he looked down the well, and there was absolutely no inside the well and the sun shone straight down into it. On the other hand, the mathematician saw an obelisk that day, and it cast a shadow.

[NeonKnight88]

So they were able to conclude deductively from the empirical evidence that the earth was curved. He then used the data from the angle of the shadow that was being cast by the obelisk and the distance from the obelisk to the well in the city to the south to deductively figure out the circumference of the earth to within ~.0001 km of the actual circumference.

[doloafing]

Our belief that the Earth is round is not based on that. Sure, that's awesome and everything, but that's not our main piece of evidence.

We now understand why the Earth is round, based on our inductive understanding of gravity, both of which are supported by evidence.

If we want to go down the deductive road, when one applies logic to our understanding of genetics and genetic mutation, evolution is the result. We also happen to have a mountain of evidence to support that.

[shanedk]

That was Eratosthenes. I cover him in my video "Why don't we know more?"

[NeonKnight88]

Yeah I am just saying deduction > induction.

[shanedk]

When both are options, sure, but deduction is limited. In a situation where deduction is impossible, it of course becomes worthless and induction is the way to go.

[WarmWeatherGuy]

If scientist WERE to disallow criticism then that would stifle scientific progress. It is the religions that have historically stifled scientific progress.

They criticize scientists when they change their mind, claiming they keep changing their minds. Then they criticize them for not allowing change. They just want to bitch.

Religion never allows change to their story so it is ironic that they should complain that they think the scientists are doing the same thing.

[TheDoubtingApproach]

Excellent video. Thanks.

[d34dly4rr0w]

5/5. I like your videos. No creationist bullshit, no crazy fiction science. Just the truth.

[interstate317]

"there fourth point, which is false of course..."

lol

[Morrakiu]

That ape-like behavior....Dear Zeus!! All of those students spontaneously morphed into creationists! Quick, doctor! Prepare an injection of rational thought!

Your videos are always WIN

[somethingesoteric]

Heh. As if any more proof were required, NewScientist just ran a cover entitled "Darwin Was Wrong" !!

Great video. I learned a lot as usual, thanks.

[Core5]

The only thing that NewScientist article revealed is that there is a substantial amount of HGT (Horizontal Gene Transfer). This isn't new, and it doesn't discredit Darwin or evolution. It simply means that we once again envisioned a too simplistic view. While the Tree was, and IS a very useful tool especially in multi-cellular eukaryotes. A more web-like structure better explains some inconsistencies in the nested hiarchy observed in Bacterial Archean and Plant linages due to hybradization.

[somethingesoteric]

Yes, I did read the article. However I deemed it unnecessary to delve into the particulars, because the title says it all. A periodical, written by and for scientists, will run the cover "Darwin Was Wrong". Is the theory of evolution open to criticism? Yes, by this example it clearly is.

Although the theory stands up to this new (ish) data, the tree of life Darwin sketched, whilst still being an excellent tool for explaining/understanding the theory,no longer can be viewed as a definitive model

[Core5]

By not delving into it, you are no better than a creationist quoteminer misrepresenting and over exaggerating. Darwin formulated the Tree of Life model long before DNA was know, Bacteria weren't even discovered yet! Yet the model he proposed was and is quite adequate to explain most of heredity. The article has a perfect analogue: General Relativity wasn't to show Newton's theory of Gravitation wasn't wrong. It only proved that it was incomplete, and worked fine given what was known at the time.

[somethingesoteric]

My, my, quite the aggressive pedant, aren't you?

You have, of course, missed the point. I agree fully that the findings on HGT do not really debunk the tree (as you would see if you had read my last post!).

However, the point being made has nothing to do with these findings, so the details remain (largely) irrelevant. The point is that, 150 years on, the theory of evolution is still subject to scrutiny, change and, yes, criticism from, crucially, within the scientific community.

[somethingesoteric]

This point requires little more to be proven than simply eyeing the title on a respected scientific journal. Although the content is valuable, arguable and interesting, it's not necessary to read it to see that the theory of evolution is open to criticism. Want to know why I'm arguing this point? Look at the title of the video.

[somethingesoteric]

And! You are no beter than a staunch theist, refusing to allow evidence to shake their blinkered belief system. The simple tree of life is no longer valid. It has failed the test of time. It has been disproven. Move on. Deal with it.

[Core5]

Sorry, I misread your argument. I was only defending against the view that the tree is completely wrong, which some one could easily get the wrong idea about.

This article is indeed a fine example at how evolution is open to criticism and new data. While the idea of a tree is not completely accurate, science once again demonstrates that when new data and criticism conflicts with existing theories, Either modify or discard the theory. In this case a modification.

[joemarklawson]

@somethingesoteric

I get your point on this. Biologists don't worship Darwin. His initial writings were not divinely inspired, hence we can discard the points where he was mistaken without any holy wars.

I think NewScientist ought to be brought to task for sensationalism and bad science journalism. The editors note shows that they knew it would be quoted out of context. The title was misleading and deceptive when compared to the content. Shame on them.

[somethingesoteric]

Argh.Look.The title of this video is:

"How Evolution Is Scientific Part 4: Open to Criticism"

I think the reason Shanedk made this video was to refute the statement in a creationist website that evolution theory is not open to criricism.

Now.The fact that a scientific journal would run a cover story CRITICISING something that makes up Darwin's theory is even more evidence that the scientific community will and does criticise the theory.

Shanedk did not mention this,so I though I would.

[somethingesoteric]

I was not quoting the cover out of context!

I was using it AGAINST creationists and their stupid argument that evolution is not open to criticism. No shame on them, because who cares what creationists think? Let them take the cover out of context, because any sane person can see what it actually means.

*Please, someone, tell me you understand what I am saying before I lose all faith in humanity!*

[shanedk]

I understand you, and I think your point is excellent.

[somethingesoteric]

Thank you, sir!

[joemarklawson]

something@

Relax, buddy. I started my email,

"I get your point" then tried to add my own thoughts to yours. I understood what you meant.

I'm still annoyed with NewScientist for sensationalist journalism.

[somethingesoteric]

I am sorry. I read a negaituve in your comment that wasn'y actually there!

[CKtheFat]

Very nice video.

Interesting choice of music.

[NoSz4]

great stuff shane, 5 star

[chopin65]

Well done! Go and get them! You must be a very good teacher. You Tube needs clear headed people like you.

[intelligentfalling]

Same with Stephen Gould. He criticized evolutionary gradualism with his theory of punctuated equilibrium and that launched his career. However modern genetic and morphological testing reveal that Nat Sel can cause much faster change than is needed for PE, so his theory was false as an overall rule, but still is believed to have some validity through epigenetics and cysregulation. I woulda added that :-p

[Atheisticwiccan]

definitely a good series of videos

[mtanti87]

I never realized how far into lying these people would go as when you mentioned Michael Rice.

[ILYIAB]

Just... Thanks! Await the next one. Have a great day!

[geancanach]

excellent video yet again :D

(and the subtitles make Expelled much better)

[atlant80]

Hey! I just had my bio midterms today and Lean Margolese (sp?) was on it! I aced the endosymbiosis section!

[flamablesteve]

I love the monkey not being related picture:D

[atlant80]

Damn it! Not first! Keep it up, shane! Love your vids!

[digitised]

More good stuff!