there's no such things as transitional fossils. OR...EVERY SINGLE species is a transitiona species. both mean the same thing once you simplify them. we are always evolving, so everything is a transitional species from it's more primitive form, to it's future form.
@Tazy50 transitional FOSSILS are fossils found to be at the phase of transition , the case you presented is still correct however ... transitional fossils and speciation are different ..
@IvanderHaisley that's just what humans classify them as. It doesn't change the reality of what they really are. If everything continues to evolve, and doesn't have a goal, then aren't we all transitional fossils?
@Tazy50 uhm yeah ...i question your "logic" ....if you say that humans classify them (the term transitional fossils and the present time animal undergoing the process of evolution) as they are then they (the terms)should be used ... yes you present a neat analogy but really .the term transitional fossils is the term used to say that the fossil found was at the phase of transition .... put a stress on the word fossils ....
Revelation 10:11 And they say to me(John), "You must prophesy again with regard to peoples and nations and tongues and many kings."
Is John one of the witnesses?
Check out my favs, especially the one about the stars found in the bible. Pics in those videos of the Sun Moon and Stars are authentic and the end time is drawing. The stars seem to be 11 then 12 and then definitely7. Check out these symbols and signs from heaven.
DonExodus, just wanted to tell you how much I enjoy your video's. I've never quite had a grasp on DNA pertaining to evolution, so it was great to at least get my feet wet in that area, I even took notes. Question, from your perspective, do you think that eventually creationists will accept evolution as truth, or even science at that, and will we one day look back and say, 'how is it that people were so stupid back then?' I'm curious to get your thoughts on this if you have the time. Thanks again
Great video and explanation!!! But kind of low views, and I doubt there are many Theist among them!!! I have a question, large population is slower on evolving so with us humans being like 6+ billion or maybe more are we almost at evolution dead end???
It seems like there are several creationist arguments that everyone debunks, but there seem to be several different approaches to each of these. I wonder if there'd be some way to create a sort of "super-debunking" series with every last creationist tactic being shot down by a veritable blitzkrieg of scientific arguments. Then of course the challenge would be to get this thing viewed by the general public. I think it could work, and it'd be fun to watch.
what creationist do is that they reach a point where in order to show them just how wrong they are they would be required to know things.
Like the phylogenetic tree and the evidence behind it is enormous that fit with evolution but present unresolved paradoxes for any other theory.
But to get it they would have to understand a little of everything and really accept it first. and creationists at best have a very spotty knowledge of science
I showed this to a couple of YEC friends (I myself am an atheist). I told them that this video says nothing about the age of the earth- they are observed instances of speciation. Well, the previous video does mention in a pic one or two millions years ago. They were surprisingly receptive. I did not follow up to see if they are still receptive to the idea of evolution.
You cant debate with a creationist because they dont do their research and wont listen to reason and generally twist the truth to meet there own needs, which is fine I dont care if they live in there own little lie the thing that pisses me off is they teach this to there offspring.
"You cant debate with a creationist because they dont do their research & wont listen to reason generally twist the truth to meet there own needs"
This is true.
Im debating a Fundie right now (the debate has been going on for 3 weeks now) who is so determined to try & prove he's correct that he'l say anything.
I just read his recent post where he still believes that " there R no transitional forms in the fossil record."
This claim has been debunked repeatedly, yet they cont.2 lie!
I find it funny that there are still many people who either deny transitional fossils that we have or are ignorant to the fact that they exist in the first place. Good luck with your debate tho, sometimes it feels like your hitting head against a very thick brick wall, try and find some common ground first if you haven't already.
"Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon — it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory."
whats with all the pickin on watergun for........he thinks worlds 6000years...so what...if i was learning science from Donexodus id probably think that too.
of corse it is, if u want to believe that then u believe that...
and its flat, COLOMBUS WAS A SATANIST AND GUIDED BACK ON BY THE HAND OF HIS EVIL MASTER... or alternatively why not accept modern science and theory... just a suggestion =D
Wow, that is fun. I've always wondered what it would be like to boldly assert something with no evidence to back it up. I'll try it again:
EVILUSHUN IS A LYE.
Wow. The thrill of it. No wonder the creationist enjoy this so much:
WEVE NEVER FOUND ANY TRANSISHIONAL FOSILS.
That feels great. I think I have a new hobby. Now, where haven't they heard my witty insights? Oh, yeah... ALL OVER YOUTUBE! I'm off to spread my idiocy! TTFN.
Great as usual - I'm still sniggering over the opening music (it sounds like backgroud music to porn) - well we are talking about reproduction after all (and that's what sex is for)!
Don - You are a champion of the truth. Hybridization seems to be a key to understanding evolution. I have a question. Is viable offspring a deliniation mark for species? We consider the vicuna and the camel as distinct species that due to morphology in size cannot naturally mate, yet still produce viable offspring. It seems to me that speciation is clear in definition, but species is not. This makes sense that it is not because of the many gray drifting areas in boundaries of a specie's domain.
You see that in dogs too, Never see a chiwawa mate with a great dane, but I think you can do it in the lab.
I think that if two breeds of the same species do not interbreed with each other long enough those lines will become different species. Think of the example with the lizards. Pop A can mate with B, B with C, but not A with C. If species b is not there to link the breeds then species becomes easier to define. Species is better used to define the fertility between two animals.
Good question, fruit fly species could not have mated with particular ancestors. This is speciation. Just because fruit flies reproduce quickly relative to us, DOES NOT mean that they should evolve more quickly.. necessarily... sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. It all depends. Also, what about ALL OTHER ANIMALS....?
OK, why all the whining about PG ratings in the comment section? Is it all this talk about "matings"?
Well, you just can't get very far in understanding this stuff without first understanding the molecular biology of sex.
Also, why are people discussing Thermodynamics in the comments? This is Biology, not Chemistry. Thermodynamics applies to the movement and behavior of molecules. What DonExodus is talking about applies to population genetics, ecology, geography, and karyology.
