Sorry but the Cambrian Explosion is a scientific fact and there is no pre Cambrian evolutionary explanation for their existence. Even Dawkins says that it can not be explained. So what you said is not accurate.
There's a nice little video on the first member of the animal kingdom. The basis for all other animals to come. Search Youtube for '1of6 - The Shape of Life - Episode 01 - Origins' or
The theory of evolution seems to work fine for 520million years.
So there's what, some hiccup before that? Big deal. Every Creationist changes their argument time and time again, and when they first hear about the 'Cambrian Explosion' it's all see, see, I told you, as if they've finally found a winning argument yet again. It's all moot really.
Evolution is about the changes. How life began is a whole different story.
It's sad when people think evolution & god can't coexists. I SMH!
@22fr6 Who’s evidence? Your evidence? Based on what criteria? Yours? That’s a very poor proof to submit.
Your’e a paper tiger and a fool, and a weak one at that.You are scared and it’s sadly telling by tone of your entire tirade.Perhaps you should consider taking a course in logic as well. I certainly would recommend it.
If this is the best evidence to refute evolution, then there is not point in anyone looking furter.
They claim that there vere no animanls before the camprian, THERE WAS
They claim that no new genotypes was developed after the camprian, THERE WAS included mammals ie. HUMANS
And even if they are right the theory of evolution still workes perfectly the 520 mil. years after the cambrian, so it does not disprove the theory, it would only prove that the theory is not complete
1) 2:27 ... same old bull shit.. you are not puffing some body structure in exitence..
2) mr mayer is a Phd in history and a pholsophy of science, he is no paleontologist.. why the hell is he presented as an autority figure for something that he probably has no specific knowledge about..
I thought there was something fishy when I heard the spooky music... Of course it was our ID-friends again... They try to sound scientific and clever but fail miserably... What's Meyer's problem?
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence...
@22fr6 The Endicaranian.fauna went extinct millions of years before the Cambrian radiation event and no one has been able to make a link between them and the Cambrian phyla which appear with in a 3-10 million year period some Chinese say even less. The event show multi cellar creature suddenly appearing in orders of magnitude with no known ancestry. Even Richard Dawkins admits this which he calls a delight to creationist and he is a hardcore evolutionist.
@22fr6 now how do they 'develop' shells and skeletons? how do they 'know' that they need shells and skeletons? and how do they 'made' them for themselves?
There is some new data coming out on behavior (and environment) turning genes off and on. Always thought there would be a feedback into the genetic plans when procreating. Might have some relevance here with HOX.
Article was in New Scientist-diet changes in a group of males led to gene switching.
1. the cambrian explosion occured MUCH earlier than this video states (~543MYA).
2. heavy elements were saped from the atmosphere to add the opertunity for "new info" as he says, wich if not added by the elements themselves, would most likely add room for if not stimulate mutation.
3. sponges are complex life forms dumb ass!
4. hox geans code for creation/organization of limbs, organs, etc. and activate from firtilization. a mutation could create multiple/different organic structures.
The information here is quite outdated and intended to disseminate lies about evolution in order to promote intelligent design and the Christian theocratic worldview. It features a staunch Unification Church 'moonie' Jonathan Wells, whose intent is to spread the pseudoscience of intelligent design among the scientific community and the general public. Fossil records now show a very rich fauna predating the Cambrian, the now well known Vendian or Ediacaran deposits of Australia and Russia.
Everyone had a mom and a dad. No scientist thinks there is anything different with the 60 million year period. Evolution took off at some point, after several billion years as one celled animals.
Mutation provied the variation needed for evolution to happen.
Wow this vid is so religious screams stupidity most of the information is correct.But they are dumb to assume things like where did the sponge larvae come from.What are they disproving not evolution because that wouldnt prove the first few verses of the bible.If pre cambrian life was very tiny and small it didnt nessarly have to be captured in that exact rock formation.We are lucky to have the fossils we have even still.We dont even need fossils to prove evolution.Dna
Religions teach that the EARTH is 10,000 years old. This video claims that the Cambrian period was 250,000,000 years ago. How does that fly in the face of the Bible, you short sided fools!
