David Attenborough, Inaccuracies in Darwin and the Tree of Life (Evolution Principle-MJM)

[darkfur35]

Evolution is a big farce.....I mean fart.

[MrPlokijuhujiko]

I will admit that it's pretty ballsy to proceed each of your arguments with someone who utterly debunks them. Ballsy and stupid.

[darkfur35]

evolution is just a bad joke.

[SeedsOfHatred]

@darkfur35 Bad, dirty, tasteless, unfair, sure. But at least it has a witty punchline.

The Creationist joke simply finishes with "God did it" and walks away, leaving us with a lot of unanswered questions.

[animaljp3]

@darkfur35 prove it is a joke

[txtamaman]

It's funny what people will believe...you will believe in Super Aliens ...men from monkeys , life erupting from nothing but you will not believe in a being that actually created life. Even the formula that evolutionists use for the possibility of life, by their own admissions, is so far beyond the realm of probability that it would never just happen. Carbon dating has so many flaws and assumptions that at best we could date to about 50,000 years ago. Most scientists agree to this. Good luck!

[ScarletDavies]

@txtamaman Good luck with what? Yes, science has flaws but so does religion. The difference between the two is that science will admit to its flaws.

[ciarogciarogeile]

@txtamaman Everything that you have just said there is a complete lie. I find it very strange that an entire century of true scientific inquiry could be completely wrong, even when hundreds of thousands of scientists working independently of one another in innumerably different fields have all come to the same conclusions about the nature of life on Earth and the physical laws of the universe. Just because you are uncomfortable with them does not negate them.

[ciarogciarogeile]

@txtamaman Indeed, it is funny what people will believe. I don't have a problem with people believing in a God. I would never say that evolution rules out the possibility of the existence of a creator being of some description. Because it doesn't. But to deny evolution is ridiculous. To support either Creationism or evolution requires evidence of one or the other. Evolution has over 3 billion years of evidence (being a product of it, we ourselves are exhibit A...), while Creationism does not.

[dieugrandify]

As long as they don't read the Quran, they will never get right thoses Scientists, His mighty blessed them with brains only to feed it th dogs under Satan's watch.

[Rhinogradentian]

Designer or no designer, evolution and life is divinely beautiful <3

[glendaweil]

Wrong we are not related to apes unless your an athiest then goes anything to try and disprove God.

[grumpyguts1967]

@glendaweil did i just read that right glenda? 'we are not related to apes unless your an atheist'?....as an atheist myself i dont try to disprove god , its a pointless endeavour , what i do is give my reasons for believing he shouldnt exist and why a god of the bible is not worthy of human worship, this saves time arguing over evidence for and against creation, besides , your religion is based on faith , not scientific evidence, if you believe , thats cool , but leave science to scientists.

[glendaweil]

@grumpyguts1967 Tis i wht hapens when you leave science to scientist they have no common sense and wil make up all kinds of crap like macro man from ape bs oh i know descended from ape like creatures yea right.

[ciarogciarogeile]

@grumpyguts1967 Couldn't have said it better meself! Fair play! :)

[grumpyguts1967]

@ciarogciarogeile thanks , appreciate it.

[mutadis1]

Creationists make 2 important errors in their story:

1* The myth of the perfect DNA (genes) replication.

2* An ignorance of the analogy between dead and living material.

1*: ‘Ultra complex living cells containing a system for perfect DNA (genes) transmission?’

Reality is, that but a smaller number of billions of DNA, seeds, eggs, living cells, foetuses, etc result in a ‘normal’ (= NOT perfect, but conditional average) living organism. This is daily scientifically proven.

[mutadis1]

2*: Are water and stones dead material?

Electrons move at high speed inside the atoms of any material. Electrons can move between different atoms (environmental conditions), attracting each other and forming molecules (basic chemistry). If incidentally the food of various atoms is near, temperature, pressure, etc is well, molecules produce autonomously. From atoms (elements) to molecules (materials), the building blocks of each basic virus as well of the complex human body. Any change of…

[mutadis1]

… any change of environment (micro or macro) will influence and may result in changes of either dead of living material. It is only a matter of time for science to puzzle out a full accurate picture of life and evolution techniques. The nearly unbeatable question remains: what is matter and energy, created by the Big Bang? MM

[mutadis1]

Darwin: ‘Evolution by natural selection’; 100% correct. Concluding that species adapt to environment is inaccurate and irrelevant (it is the environment that adapt the species).