The old man has drowned in a ditch. His lungs are filled with so much water. The body swimming with countless maggots. We shall not mourn his final passing. I feel great pleasure in his watery death. I stare at his bloated corpse and slice off the empty head. I peel away the flesh and wash off the skull. It is time to return to my shadowy realm. To a hero's welcome from our darkened demons. I proudly place my trophy right beside my altar. Behold! The god of heaven is now dead!
Small criticism, I cannot show this video to my class! Your videos are perfect for my biology class, but they have to be PG rated before I can show them. Could you please consider us poor high school science teachers when you make these videos?
I dunno, I think it's kinda cool that a teacher wants to referance failtube; of all places.
Either way, not my complaint- merely elaborating. Personally I'm all for profanity at school, so, I don't especially care even if he plays this on a widescreen projector to his whole school system. =)
And watergun58. Stop calling everyone a pussy -_-. Insults don't make you sound more intelligent, nor do they support your argument. You can insult anyone you like, but it won't make the truth go away. Just tellin' ya C:
In order for evolution to stand on its current definition, entropy is part from the start...the origins. That's the big problem. How do you start, Behe points to irreducibly complex systems, and he makes excellent points.
Dempski's paper posited Pi as an example of an artifact of identifiably intelligent origin. Certainly finding Pi(or the bible's text) encoded in human DNA would be indisputable. Why has this been downgraded to Behe's concept of Irreducible Complexity which is evidently much more difficult to extract from plausible paths of evolved complexity and so less than the rock solid proof the Dempski proposed?
What really what makes Behe's concept so intriguing is that its already in biology. The idea of these molecular systems working and the awesome complexity at the simplest level is pretty cool stuff. I'm stuck on this at the moment, it is good science. I like to think of these things.
Anyway. If you wish to continue this debate in a more civilized and comprehensive manner, I invite you to mail my youtube account, that way we can do this more quickly, and hopefully we can get somethign about of it.
It would be good science it they did good science instead of just looking at shit and saying "Hmm looks complex. It must be designed . I bet god did it." What a bunch of bull hooey. Complexity is not a measure of intelligence. A snow drift pile is complex. A simple cube can be an indication of intelligence. You need a measure or "out of placeness" that like a cube shaped planet would let us know "IT AIN'T NATURAL"
All fossils tell us, is that they died. There is no evidence any of the fossils gave birth to anything other than its kind. Because of evolutionary preconseptions, they try to feed us bullcrap, of this one evolved into that one.
Human "evolution" is still without a transitional form. The the various fossils that have been found are either classified as a variety of human being or ape...no transitionals here.
ERVs are remnants of failed viral infection which occurred in an ancestor's sex cell and got propagated in its child. The viral insertion site is completely random for many ERVs (and semi location specific for some (limited options but still an abundance of equally tenable locations to choose from) and finding one in the same location in two individuals indicates they each had that same ancestor. humans and chimps share many ERVs locations in common. What other conclusion can one come to?
By what means did the code of life and the enzymes necessary to make the code originate? Which came first: the code to make the enzymes or the enzymes to make the code?
If fifty years of intensive research on mutant fruit flies has produced nothing but more fruit flies, why is it thought that other organisms can evolve into something else?
Have you evidence to support yours? Evolution is a theory that has been repeatedly revised and perfected for over a century, mountains of evidence have been unearthed. New discoveries have been made, all met with the same scrutiny as any other in the field of science. You however, have naught but bibles and bronze age scribblings of superstitious and primitive minds to support your thesis. Btw, I was a devout christian for 15 years, and I can just TELL you're the striking image of christ.
In the "tree of life" that evolutionists have dreamed up, gaps in the fossil record are especially huge between single-cell creatures, complex invertebrates (such as snails, jellyfish, trilobites, clams, and sponges), and what evolutionists claim were the first vertebrates, fish. In fact, there are no fossil ancestors at all for complex invertebrates or fish.
The burden of proof is on you. There are plenty of fossil ancestors for complex invertebrates and fish. Read an encyclopedia of science, and it will bring up examples. If you can PROVE with EVIDENCE that there are not fossil ancestors, and if you can cite your sources for your ludicrous statements, then and only then will people take you seriously. Until then, huddle in your cave and worship your false god by yourself. The world doesn't need your stupidity to stagnate progress.
You really have said a lot without really saying anything. You did not comment about a single true transitional form.
Progress will truely begin when this lost science in the current understanding of evolution is replaced by investigations not prejudiced by presupposions and true object statements and ideas can come to the table.
By what means did the code of life and the enzymes necessary to make the code originate? Which came first: the code to make the enzymes or the enzymes to make the code?
The theory of evolution remains a theory because there are scientists who still evaluate data in an objective way. Stephen Jay Gould has commented on the frustration of the MASSIVE LACK of evidence in the form of transitional species in the fossil record. I have been slandered simply for questioning and investigating the merits of this theory (which is exactly what any OTHER theory in science is exposed to in sometimes brutal fashion...but somehow evolution is exempt!?)
Please provide 1 actual transitional form in the fossil record, you cannot. It has yet to be found despite the >billions of fossils unearthed. I am not dishonest. He put forth punctuated equilibrium just to try to make it work for crying out loud!
By theory i mean theory, not LAW. Like the 2nd LAW of Thermodynamics, which the theory of evolution violates. (entropy, towards disorder, not higher order)
I'm sorry. If you read some children's encyclopedia which briefly explained the law, and then watched some christian video bastardize it, you hardly have the right to talk about the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Laws are also theories. In the scientific arena, the theory is the ultimate level of scientific truth that is achievable. Laymen such as yourself should learn the definitions of such terms you misuse, and the workings of the laws you so love to bastardize.
I appreciate being patronized, this is not uncommon. I will not argue venn diagrams. I also appreciate you thinking that I am Christian, remarkable. I have only commented on facts, but you bring up religion.
Facts? I am quite sorry, I didn't catch that. To my knowledge, none of your statements are proven fact. I feel sorry for you my friend; at least the religious have an excuse to be stupid. You however, have proven to me that you don't. It also seems that you've failed to dispute any of my important points, but instead resorted to picking on something that is otherwise unrelated to the argument.