1. Not every religion teaches the earth is 10000 years old. 2. Not every scientist describing problems with evolutionary theory is doing so on a religious basis. A lot of main stream scientists are simply describing accurately the evidence they are finding. 3. Not every religious person believes the same things about the Bible or any other religious text for that matter. That is why there are so many different types of Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buudists, etc.
" 2. Not every scientist describing problems with evolutionary theory is doing so on a religious basis. A lot of main stream scientists are simply describing accurately the evidence they are finding."
There are no mainsteam scientists who refute evolution. Creationists just like to lie and say there are.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Even within the scientific community the age of the earth is up for debate. In the 1960's scientists shocked the world by claiming the earth was 5 billion years old. That number has grown to hundreds of billions of years in just a few decades. There are a lot of people in the scientific community that feel this is intellectually dishonest. There is evidence that suggest the earth is much younger.
NO, actually you are WRONG. 5-6 billion years is still the norm, and I have never heard of any theory claiming 100's of billions of years. And NO credible scientist would claim the Earth is as young as 10,000 yrs. or anything close to that. SORRY, try your tripe on fools.
@Elvikowsky Welcome angry God-Hater, and I’m happy to have an impact on your dismal view of yourself, and the world that you live in.Ask yourself this,”If you don’t believe in Jesus/God then what drives you to attack them?” Somewhat odd huh?
@Seigu007 What faith do you belong to 'cause I can probably cite an example when every faith's God Fearing people did some horrific things & as such should be disavowed. God seems never to be the problem, it's the religious that are.
-
Creationists arguments which seemed always to be based on the literalness of the bible, seem always to change (e.g. Earth being 6,000 years old--missing link b/n ape & man--Cambrian Explosion? etc.)
Lack of evidence means nothing as you can't prove god exists...
Science also changes over time with new discoveries and Christians have many good reasons to believe in God`s existence however Atheists don`t have equally good reasons to argue against God`s existence only a will to not believe.
@FeignofCordor, Atheists have a will not to believe, what?
1st, I'm not an atheist. 2nd, Historically God was the answer for everything, e.g. when the sun darkened during a solar eclipse it was god(s) doing. Yet, with science comes enlightenment & man is better able to explain the world around him (i.e. the moon blocking the sun) & there's less a need to attribute causes to 'Acts of God'.
Of course they don't. This is the real reason they don't want ID or creation taught either. They don't want to be exposed as liars. You must not expose their religion as a hoax.
@22fr6 I see you are ignoring the evidence just to continue with your belief
peyupsgurl 3 weeks ago
@22fr6
Sorry but the Cambrian Explosion is a scientific fact and there is no pre Cambrian evolutionary explanation for their existence. Even Dawkins says that it can not be explained. So what you said is not accurate.
FeignofCordor 1 month ago
There's a nice little video on the first member of the animal kingdom. The basis for all other animals to come. Search Youtube for '1of6 - The Shape of Life - Episode 01 - Origins' or
or cut and paste the following to a Youtube URL,
watch?v=fwesx8Ko0n8
agonyflips 1 month ago
The theory of evolution seems to work fine for 520million years.
So there's what, some hiccup before that? Big deal. Every Creationist changes their argument time and time again, and when they first hear about the 'Cambrian Explosion' it's all see, see, I told you, as if they've finally found a winning argument yet again. It's all moot really.
Evolution is about the changes. How life began is a whole different story.
It's sad when people think evolution & god can't coexists. I SMH!
agonyflips 1 month ago
I think I'm agnostic but,
I haven't decided.
*RIMSHOT*
agonyflips 1 month ago
@22fr6 Who’s evidence? Your evidence? Based on what criteria? Yours? That’s a very poor proof to submit.
Your’e a paper tiger and a fool, and a weak one at that.You are scared and it’s sadly telling by tone of your entire tirade.Perhaps you should consider taking a course in logic as well. I certainly would recommend it.
Seigu007 3 months ago
ATHEISTS WHEN YOU COURSE AND PISSED
THIS IS THE BEST EVIDENCE EVER TO REFUTE EVOLUTION
yahzanhashem 7 months ago
@yahzanhashem
If this is the best evidence to refute evolution, then there is not point in anyone looking furter.