The M.Mutadis’ theory completed the evolution principle by: ‘The simple mutations of genetic molecules in the natural reproduction process’.

Reminder: the channel controller removes contemptuous comments. (MJM)

[jaykulls]

Actually, watching the video again, I can see that you are flat out wrong.

[mutadis1]

We know there are less limitations or taboos in Australia about genetic experiments. So the knowledge there must be comprehensive. If you are convinced to have understood the complete evolution principle we promoted here, you are free to send us a link to any document that demonstrates this new idea if of an earlier date than our publications. Also we will not involve in arguing about minor translation errors or word games in the English language. (Response to comments)

MJM

[mutadis1]

REMINDER. There is no ’adaptation’ force in life or species. Adaptation is a misleading result, as the no adapted are eliminated. Nitpicking? No. People regularly take wrong tracks to solutions. (resp. to comments) MM 

[jaykulls]

@mutadis1 I cant see the point of this. It's not the individual creature that adapts, it is the whole species. Maybe your interpretation of the word adapt is different to mine. But it is just a word. The species certainly do change to suit the enviroment. How is that not adapting?

[mutadis1]

@jaykulls Sure, in common thinking and language, species (virtually) adapt to environment. However you ignore the ‘greater picture’ if you reverse the factual truth of action and consequence. The base of life and species’ evolution is inside the continuously (apparently accidental) changes of new genetic molecules. Molecules and environment are a result of the chain of consequences of the initial Big Bang. Compare with a shot on a billiard table. MM

[jaykulls]

@mutadis1 From someone who is obviously intelligent, this is just nitpicking. You have not revealed any flaw in the current thinking on the subject.

[mutadis1]

@jaykulls There is a fundamental difference between adapting to (active capacity) and being adapted (passive property). Even Darwin found this 150 years ago. Don’t act by superficial thinking or shooting down weird looking ideas too fast. 

[mutadis1]

Society, politics, science…, people mainly act on symptoms. Finding, or acting on true causes need more intensive efforts and often brings less personal benefits. MM

[cojanti]

I do not understand your point, Mutadis1. Throughout 7 minutes 45 seconds of video and lots and lots of text, you have failed to inform me of what those inaccuracies are.

You have failed to state the very essence of your theory and I am left confused about your viewpoint at the most basic level.

[jaykulls]

@cojanti agreed, I think maybe he doesn't understand it all that well.

[mutadis1]

Some basic knowledge of automation may help to understand life and evolution.

Every living cell is steered by the genetic (memory) molecule(s) inside. It multiplies autonomously and determinates the interaction with other cells. MM

[Sikoa2617]

God(or not), reading these comments is like reading an essay. Come on peeps, summarize it for us lazy people. =D

[dawudedude]

I wish I could like the bits with david attenborough in them rather than having to dislike the whole thing :(

[dawudedude]

How about rather than believing in something that cant be proven, we KNOW something that can be.

[mutadis1]

Building a chain of nuclear power plants (incl. MOX!!) in a high level risk earthquake area is the same as ‘Selling your Soul to the Devil to obtain earthly Riches’! However, the courage of the Japanese how they deal with their apocalyptic ordeal deserves respect and full support.

[mutadis1]

EVOLUTION by M.Mutadis. (the darwinPlus rule 1991/ book:‘3 Laws of Life’, published online Sept 2008) Species evolve due to the mix of male and female genes into the progeny. Species evolve (slow mutation) into new species due to nature’s imperfection in reproducing exact complex genes molecule copies. Environment dictates which properties survive. (Darwin)

[mutadis1]

Relativity1/2 (simplified): Ride a car speed 70, throw forwards a ball out with speed 30. Ball flies total speed 100 relative to road or spectator. The car lights send light travelling at constant speed...... read further on channel's page, error mssge here....