As a once angry person, I sympathize with you. Emotional attacks, unfortunately can only go so far. The points which I have argued with you and not heard a response: transitional form, which lies solely with you as I do not know of one. And for the record, by ridiculing me with religion, then saying I picked an unrelated to comment about is rather juvenile.
The comment on religion, is but a comment on religion. It is unrelated to any reasoned argument outlined prior to it. I was merely pointing out the fact that the only point you chose to refute was my comment on religion. I apologize for assuming that you were religious in any way. Neither of us have presented solid evidence for our points, however, as I have said before, the burden of proof lies with you. You are the one disputing accepted theory, not I.
Also, thermodynamic entropy is actually REQUIRED for life and evolution, it is the conversion of stored energy into work and waste heat. Much ado about information theory NAAAWT lol.
Ask a creationist to prove that a rock has higher entropy than a plant. It's just the opposite.
Some people speculate that protein novelty (evolution) may be entropically FAVORED since it greatly increases the number of different molecules in the quasi-open environment of living cells.
No other theory is so crapped so much on by the public. What other scientific theory is the public brainwashed against in favor of pseudoscience? What other scientific theory has been attacked by quote mines and mass public misinformation?
Your point could not be further from the truth- evolution is held to the same standard to the scientific community, but a laughable one in the public.
In the last edition of the NPR program "Talk of the Nation-Science Friday," they talked about how copper apparently also kills bacteria and this has caused a push to replace all the bed frames in hospitals with copper frames.
Evolution be the work of satan to draws yu awaty from Jesus. Their is kno evident for it watsoever!!! Dinosaws were humans friends and all evidence point to a big flood.
But God still loves you !!!111 And cares abut you!! So repent befoer he tortures you for all eternity.
But wait, that raises a red flag. Sure, you said that I'd burn in hell for eternity, but you FORGOT to say that you'd pray for me to see the light and truth and all that jazz! I mean, the conceit is not complete by just saying "GAWD LURVS U!!!"
Come on guys, they're not "new species", they are different KINDS (!!!) of the same species. You know... like dogs. A bird transforming into another bird is still a bird!
Just wondering and this is probably a stupid question but it is possibly unlikely that a Chihuahua and a St. Bernard could successfully breed so is it wrong to classify them both as dogs? Are they separate species at this stage that we haven't reclassified?
It forms a reproductive isolation that will if maintained produce progressively more distinct sets of genes and eventually preclude successful breeding. Even after that dogs will be a type of "ring species".
They CAN reproduce. They just can't. Do you get it? It's not that their reproduction doesn't work, it's just the size of their bodys. Just like different sizes in humans can make sex more problematic.
Do you think its possible to make a cross between a dog and a cat if both sperm and egg both have full compliments of their chromosomes, or if two zygotes of both species were fused? I think that would be awesome because you'd have an animal that would chase itself up a tree, catch mice and fetch the paper, and hike its leg on top of your fire place mantle for a wee wee.
It is not the chromosome count that determines viability. The proteins that switch genes on and off need to be non-interfering. The histone locations need to match. Fused zygotes would be a chimera and also not very likely to survive even to term. We'd likely call it doa.
Saying things doesn't make things true, but the fact you believe otherwise is probably why you are creationist. In reality you are scared of the possibility you might be wrong, so you avoid the million pieces of evidence.
"supernatual stuff is just stuff unknown to science at the moment. "
The truly supernatural cannot be studied by naturalistic means.
Anything previously thought to be supernatural that an explanation is subsequently found for then ceased to be declared as supernatural an instead becomes entirely natural. That's how science works.
Hopefully you understand this and my expansion was what you were trying to say in the first place, but I felt it was worth expanding upon.
So the millions of fossils that have been found, and the conclusions drawn about them by thousands if not millions of scientists, are all wrong, while a small group of people know better?
Thanks for letting us know. What's your source, by the way?
Wow, are there really that many people who have no knowledge of evolution but still refuse to believe it?!? Are there really that many people who will say that there is zero evidence for it without reading any secular books about it? I have never heard of so many people speaking so much about something of which they know so little.
The things that the evil book will lead people to believe. lol
there's no such things as transitional fossils. OR...EVERY SINGLE species is a transitiona species. both mean the same thing once you simplify them. we are always evolving, so everything is a transitional species from it's more primitive form, to it's future form.
Tazy50 9 months ago
@Tazy50 transitional FOSSILS are fossils found to be at the phase of transition , the case you presented is still correct however ... transitional fossils and speciation are different ..
IvanderHaisley 1 month ago
@IvanderHaisley that's just what humans classify them as. It doesn't change the reality of what they really are. If everything continues to evolve, and doesn't have a goal, then aren't we all transitional fossils?
Tazy50 1 month ago
@Tazy50 uhm yeah ...i question your "logic" ....if you say that humans classify them (the term transitional fossils and the present time animal undergoing the process of evolution) as they are then they (the terms)should be used ... yes you present a neat analogy but really .the term transitional fossils is the term used to say that the fossil found was at the phase of transition .... put a stress on the word fossils ....
IvanderHaisley 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Revelation 10:11 And they say to me(John), "You must prophesy again with regard to peoples and nations and tongues and many kings."
Is John one of the witnesses?
Check out my favs, especially the one about the stars found in the bible. Pics in those videos of the Sun Moon and Stars are authentic and the end time is drawing. The stars seem to be 11 then 12 and then definitely7. Check out these symbols and signs from heaven.
themiraclesonearth 11 months ago
DonExodus, just wanted to tell you how much I enjoy your video's. I've never quite had a grasp on DNA pertaining to evolution, so it was great to at least get my feet wet in that area, I even took notes. Question, from your perspective, do you think that eventually creationists will accept evolution as truth, or even science at that, and will we one day look back and say, 'how is it that people were so stupid back then?' I'm curious to get your thoughts on this if you have the time. Thanks again
TheLacedaemonian300 1 year ago
Ah ensatina salmanders.. Common in my area. Another example is Slender salamanders, found in the same region as the ensatina
mmmmmarcus 1 year ago
about gigas would u pls watch this and tell me ur review about it /watch?v=rcJ6cEy2W0E
ahmology 1 year ago
Great set of lectures, many thanks, Runi.