They claim that there vere no animanls before the camprian, THERE WAS
They claim that no new genotypes was developed after the camprian, THERE WAS included mammals ie. HUMANS
And even if they are right the theory of evolution still workes perfectly the 520 mil. years after the cambrian, so it does not disprove the theory, it would only prove that the theory is not complete
dimbbulb
dinomand 7 months ago
@yahzanhashem Only if you never went to school.
77Totems 7 months ago
@yahzanhashem Why no Cambrian rabbits?
MsMrNoface 2 months ago
are they dating genesis to the cambrian? :)
couple more things
1) 2:27 ... same old bull shit.. you are not puffing some body structure in exitence..
2) mr mayer is a Phd in history and a pholsophy of science, he is no paleontologist.. why the hell is he presented as an autority figure for something that he probably has no specific knowledge about..
MartaItSMe 9 months ago
I thought there was something fishy when I heard the spooky music... Of course it was our ID-friends again... They try to sound scientific and clever but fail miserably... What's Meyer's problem?
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence...
Go read a book or something! Peace!
henrikthedj 1 year ago
more creationist propaganda
NaturalSelection101 1 year ago
I want my 15 minutes back!
Kingucktoad 1 year ago
@22fr6 The Endicaranian.fauna went extinct millions of years before the Cambrian radiation event and no one has been able to make a link between them and the Cambrian phyla which appear with in a 3-10 million year period some Chinese say even less. The event show multi cellar creature suddenly appearing in orders of magnitude with no known ancestry. Even Richard Dawkins admits this which he calls a delight to creationist and he is a hardcore evolutionist.
benthemiester 1 year ago
Darwinism is 150 years out of date, proving Darwin wrong does not prove evolution did not happen.
We do have pre-Cambrian fossils, everyone had a mom and a dad.
gregrutz 1 year ago
Everyone in the Cambrian Period had a mom and a dad, just like today.
They did find pre-Cambrian fossils.
How do Creationists explain the life 520 million years ago?
Where do you think the 'new information'' comes from, the Explosion happened.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@22fr6 now how do they 'develop' shells and skeletons? how do they 'know' that they need shells and skeletons? and how do they 'made' them for themselves?
rahxun 1 year ago
@rahxun Easy, it is called Evolution.
gregrutz 1 year ago
HUmm never heard anyone use the term "Darwinians" before, usually just darwinists
phookadude 1 year ago
There is some new data coming out on behavior (and environment) turning genes off and on. Always thought there would be a feedback into the genetic plans when procreating. Might have some relevance here with HOX.
Article was in New Scientist-diet changes in a group of males led to gene switching.
437thx1138 1 year ago
Ken Miller is right !
gregrutz 1 year ago 2
1. the cambrian explosion occured MUCH earlier than this video states (~543MYA).
2. heavy elements were saped from the atmosphere to add the opertunity for "new info" as he says, wich if not added by the elements themselves, would most likely add room for if not stimulate mutation.
3. sponges are complex life forms dumb ass!
4. hox geans code for creation/organization of limbs, organs, etc. and activate from firtilization. a mutation could create multiple/different organic structures.
LongJoeWhiplash 1 year ago
The information here is quite outdated and intended to disseminate lies about evolution in order to promote intelligent design and the Christian theocratic worldview. It features a staunch Unification Church 'moonie' Jonathan Wells, whose intent is to spread the pseudoscience of intelligent design among the scientific community and the general public. Fossil records now show a very rich fauna predating the Cambrian, the now well known Vendian or Ediacaran deposits of Australia and Russia.
charadester 2 years ago 4
Everyone had a mom and a dad. No scientist thinks there is anything different with the 60 million year period. Evolution took off at some point, after several billion years as one celled animals.
Mutation provied the variation needed for evolution to happen.
gregrutz 2 years ago
clones so not mom AND dad
numberman52 2 years ago
There were males and females in the Cambrian Period.
gregrutz 2 years ago
Every one tries to prove that what he believes.
naboten 2 years ago
@naboten That might be true about religion. Biology is not based on 'faith'
We have the fossils. We have the DNA.
gregrutz 2 years ago
Comment removed
robertmike57 2 years ago
Wow this vid is so religious screams stupidity most of the information is correct.But they are dumb to assume things like where did the sponge larvae come from.What are they disproving not evolution because that wouldnt prove the first few verses of the bible.If pre cambrian life was very tiny and small it didnt nessarly have to be captured in that exact rock formation.We are lucky to have the fossils we have even still.We dont even need fossils to prove evolution.Dna
flacokiddabi 2 years ago
@flacokiddabi lol uh i think fossils play a big roll in Evolution...
shoonger001 2 years ago
Did Cambrian had its own Jezus and Saviour then?