[mutadis1]

Relativity2/2: Light, a form of energy. A body contains matter. Matter has mass. Energy is needed to accelerate mass. Towards light speed (c), mass increases. Accelerating a body close to c, would need a part of the energy of the universe! Most probably (full) matter cannot exist at light speed. CERN (Geneva); giant magnetic forces accelerate smallest particles to highest speeds in opposite direction, obtaining collisions; to learn about matter, energy, the universe and the BigBang. MM

[mutadis1]

Science is knowing, not believing.

A scientist who believes, may be a good professional, but might be not a full scientist.

MM

[mutadis1]

As we probably never can uncover what the primal energy (or matter) of the universe is, not in reason not in qualification, some people could call this energy ‘God’. An issue of giving things names. However, in that case one has to be aware that this ‘God’ is completely predictable, calculable in all actions and consequences. (Response to some comments)

MM

[stufaman]

Look at it this way. David Attenborough's documentaries show how unfair life can be. How cruel is it to see a new born animal snatched from it's mother and eaten alive, but it happens. And no matter which God anyone believes in. It's fair to say 'HEs' let some horrible things happen to us.

I'd say life is so unfair that many religious factions would be gutted to find out their faiths are based on some one's bizarre theory. No matter what we believe, that does happen.

[mutadis1]

It makes no sense to talk about things everybody knows, but it may be good to talk about things everybody thinks to know.

M Mutadis

[mutadis1]

The greatest mystery for humanity is not the universe, nature or life,

but, the question what is matter and energy? The building blocks of everything.

M Mutadis

[korzon]

@mutadis1 Yes but the question is where did all this energy and matter come from Nothing?Something had to create the matter first to even have the energy. And you would need the energy to create the matter.What came first matter or energy and how could this all come to be with no outside intervention?Scientists have absolutely no idea so all they do is speculate.The Universe is matter and energy so it is still the greatest mystery.

[TheJamesnao]

@korzon Haha that is very inaccurate and moronic to speak personally...

"We are made of stars. We can trace the elements, forged in the center of high mass stars that went unstable at the ends of their lives, explode and scattered their enriched contents across the galaxy, sprinkled into gas clouds which then collapse and form stars and planets... And life." - Neil d. Tyson (NASA Astrophysicist an a really cool guy.) FROM THE BEST SERMON EVER ON YOUTUBE!!!!

[korzon]

@TheJamesnao Realy then answer the question where did all this come from?Thats what my comment is about not the giberish you said i made the question quite clear without even mentioning evolution this goes way back before the first supposed cell.Obviously you dont know so you skipped that part and started off with the effect and not the cause.Again where did this matter and energy come from?Last time I will ask.

[TheJamesnao]

@korzon after measuring the WMAP radioactive background radiation data, were able to confirm the age of the universe and determine how inflation and the cooling afterward gave the perfect conditions for stars to collide and explode forming the trace elements which ALL MATTER and ORGANIC COMPOUNDS are made of and therefore starting the process of gravity forming planets that would rotate around certain stars in which ones in a goldilocks zone (like earth) can support water and so on... BETTER????

[korzon]

@TheJamesnao Not realy my question is where did all this matter and energy come from.I start from the beginning when i learn something like my guitar for instance.It's ok nobody has the answers it seems i will keep searching.

[TheJamesnao]

@korzon Since the dawn of time, man has used the excuse that "it was God" that was responsible for the things we couldnt explain. Like when we didnt know what the stars were? It was "Heaven" and before we knew that we werent the center of the universe, then "GOD" made everything just for us!

Now we have found earth-like planets everywhere in the solar system and asking something as childish as WHERE DID EVERYTHING COME FROM??? OH YOU DONT KNOW? ITS MUST BE GOD THEN! Intelligent design BS!!!!

[mutadis1]

Simple primal economy. M.Mutadis

As Einstein told: matter and energy are same things but under a different appearance.

Money is but a credit for labour. The cost to pay is fundamentally only the price of the labour or the energy. Labour and energy are same things, depending contemporary conditions.

Read my book .

[nicophobia]

@mutadis1 I hope that your book was proof read first or properly translated from your native language as your English isn't very good. I'm not even sure what your point is. Also the money as credit for labour is a bad analogy for the transference of energy. You're using Marxism to describe physics.