RuniChannel1 1 year ago
What?!! No well reasoned debates about polyploidy speciation from creationists? I wonder why...
Highlyskeptical 1 year ago
Great video and explanation!!! But kind of low views, and I doubt there are many Theist among them!!! I have a question, large population is slower on evolving so with us humans being like 6+ billion or maybe more are we almost at evolution dead end???
Satybp666 1 year ago
@8:40 Don turns into Max Headroom.
WolfCoder 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@WolfCoder "@8:40 Don turns into Max Headroom"
yeah I laughed so hard at that point It made my neighbor's dog bark XD
stiimuli 1 year ago
It's all been said before, but I just can't say it enough. Ignorance is a prerequisite for being a creationist.
Starbat88 2 years ago 9
It seems like there are several creationist arguments that everyone debunks, but there seem to be several different approaches to each of these. I wonder if there'd be some way to create a sort of "super-debunking" series with every last creationist tactic being shot down by a veritable blitzkrieg of scientific arguments. Then of course the challenge would be to get this thing viewed by the general public. I think it could work, and it'd be fun to watch.
freakyphysicsguy 2 years ago 5
i wud buy that
red2seata 2 years ago 2
@freakyphysicsguy
what creationist do is that they reach a point where in order to show them just how wrong they are they would be required to know things.
Like the phylogenetic tree and the evidence behind it is enormous that fit with evolution but present unresolved paradoxes for any other theory.
But to get it they would have to understand a little of everything and really accept it first. and creationists at best have a very spotty knowledge of science
LeopardFrogPilboxhat 2 years ago 4
@freakyphysicsguy they would simply flag it
patrickledford420 1 year ago
I like this all series that you made about the evolution. Continue making good stuffs,
Loa4EVER 2 years ago
Nice video Don. Explained speciation perfectly. or rather polyploidy.
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
RONALD FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!
rtarbinar 2 years ago
I'd hate to have Dubius's child support payments.
MortalTodd 2 years ago 2
Ahh so those copper mine flowers speciated when the mines closed in 1859?
You know what else happened in 1859?
Origin of species
I smell a conspiracy
*dons tinfoil sailor hat*
VoteNixon2008 2 years ago 3
lol
Katsuhisa777 2 years ago
I showed this to a couple of YEC friends (I myself am an atheist). I told them that this video says nothing about the age of the earth- they are observed instances of speciation. Well, the previous video does mention in a pic one or two millions years ago. They were surprisingly receptive. I did not follow up to see if they are still receptive to the idea of evolution.
nivek297 2 years ago
You cant debate with a creationist because they dont do their research and wont listen to reason and generally twist the truth to meet there own needs, which is fine I dont care if they live in there own little lie the thing that pisses me off is they teach this to there offspring.
lothor1234 2 years ago 10
lothor
"You cant debate with a creationist because they dont do their research & wont listen to reason generally twist the truth to meet there own needs"
This is true.
Im debating a Fundie right now (the debate has been going on for 3 weeks now) who is so determined to try & prove he's correct that he'l say anything.
I just read his recent post where he still believes that " there R no transitional forms in the fossil record."
This claim has been debunked repeatedly, yet they cont.2 lie!
Cootabux 2 years ago 17
I find it funny that there are still many people who either deny transitional fossils that we have or are ignorant to the fact that they exist in the first place. Good luck with your debate tho, sometimes it feels like your hitting head against a very thick brick wall, try and find some common ground first if you haven't already.
lothor1234 2 years ago 4
Scott D. Weitzenhoffer~
"Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon — it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory."
pranays 2 years ago 6
whats with all the pickin on watergun for........he thinks worlds 6000years...so what...if i was learning science from Donexodus id probably think that too.
Antisyncretism 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE EARTH IS 6,000 YEARS OLD.
Watergun858 3 years ago
of corse it is, if u want to believe that then u believe that...
and its flat, COLOMBUS WAS A SATANIST AND GUIDED BACK ON BY THE HAND OF HIS EVIL MASTER... or alternatively why not accept modern science and theory... just a suggestion =D
jesuswuzahippy 3 years ago 2
YOU'RE AN IDIOT.
VivekisV 3 years ago
who?
herbiethebarber 3 years ago
Watergun858. Ya know, the comment where the idiocy is capitalized.
VivekisV 3 years ago
says who? not the bible
herbiethebarber 3 years ago
"THE EARTH IS 6,000 YEARS OLD."
Do yourself a favor, Rent some lab time.
Do some Isochrone testing on some material and wise up.
Cnidarious 3 years ago 5
MARS IS 7,000 YEARS OLD.
Wow, that is fun. I've always wondered what it would be like to boldly assert something with no evidence to back it up. I'll try it again:
EVILUSHUN IS A LYE.
Wow. The thrill of it. No wonder the creationist enjoy this so much:
WEVE NEVER FOUND ANY TRANSISHIONAL FOSILS.
That feels great. I think I have a new hobby. Now, where haven't they heard my witty insights? Oh, yeah... ALL OVER YOUTUBE! I'm off to spread my idiocy! TTFN.
joemarklawson 3 years ago 28
Haha, Nice.
Stevenlurvsjulie 2 years ago
Haha! AiG is THATTAWAY!!
curvalecce 2 years ago
no its not.
Cnidarious 2 years ago
heh, those last 2 videos were great.
taught me alot i didnt know, and reminded me of things i had forgotten from my biology days.
Brettah31 3 years ago
DonE NO! I just read the description:leave Ronald there! I love it!
euphemus2 3 years ago
To complicated for the common deluded Christian.
To reach the simple minded Theist,we should write the "Gospel of Evo".
gotohellfast 3 years ago
Thank you Don for another piece of sweet tasty cake.