Its bullshit because I didn't red in bible anything about that Garden of Eden being populated with dinosaurs or something
arlpainbringer 2 years ago
Phew! That must be the reason why most Europeans don't like America...
Elvikowsky 2 years ago
you are right!
Elvikowsky 2 years ago
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
josiahdallas 2 years ago
"Darwinism doesn't have a strong response - GOD MUST HAVE DONE IT!!!1!!111!!!1!"
sigh
iamthe1337est 2 years ago
Religions teach that the EARTH is 10,000 years old. This video claims that the Cambrian period was 250,000,000 years ago. How does that fly in the face of the Bible, you short sided fools!
1milewski 2 years ago
"This video Claims"
josiahdallas 2 years ago
1. Not every religion teaches the earth is 10000 years old. 2. Not every scientist describing problems with evolutionary theory is doing so on a religious basis. A lot of main stream scientists are simply describing accurately the evidence they are finding. 3. Not every religious person believes the same things about the Bible or any other religious text for that matter. That is why there are so many different types of Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buudists, etc.
technomagi2009 2 years ago
" 2. Not every scientist describing problems with evolutionary theory is doing so on a religious basis. A lot of main stream scientists are simply describing accurately the evidence they are finding."
There are no mainsteam scientists who refute evolution. Creationists just like to lie and say there are.
carnemolidazh 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Even within the scientific community the age of the earth is up for debate. In the 1960's scientists shocked the world by claiming the earth was 5 billion years old. That number has grown to hundreds of billions of years in just a few decades. There are a lot of people in the scientific community that feel this is intellectually dishonest. There is evidence that suggest the earth is much younger.
technomagi2009 2 years ago
NO, actually you are WRONG. 5-6 billion years is still the norm, and I have never heard of any theory claiming 100's of billions of years. And NO credible scientist would claim the Earth is as young as 10,000 yrs. or anything close to that. SORRY, try your tripe on fools.
1milewski 2 years ago 4
As if any serious scientist ever claimed the earth was 100 billion years old. Haha, who told you that? Your claim is simply ridiculous.
Elvikowsky 2 years ago 9
@Elvikowsky Welcome angry God-Hater, and I’m happy to have an impact on your dismal view of yourself, and the world that you live in.Ask yourself this,”If you don’t believe in Jesus/God then what drives you to attack them?” Somewhat odd huh?
Seigu007 3 months ago
@Seigu007 What faith do you belong to 'cause I can probably cite an example when every faith's God Fearing people did some horrific things & as such should be disavowed. God seems never to be the problem, it's the religious that are.
-
Creationists arguments which seemed always to be based on the literalness of the bible, seem always to change (e.g. Earth being 6,000 years old--missing link b/n ape & man--Cambrian Explosion? etc.)
Lack of evidence means nothing as you can't prove god exists...
agonyflips 1 month ago
@agonyflips
Science also changes over time with new discoveries and Christians have many good reasons to believe in God`s existence however Atheists don`t have equally good reasons to argue against God`s existence only a will to not believe.
FeignofCordor 1 month ago
@FeignofCordor, Atheists have a will not to believe, what?
1st, I'm not an atheist. 2nd, Historically God was the answer for everything, e.g. when the sun darkened during a solar eclipse it was god(s) doing. Yet, with science comes enlightenment & man is better able to explain the world around him (i.e. the moon blocking the sun) & there's less a need to attribute causes to 'Acts of God'.
Watch this video:
cut & paste into URL
watch?v=mE-NQ6mYJsg
Interesting point of view
agonyflips 1 month ago
@technomagi2009
The earth is 4,566 million years old,
+ or - 2 million years.
Clear enough for you.
gregrutz 2 years ago
they wont tell you this in school
darpachief 2 years ago
Of course they don't. This is the real reason they don't want ID or creation taught either. They don't want to be exposed as liars. You must not expose their religion as a hoax.
jesusrules2012 2 years ago
Very well done and very informative.
campdon 2 years ago
great video
iToyRobot 2 years ago