Reading your book should be our choice not your edict. I'm sure you know what you are on about but you're no salesman.

[Eternidad195]

Mutadist

David Attenborough is a very clever man and has nothing to do with your beliefs

[Alexdurrant7]

This video throws Behe's bogus idea of irreducible complexity out of the window.

[mutadis1]

@Alexdurrant7 I agree. The ‘Irreducible Complexity Principle’ is more an issue in fe a nuclear power plant (artificial man made complexity). In living nature, it is a delusion. In extremis one could invert the theory and conclude that reduced complexity is a base of natural evolution. Scientists often get blinded into complexity.

[TheCarpecarp]

@Alexdurrant7 irreducible complexity is the best argument creationists can come up with... and it's still even close to being good enough.

[mutadis1]

Germs and insects, that will survive on earth long after the human race vanished, don’t care that you can think, eat,… being brilliant and what so ever. Any specie shrinks or disappear when it’s environmentally energy is exhausted. This is according the first law of physics.

In human terms it is called ‘overpopulation’.

Don’t let my statements affect your feelings. Just open some dogmatic cathedrals in your mind.

[elgostine]

@mutadis1 that limit is known to ecologists as 'carrying capacity'

[mutadis1]

Come on, I give you another key to the solution. For free, for the world that is too stubborn to spend 5 $ to solve the secrets of life!

The Darwin law shaped the species on a macro environmentally scale.

But more important, is the kind of a Darwin principle acting on the molecular level, in reproducing the genetic molecules in each living cell. MM

[mutadis1]

Comparing the human genius with a piece of stone may sound ridiculous.

But, our thinking is caged within the human scale. Even human evolution and performances are neglectable, dimensional and on time base, in the scale of our universe. However, a common rock you find on your path, consisting of simple and dead material, ran through an evolution of a similar time scale as the universe.

[lewisyang91]

I would rather you present your theory to the public in a clear and precise fashion than to make a very disconnected sales pitch, promising of a simplistic theory "small and simple book called[...]" to counter two of the most brilliant minds to ever bless science.

[mutadis1]

Fundamentally, we people don’t differ from a piece of Stone.

We are but molecular robots, products of the BigBang, shaped by evolution on macro as well as on molecular level. We will be able to decode the cycle of emerging and disappearing of our universe. The meaning of the force behind it, we most probably cannot discover. Some will introduce there the divine force. Science as well as any Divinity are but inventions of the human mind. M.Mutadis

[InnerSmile72]

Go challenge yourself in the forum of scientific opinion, not public opinion. Peer review will bring acceptance. You embarrass yourself here... no wonder there is a low rating,.

[mutadis1]

Countless people died, or are living in a hell, only for advertising their opinion. Free speech is an upmost privilege, even in so called democratic countries. Internet gives opportunities on a massive scale as never before in history. Nothing to do with gaining something. However, we cannot waste our time responding on useless comments and will remove them. You are free to tell the world whatever you want in Your channel, but it might take More effort than making an email add and ID.

[ViNcEyOuNg1991]

Don't you just love cheap advertising of ones product!

[mutadis1]

@ViNcEyOuNg1991 : You are advertising Your opinion on Our Channel, for Free!

Better first understand the true meaning of the word 'Cheap', before launching it.

[ViNcEyOuNg1991]

@mutadis1 Hold on, does m advertising my opinion lead to any gain on my behalf? What a ridiculous comparison to make!

[TheJamesnao]

I Understand why people want to hold on to social traditions that are instilled in them since child-birth, religion gives us answers and morals to live by and someone to talk to when we are alone and scared and have nothing else. But one can't turn from reason and obvious scientific evidence! There is much proof showing the result of evolution and people who refute the evidence are scared of losing the level of comfort they had in religion and the assurance of salvation. But a new dawn awaits us

[Brencs]

@TheJamesnao Well said m8. A new dawn would be nice.

[elgostine]

@TheJamesnao here here!!