SuperTwit 3 years ago
Excellent videos as usual Don, thank you for sharing your knowledge.
aljimilah 3 years ago 2
Great as usual - I'm still sniggering over the opening music (it sounds like backgroud music to porn) - well we are talking about reproduction after all (and that's what sex is for)!
euphemus2 3 years ago
sniggering lol
AnonymsSnip3r 3 years ago
What's so hilarious about "sniggering"?
euphemus2 3 years ago
I've just been spending too much time around racists lately.
AnonymsSnip3r 3 years ago
Oh right - I see. I was about to say... "sniggering" by definition is less than hilarious laugher (LOL).
I've heard of "wigger" but what would "SNIGGER" mean anyway: Smooth-"N-WORD"; Short- "N-WORD"; Snip3r-"N-WORD"?
I think I'll use the older "snicker" next time.
euphemus2 3 years ago
Hahah
AnonymsSnip3r 3 years ago
Great vid but a little OffTopic comment: Why is it DonExodus2, and not just DonExodus? ^^
christopher90 3 years ago
Had to re-register after error.
DonExodus2 3 years ago
Good Music Choice!
GabrielGrewal 3 years ago
Don - You are a champion of the truth. Hybridization seems to be a key to understanding evolution. I have a question. Is viable offspring a deliniation mark for species? We consider the vicuna and the camel as distinct species that due to morphology in size cannot naturally mate, yet still produce viable offspring. It seems to me that speciation is clear in definition, but species is not. This makes sense that it is not because of the many gray drifting areas in boundaries of a specie's domain.
CHAS1422 3 years ago
You see that in dogs too, Never see a chiwawa mate with a great dane, but I think you can do it in the lab.
I think that if two breeds of the same species do not interbreed with each other long enough those lines will become different species. Think of the example with the lizards. Pop A can mate with B, B with C, but not A with C. If species b is not there to link the breeds then species becomes easier to define. Species is better used to define the fertility between two animals.
crimsonfist3 3 years ago
I wonder.. is it true that even after all the countless generations of fruitflies, they can still interbreed? Or is it they need more time?
leojboby 3 years ago
Good question, fruit fly species could not have mated with particular ancestors. This is speciation. Just because fruit flies reproduce quickly relative to us, DOES NOT mean that they should evolve more quickly.. necessarily... sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. It all depends. Also, what about ALL OTHER ANIMALS....?
herbiethebarber 3 years ago
Honestly, please teach my university Bio 121 class, you would own.
LaCerca 3 years ago 3
Good video as usual, keep up the good work.
JACKtheRIPP3R189 3 years ago
OK, why all the whining about PG ratings in the comment section? Is it all this talk about "matings"?
Well, you just can't get very far in understanding this stuff without first understanding the molecular biology of sex.
Also, why are people discussing Thermodynamics in the comments? This is Biology, not Chemistry. Thermodynamics applies to the movement and behavior of molecules. What DonExodus is talking about applies to population genetics, ecology, geography, and karyology.
helical4 3 years ago
Comment removed
helical4 3 years ago
RobertBaral365 3 years ago
*****
profanity pump
*****
atypicalguy 3 years ago
Great Video!
Small criticism, I cannot show this video to my class! Your videos are perfect for my biology class, but they have to be PG rated before I can show them. Could you please consider us poor high school science teachers when you make these videos?
Keep up the great work!
mausphart 3 years ago 2
Why exactly is this video not PG rated???
leojboby 3 years ago
Ronald :P
DonExodus2 3 years ago
"You fucking fail, get the fuck out."
Great for the lulz, not so great for the classroom.
getonwithitgawd 3 years ago 2
oh noes!... best find yourself another instructional video cause the lulz aint goin nowhere!
leojboby 3 years ago
I dunno, I think it's kinda cool that a teacher wants to referance failtube; of all places.
Either way, not my complaint- merely elaborating. Personally I'm all for profanity at school, so, I don't especially care even if he plays this on a widescreen projector to his whole school system. =)
getonwithitgawd 3 years ago
Working on it :)
DonExodus2 3 years ago
Outstanding We do need more Good teachers and Profs!
GabrielGrewal 3 years ago 2
lol max headroom moment at 8:40
ReligiouslyAtheist 3 years ago
damian is a smart man
ninja6kid 3 years ago
////Like the 2nd LAW of Thermodynamics, which the theory of evolution violates///
Astoundingly ignorant. It's like Hovind tunneled out.
Ozzyman200 3 years ago
Hovind can see you, even at this moment.
chert95 3 years ago
And watergun58. Stop calling everyone a pussy -_-. Insults don't make you sound more intelligent, nor do they support your argument. You can insult anyone you like, but it won't make the truth go away. Just tellin' ya C:
stardust005 3 years ago
In order for evolution to stand on its current definition, entropy is part from the start...the origins. That's the big problem. How do you start, Behe points to irreducibly complex systems, and he makes excellent points.
nikvagm 3 years ago
Dempski's paper posited Pi as an example of an artifact of identifiably intelligent origin. Certainly finding Pi(or the bible's text) encoded in human DNA would be indisputable. Why has this been downgraded to Behe's concept of Irreducible Complexity which is evidently much more difficult to extract from plausible paths of evolved complexity and so less than the rock solid proof the Dempski proposed?
damianpoirier 3 years ago
What really what makes Behe's concept so intriguing is that its already in biology. The idea of these molecular systems working and the awesome complexity at the simplest level is pretty cool stuff. I'm stuck on this at the moment, it is good science. I like to think of these things.
nikvagm 3 years ago
I cannot make any more comments this evening, thanks to all.
nikvagm 3 years ago
Anyway. If you wish to continue this debate in a more civilized and comprehensive manner, I invite you to mail my youtube account, that way we can do this more quickly, and hopefully we can get somethign about of it.
stardust005 3 years ago
It would be good science it they did good science instead of just looking at shit and saying "Hmm looks complex. It must be designed . I bet god did it." What a bunch of bull hooey. Complexity is not a measure of intelligence. A snow drift pile is complex. A simple cube can be an indication of intelligence. You need a measure or "out of placeness" that like a cube shaped planet would let us know "IT AIN'T NATURAL"
damianpoirier 3 years ago 2
Behe almost convinced me with his irreducible complexity argument.
Until I realized that it was rewording the ToE to saying that "ONLY the good genes get passed down"
that ONLY complete and functional tools get passed down.
Yet evidence of "incomplete broken pieces parts of complicated systems" being passed down abounds.
damianpoirier 3 years ago
Molecules aren't smart.
They don't "figure out a good tool to evolve towards."
They can't say this tool is good or that tool is bad.
A protein 'encoded for' is produced willy nilly (even if it means killing the biological producer of that protein).
If it only kills the organism "after" reproduction then that insidious protein code gets passed on.
Some offspring may acquire a mutation that triggers the protein before reproductive age. They get deleted from gene pool.
damianpoirier 3 years ago
Other offspring may acquire a mutation that triggers the protein or combines with the protein to do something totally marvelous for the organism.
Behe's notion that 9/10ths of a mousetrap will not be passed down is grossly misrepresenting evolutionary mechanisms.
Where some people see a sniper aiming for a protein product / tool (flagellum)
The reality is more like shrapnel.
We're drawing circles around the blind strikes and calling them bulleyes.
damianpoirier 3 years ago
Yeah, irreducible complexity would be better named as 'infinitely reducible complexity'. Although.. that 'infinitely' might be a bit questionable.
stardust005 3 years ago
he also calls people niggers and has been known to praise the work of the 9/11 terrorists. I mark his garbage spam.
damianpoirier 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
All fossils tell us, is that they died. There is no evidence any of the fossils gave birth to anything other than its kind. Because of evolutionary preconseptions, they try to feed us bullcrap, of this one evolved into that one.
Watergun58 3 years ago
Human "evolution" is still without a transitional form. The the various fossils that have been found are either classified as a variety of human being or ape...no transitionals here.
nikvagm 3 years ago
ERVs are remnants of failed viral infection which occurred in an ancestor's sex cell and got propagated in its child. The viral insertion site is completely random for many ERVs (and semi location specific for some (limited options but still an abundance of equally tenable locations to choose from) and finding one in the same location in two individuals indicates they each had that same ancestor. humans and chimps share many ERVs locations in common. What other conclusion can one come to?
damianpoirier 3 years ago
I do not know this evidence, I will need to study before commenting. Thank you.
nikvagm 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the fruit flies speciated many times, producing new species that could not mate with one another.
But they were still fruit flies. Your point?
Watergun58 3 years ago
and human and chimps are still primates. THAT's the point you dufus.
damianpoirier 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Why have new phylas not developed since the Cambrian explosion?
Watergun58 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
By what means did the code of life and the enzymes necessary to make the code originate? Which came first: the code to make the enzymes or the enzymes to make the code?
Watergun58 3 years ago
If fifty years of intensive research on mutant fruit flies has produced nothing but more fruit flies, why is it thought that other organisms can evolve into something else?
Watergun58 3 years ago
the fruit flies speciated many times, producing new species that could not mate with one another.
stardust005 3 years ago
The burden of proof is on you. There are plenty of fossil ancestors for complex invertebrates and fish.
So who was the ancestor, that gave rise to the first fish?
Dont get mad pussy because you have no evidence to support your fairy tale.
Watergun58 3 years ago
Have you evidence to support yours? Evolution is a theory that has been repeatedly revised and perfected for over a century, mountains of evidence have been unearthed. New discoveries have been made, all met with the same scrutiny as any other in the field of science. You however, have naught but bibles and bronze age scribblings of superstitious and primitive minds to support your thesis. Btw, I was a devout christian for 15 years, and I can just TELL you're the striking image of christ.
stardust005 3 years ago
Notcie these pussy atheists dont answer my questions.
Watergun58 3 years ago
In the "tree of life" that evolutionists have dreamed up, gaps in the fossil record are especially huge between single-cell creatures, complex invertebrates (such as snails, jellyfish, trilobites, clams, and sponges), and what evolutionists claim were the first vertebrates, fish. In fact, there are no fossil ancestors at all for complex invertebrates or fish.
Watergun58 3 years ago
LMFAO
SlashIStheShit 3 years ago
The burden of proof is on you. There are plenty of fossil ancestors for complex invertebrates and fish. Read an encyclopedia of science, and it will bring up examples. If you can PROVE with EVIDENCE that there are not fossil ancestors, and if you can cite your sources for your ludicrous statements, then and only then will people take you seriously. Until then, huddle in your cave and worship your false god by yourself. The world doesn't need your stupidity to stagnate progress.
stardust005 3 years ago
You really have said a lot without really saying anything. You did not comment about a single true transitional form.
Progress will truely begin when this lost science in the current understanding of evolution is replaced by investigations not prejudiced by presupposions and true object statements and ideas can come to the table.
nikvagm 3 years ago
Why have new phylas not developed since the Cambrian explosion?
Watergun58 3 years ago
By what means did the code of life and the enzymes necessary to make the code originate? Which came first: the code to make the enzymes or the enzymes to make the code?
Watergun58 3 years ago
That's a stupid question. You should probably learn about the theory of abiogenesis before you continue commenting.
stardust005 3 years ago
Jesus makes things evolve, simply because he can.
gayponyrape 3 years ago
The theory of evolution remains a theory because there are scientists who still evaluate data in an objective way. Stephen Jay Gould has commented on the frustration of the MASSIVE LACK of evidence in the form of transitional species in the fossil record. I have been slandered simply for questioning and investigating the merits of this theory (which is exactly what any OTHER theory in science is exposed to in sometimes brutal fashion...but somehow evolution is exempt!?)
Data is everything.
nikvagm 3 years ago
Please go look up the definition of the word "theory" as it pertains to scientific study...
CynicalSavior 3 years ago
//remains a theory //
What do you mean 'remains a theory'. Cell theory remains a theory, is this a problem?