[korzon]

@TheJamesnao No we just dont buy Species turning into other species however we do belive in micro Evolution it's simply adaptation.What we had was simply more veriety and things died off went extinct that we can observe today.Science is Observing and repeating observation Evolution and creation could in scientific terms actualy never be science fact only fiction due to we are not able to observe or repeat.GOD said he made everything even the planets but not specifics we wouldnt have understood.

[TheJamesnao]

@korzon So how can you explain the Cro-Magnon, Neanderthaw and other species we have found rock hard evidence of in fossil form???

THE BIGGEST TRUMP CARD IN YOU STUPID MORONIC ANTI-TRUTH and ANT-REALITY stint is the FACT of MODERN DAY GENETICS!!!! WERE DIRECTLY LINKED TO APES AND A BEAUTIFUL HIERARCHY OF ANIMALS GOING DOWN FROM THERE!!!!

How can you explain Archeopteryx??? A DINOSAUR THAT HAS FEATHERS THAT IS ALSO LINKED TO THE EVOLUTION OF ALL BIRDS IN THE WORLD?!?!?

u make christians dumb

[TheJamesnao]

@korzon and sorry but God didnt make the planets and stuff too, Cosmologists now have alot of cool information showing new proof in Astrophysics and beyond, but it doesnt matter bc retards like you dont believe in proof or scientific evidence!!!!

I am a Christian but creationist and half-bred intellectual wannabe radicals like you that make religion in general... to be pushed in decline like it should be. THE WORLD NEEDS A MODERN DAY VIEW ON RELIGION BASED ON REAL FACTS AND TRUTH NOT LIES!!!!!

[mutadis1]

One can prove that God exists, or one can prove that God does not exist. It does not matter, half of the people will believe it, the other half not. As this experimental video proves: started with a 5 star rating and converging to 2.5 stars at the end. Dr C.F.Gauss, a contemporary of Darwin, must have known this. By the way, we will disable rating if it sinks below 2.5*, just to prevent inspire hackers and to...

[mutadis1]

Carbon dioxide (CO2) gas is the basic resource of all life on earth. Carbon (C) and Oxygen (O2) are the fuel of each evolved living organism. One could conclude, the more CO2 in the air, the more life is possible. MM

[mutadis1]

The Truth is as simple as Einstein's Formula.

There Was the BigBang.

There Is the evolving development of the BigBang.

That is all!

Think about that, when you try to solve 'the Secrets of Life'.

MMutadis

[mutadis1]

SP 2 /2 . All life emerges and evolves out the cauldron of chemical soup with genetic molecules.

The logic in the theory of endless varieties of living organisms surpassing the classifying in species, may be confirmed by several evidence. F.e. : we share not only the genes of apes, but also some genes of insects, the continued discovery of new varieties, the find of the anachronism in strange human remainings on an Indonesian Island, etc MM

[mutadis1]

SP 1 /2 : Species ? There are no Species!

Deducted from law2 ( darwinPlus rule in the book ). Scientists classified life in species based on what they find today and the limited found fossils from the past. Evolution as well as undiscovered evidence made giant holes in the endless variety of living organisms. Intuition and our practical mind classified life in species, but it is only an inaccurate ( simplified ) approach of reality...

[mutadis1]

The video title may be misleading, but is not incorrect. Of course there is nothing wrong with Darwin's law of evolution! Many years I noticed media documents, including a lot of interviews with Nobel prize winners, cursing with the evolution principle. In most cases, not aware themselves about the untruths that they were telling us. Finally I lost my patience, and challenged a nearly perfect document for my criticism. Because, it's more Nobel to question the strongest, than to hit the weakest.

[mutadis1]

By the way:...Don't read my book, it's not worth the 5 dollars, and will disappoint you.

Although, it includes some findings worth a lifetime, It was but intended as a cyber endowment of progressive ideas.

PS: I correct your statement into: Apparent random mutations of genetic material, lead to apparent random survivability.

[jacevicki]

Random mutations lead to non-random survivability. This is natural selection. If you have more children who survive to have children, the traits you pass on will survive more than the traits of others. Declairing Darwin is inaccurate involves disproving inheretance. I fail to see how you show that.

What is the premise of your book? Your commens seem to discount creationism, so I am lost pondering what your hypothesis may be, and I am NOT buying the book with no idea what it's about.

[EvolutionsSolutions]

you got the guys name wrong lol, yes its david lol

[ChickenHawk110]

I am convinced that you do not have a single femtometre of accuracy with your thoughts and considerations.

Rolls Royce? Molecular Blubber? Your analogies are benign.

From your few comments in the sidebar I am determined NOT to read your book.

But whatever, keep doing what is important to you.

[mutadis1]

'the 3 Laws of Life'. From observ. of simple facts to amazing truths. The author felt the urge to pack all mysteries of life, into 3 simple rules. No scientific drivel, but clear for everyone. Evolution, law 2: "the darwinPlus rule". The author claims that the initial base of evolution of species, is the inaccuracy of nature's reproduction of complex genetic molecules (micro internal cellular environm. and condition imperfection). This law acts on int. micr. level in all living organisms. MJM

[pilgrimpater]

I don't understand what's so special about the anology of a movie merely being a sequence of stills. It's an analogy most evolutionists would agree with. It is the same as you looking in the mirror every day & not noticing any change (hangovers apart) & then being amazed when shown a photo of you as 2 year old. Evolution is by definition small undetectable (i.e. on the surface) steps where a step is defined by a generation. That's why we can observe bacteria mutation with it's many generations.

[mutadis1]

We will work out soon, within a comment space here, a synopsis explaining the link between this video and the story: "the 3 Laws of Life"

[mutadis1]

Reminder: we delete all intentional offensive and insulting comments, and block related users automatically. Although we are able, and not afraid, to shoot back with atomic force, an educational mindset prefers to deal with bad behaviour by ignoring it! We lose our time also; by examination of the deleted comments if they were the result of evolved brain activity. Don't take it personal, after been on internet too long, there is always the funny temptation of becoming rude ourselves.

[mutadis1]

Thirty years ago, after been absorbed a ten year period into an isolated engineering project, I clearly remember a remark of my Research Director: Be aware, not to evolve into a field idiot! (free transl.). It is a common property of over-skilled and over-specialised people, of missing the helicopter view, losing touch with reality, becoming blur to see simple solutions and obvious answers .The youthful overconfidence, in your comments, is a demonstration of this human weakness.

[vardesigns]

"There is a simple law acting on gene copy process.."

The accurate terminology to be used there is Transfection of ES cells and insertion into the ICM of a embryonic blastocyst to create transgenic mice.

All u do is refer to your book.....but don't explain anything clearly. These aren't even proper arguments...As someone else here said...if you soo believe that your ideas are better and actually wish to contribute...share them openly on wiki commons or something...Stop wasting ppl's time.

[mutadis1]

You can't repair a Rolls Royce without making your hands dirty.

You can't go to the bottom of truth without making your mind dirty.

We are but molecular blubber.

Nature's beauty is but a programmed fiction on the scale of the human mind. If you enlarge the scale, you see but asymmetrical coincidence. Only on the basic level , one comes close to an almost symmetry of organised atomic forces.:)

[mutadis1]

Riddle: how come plants have no brain?

They have not, because they cannot move autonomously. Motion is an initial evolved function that needs a complex nervous system. The basic brain, found in lower animals, is complex enough to compare it with the performance of a super computer.

[vardesigns]

Plants don't move??

I guess you aren't familiar with Mimosa pudica or Dionaea muscipula or even Drosera sp.

You should first know enough science to criticize anything.

[mutadis1]

Attenborough explains sweetly, how close we are DNA related to monkeys.

More accurate is: we are special monkeys that evolved a property of communication by complex languages. Language is a base for calculating. Calculating is a base for technological evolution, and control of the world.

[9salomon]

Simple little book, brilliant conclusions. Unique!

[blindmellowlemon]

keep yer powder dry

[mutadis1]

NOTE: We take the liberty to delete comments, eventually block related users, who misuse "fuck and suck" words in an improper context. Especially from the land of Shakespeare, we expect comments that surpass the educational level of the monkeys shown in the video. Try not to demonstrate you are Darwins missing link. Best regards. MJM

[mutadis1]

Atoms and molecules are not nice and beautiful, they are dictators. They are our real gods. M.Mutadis

[mutadis1]

The issue is not, rejecting or accepting evolution, religion, etc. It is about the ability to think independently, without taught, educational or other unconscious mind manipulation. The question is: can we think autonomously? Do we have a free mind ?