//Stephen Jay Gould has commented on the frustration of the MASSIVE LACK of evidence in the form of transitional species in the fossil record.//
No he didnt, he was referring to one particular clade. It is very dishonest of you to say anything else.
//but somehow evolution is exempt!//
Just the opposite, you DONT examine evolution the same way as you do other theories.
DonExodus2 3 years ago
Please provide 1 actual transitional form in the fossil record, you cannot. It has yet to be found despite the >billions of fossils unearthed. I am not dishonest. He put forth punctuated equilibrium just to try to make it work for crying out loud!
By theory i mean theory, not LAW. Like the 2nd LAW of Thermodynamics, which the theory of evolution violates. (entropy, towards disorder, not higher order)
nikvagm 3 years ago
I'm sorry. If you read some children's encyclopedia which briefly explained the law, and then watched some christian video bastardize it, you hardly have the right to talk about the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Laws are also theories. In the scientific arena, the theory is the ultimate level of scientific truth that is achievable. Laymen such as yourself should learn the definitions of such terms you misuse, and the workings of the laws you so love to bastardize.
stardust005 3 years ago
I appreciate being patronized, this is not uncommon. I will not argue venn diagrams. I also appreciate you thinking that I am Christian, remarkable. I have only commented on facts, but you bring up religion.
nikvagm 3 years ago
Facts? I am quite sorry, I didn't catch that. To my knowledge, none of your statements are proven fact. I feel sorry for you my friend; at least the religious have an excuse to be stupid. You however, have proven to me that you don't. It also seems that you've failed to dispute any of my important points, but instead resorted to picking on something that is otherwise unrelated to the argument.
stardust005 3 years ago
As a once angry person, I sympathize with you. Emotional attacks, unfortunately can only go so far. The points which I have argued with you and not heard a response: transitional form, which lies solely with you as I do not know of one. And for the record, by ridiculing me with religion, then saying I picked an unrelated to comment about is rather juvenile.
nikvagm 3 years ago
The comment on religion, is but a comment on religion. It is unrelated to any reasoned argument outlined prior to it. I was merely pointing out the fact that the only point you chose to refute was my comment on religion. I apologize for assuming that you were religious in any way. Neither of us have presented solid evidence for our points, however, as I have said before, the burden of proof lies with you. You are the one disputing accepted theory, not I.
stardust005 3 years ago
There is zero thermodynamic difference between COPYING mutation A vrs copying mutation B.
There is zero thermodynamic difference between CULLING mutation A vrs culling mutation B.
The environment pushes and life pushes back.
Action = reaction.
Complexity happens.
Entropy is not breaking down anything in evolution.
damianpoirier 3 years ago
//Please provide 1 actual transitional form in the fossil record//
I have a playlist full of hundreds.
///you cannot///
I just did.
///It has yet to be found///
You mean you have yet to find.
DonExodus2 3 years ago
OH SNAP!
TheGreatDolanmite 3 years ago
The Second Law of Thermodynamics applies to *isolated systems* alone. (Don't take my word for it, look it up).
Then look up the definition of an "isolated system" and ask yourself if biological systems are isolated.
I'm not trying to be patronising, just do it. It'll save you some embarrassment in the future.
ssnatcherss 3 years ago
Also, thermodynamic entropy is actually REQUIRED for life and evolution, it is the conversion of stored energy into work and waste heat. Much ado about information theory NAAAWT lol.
scienceminded 3 years ago
Ask a creationist to prove that a rock has higher entropy than a plant. It's just the opposite.
Some people speculate that protein novelty (evolution) may be entropically FAVORED since it greatly increases the number of different molecules in the quasi-open environment of living cells.
machomaas 3 years ago
There is zero thermodynamic difference between COPYING mutation A vrs copying mutation B.
There is zero thermodynamic difference between CULLING mutation A vrs culling mutation B.
The environment pushes and life pushes back.
Action = reaction.
Complexity happens.
Entropy is not breaking down anything in evolution.
damianpoirier 3 years ago
He just learned to speak as a parlor trick, like a parrot. hmmmm...
scienceminded 3 years ago
No other theory is so crapped so much on by the public. What other scientific theory is the public brainwashed against in favor of pseudoscience? What other scientific theory has been attacked by quote mines and mass public misinformation?
Your point could not be further from the truth- evolution is held to the same standard to the scientific community, but a laughable one in the public.
DonExodus2 3 years ago
////Like the 2nd LAW of Thermodynamics, which the theory of evolution violates///
Im terribly sorry, I mistook you for someone who actually knew what they were talking about.
Please review BASIC science before commenting, and wasting peoples' time.
DonExodus2 3 years ago
I can disprove evolution in two words: Rosie Odonnel
hoejreorienteret 3 years ago
was that "black and gold" by sam sparro playing in the background in the beggining?
ironic :D
BIGgourami 3 years ago
Thanks for doing this! I always feel like I've learned something (and not wasted a day) every time I watch one of your videos!
Bleatmop 3 years ago
Ok look. We never see evolution at work. We have never seen a monkey give birth to a whale. We see new things being created every single day!
kff 3 years ago
Good creationist impression. XD
kamijk 3 years ago
If we did see that, poor monkey... :P
DeadlyChinchilla 3 years ago
Fantastic stuff as always Don.
cliffy340 3 years ago
YEP THERE IS NO GOD
hitm4n04 3 years ago
this channel rocks!
Pottan23 3 years ago
In the last edition of the NPR program "Talk of the Nation-Science Friday," they talked about how copper apparently also kills bacteria and this has caused a push to replace all the bed frames in hospitals with copper frames.
lazyperfectionist1 3 years ago
DonEx - I'm glad you're back! Make more videos!
redwine4545 3 years ago
It is easy to fake a creationist. Here:
Evolution be the work of satan to draws yu awaty from Jesus. Their is kno evident for it watsoever!!! Dinosaws were humans friends and all evidence point to a big flood.
But God still loves you !!!111 And cares abut you!! So repent befoer he tortures you for all eternity.
Englishdosser86 3 years ago 5
But wait, that raises a red flag. Sure, you said that I'd burn in hell for eternity, but you FORGOT to say that you'd pray for me to see the light and truth and all that jazz! I mean, the conceit is not complete by just saying "GAWD LURVS U!!!"
TheGreatDolanmite 3 years ago
A5 and Ae are two different species with a common ancestor!!
Stonehawk 3 years ago
Damn, it's really hard to fake a creationist, I wonder how they do it. Oh yeah, by not reading up on the subject.
pedroFoodstamp 3 years ago
Come on guys, they're not "new species", they are different KINDS (!!!) of the same species. You know... like dogs. A bird transforming into another bird is still a bird!
pedroFoodstamp 3 years ago
Just wondering and this is probably a stupid question but it is possibly unlikely that a Chihuahua and a St. Bernard could successfully breed so is it wrong to classify them both as dogs? Are they separate species at this stage that we haven't reclassified?
amadain17 3 years ago
It forms a reproductive isolation that will if maintained produce progressively more distinct sets of genes and eventually preclude successful breeding. Even after that dogs will be a type of "ring species".
damianpoirier 3 years ago
They CAN reproduce. They just can't. Do you get it? It's not that their reproduction doesn't work, it's just the size of their bodys. Just like different sizes in humans can make sex more problematic.
ErikeRKK 3 years ago
Do you think its possible to make a cross between a dog and a cat if both sperm and egg both have full compliments of their chromosomes, or if two zygotes of both species were fused? I think that would be awesome because you'd have an animal that would chase itself up a tree, catch mice and fetch the paper, and hike its leg on top of your fire place mantle for a wee wee.
So, do we call it a dat, a cog, a dot or a cag?
FlowCell 3 years ago
It is not the chromosome count that determines viability. The proteins that switch genes on and off need to be non-interfering. The histone locations need to match. Fused zygotes would be a chimera and also not very likely to survive even to term. We'd likely call it doa.
damianpoirier 3 years ago
« So, do we call it a dat, a cog, a dot or a cag? »
I'd call it Jack.
XGralgrathor 3 years ago
I had to go watch this whole series. It was worth the hour it took! Yeah Ronald and clowns in general creep me out! haha. Amazing series! Keep it up!
pixelatedxdeath 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evolution has ZERO evidence to support it. Creationism is proven 100%
GOD DID EVERYTHING.
Watergun58 3 years ago
oh shit, well, then I'll have to accept Creationism. I follow the evidence wherever they lead. That's just the kind of scientist I am.
TheLittleDonkey 3 years ago
evolution has lots of evidence. the only evidence for GOD is the bible... but how do we know all the stuff in the book is true
deathtoll206 3 years ago
but how do we know all the stuff in the book is true
no we cant, but common sense will say, its fiction based on actual events but well embelished.
emancoy 3 years ago
Saying things doesn't make things true, but the fact you believe otherwise is probably why you are creationist. In reality you are scared of the possibility you might be wrong, so you avoid the million pieces of evidence.
lonerook860 3 years ago
I guess you hope if you keep repeating it eventually it'll become true?
aleceth 3 years ago
"Evolution has ZERO evidence to support it."
Your deity killed a kitty for that lie.
"Creationism is proven 100%"
Now your deity just killed a platypus.
"GOD DID EVERYTHING."
Science cannot comment on the supernatural.
FSAthe1st 3 years ago
supernatual stuff is just stuff unknown to science at the moment.
ToasTeR1094 3 years ago
"supernatual stuff is just stuff unknown to science at the moment. "
The truly supernatural cannot be studied by naturalistic means.
Anything previously thought to be supernatural that an explanation is subsequently found for then ceased to be declared as supernatural an instead becomes entirely natural. That's how science works.
Hopefully you understand this and my expansion was what you were trying to say in the first place, but I felt it was worth expanding upon.
FSAthe1st 3 years ago
very nice compilation of "recent" crossbreeds.
Paxmax 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GOD DID EVERYTHING. Evolution is a fucking fairy tale for NIGGERS.
Watergun007 3 years ago
watergun fuck off you troll
youre either the stupidest motherfucker ive seen youtube for about a week or a troll who hasnt learnt the art of subtlety.
either way gtfo my tubes
carnut666 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Suck my dick, you fucking prick ass bitch motherfucker. Evolution is a fucking fairy tale, with ZERO evidence to support it.
Watergun007 3 years ago
You don't sound very Christian. Your lies and hatred anger your God. Be careful, or he may punish you eternally in fire and brimstone when you die.
Englishdosser86 3 years ago 3
hahahaha, some "loving" god.
EtaCarinae22 3 years ago
haha retard
DonExodus2 3 years ago
Watergun007, Yay! It's fun to make up shit on the interwebs!!!
fiddl3r 3 years ago
god must be proud to have a guy like you. so loving, kind and full of love...
unkaodya 3 years ago
"GOD DID EVERYTHING."
Take your finger off the SHIFT key. And Science cannot comment on the supernatural.
"Evolution is a fucking fairy tale for NIGGERS."
I HATE racist pigs. You're a racist pig.
FSAthe1st 3 years ago
Hey, lay off the pigs, damnit. You scrofaphobe!
Slotherder 3 years ago
excellent, and a few useful examples to show some people. Thank you!
Yithmas 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Fossils show the transitions.
Fossils shown no transitions. They only exist in the delusional minds of evolutionists.
Evolution has been observed.
What in evolution has been observed?
Watergun007 3 years ago
So the millions of fossils that have been found, and the conclusions drawn about them by thousands if not millions of scientists, are all wrong, while a small group of people know better?
Thanks for letting us know. What's your source, by the way?
Mithcoriel 3 years ago
Wow, are there really that many people who have no knowledge of evolution but still refuse to believe it?!? Are there really that many people who will say that there is zero evidence for it without reading any secular books about it? I have never heard of so many people speaking so much about something of which they know so little.
The things that the evil book will lead people to believe. lol
Peace