Answers are given in my booklet.

[tommydatubes]

I'm not sure what inaccuracies you're talking about, but if your idea was so revolutionary and profound..AND if it's not about the money as you claim, then either you would have posted it publicly already, or someone else would have already taken it into consideration. And as far as beauty covering hard reality..well that just happens to be the epitome of the train of thought that causes people to reject the theory of evolution.

[mutadis1]

Proclaiming fairy tales about the beauty of God as well as about the beauty of Evolution, is acceptable and may be good for the mood and the moral. However, a balanced world will never be build on fairy tales. Evolution is comparable with an evolving oil spot on a clean sea. Both are obeying the basic laws of nature's fundamental forces. Nothing more, nothing less.

[mutadis1]

Darwin was a genius thinker. Why? Because he succeeded in escaping "the mental cage". A majority of high educated people, including many Nobel Prize winners, do not have this ability. By that way, they become maybe more skilled, but stay less wise than many uneducated people.

[mutadis1]

True! At first sight! But beauty always covers hard reality. The second scene, his comment at his desk, is one example of inaccuracy versus reality. As the subject is of upmost importance for humanity, I do not allow the slightest untruth done by leading personalities in media. Even, I risk to be inaccurate myself.

Dry your tears, read my book (a small step, but a giant progress in thinking), and all the explanations written on these web pages here. Thanks for your comment.

[Entertainmentwf]

I don't think you have an inch of correctness... I don't buy books which aren't supported by the scientific community.

[Entertainmentwf]

I thought as a scientist Attenborough explained evolution it in such a beautiful way without inaccuracy at all. This clip brought a tear to my eye to just the lush accuracy of his demonstration of such important content. I don't see any inaccuracies at all.

[mutadis1]

I am a great admirer of Darwin.

Moral and religion evolved in peoples minds, making societies possible.

In scientific thinking, one has to be hardliner, no mixing up with feelings, values or believes.

The forces of the atoms are the only provable, measurable and computable.

All dead and living material (including humans) are the evolved result of these forces.

[mutadis1]

BBC and Darwin. I just remember, I did deal with my first philosophic issue at the age of 3. And my only grandmother I knew during my life, was born 3 years before Darwin died.

Politics, religion, media, misguide people all the time. I dont care anymore, they should know better. When scientists try to misguide me, I still get annoyed! (one of my weaknesses!)

Time to write addendum 4, but where can I put it?

[mutadis1]

Notice: this is a 100%, non-sponsored, non-commercial amateur channel!

There is not any profit, only costs and an enormous unpaid time spend in it.

The channel motto: internet : freedom of speech for a majority of people, in opposite to the official commercial or state media!

If you would explore deeper, you would better understand.

By the way, I noticed that Microsoft office and Word, automatic language corrector, and internet copying functions seem to play games with apostrophes.

[annbretagne]

'Basic English' does not contain errors of grammar, such as the misuse of apostrophe 's', which changes the grammatical relationship of words to each other and therefore can lead to confusion. By the way, I object to you using youtube as a disguised marketing medium.

[mutadis1]

Sure, apostrophes, change the meaning of sentences.

YouTube, Internet the new jungle. Darwins law acts here and everywhere!

( notice here: YouTube software removes the - from Darwins law automatically!!)

[mutadis1]

Words are less important than the meaning behind them.

Basic English has been selected for this channel, for practical communication worldwide.

Anglophiles be aware that Chinese may be the most spoken language in the world.

Accurate translation between Chinese and Western languages is fundamentally impossible.

Attenborough, unaware and unwanted, made one statement that deviates completely from reality.

Not the words are important, the idea behind is.

[annbretagne]

photos (plural) not photo's (possessive)

[mutadis1]

ok, ty

[mutadis1]

Note:

The follow of the explanations to this video clip info were put in next videos info ( lack of space here):

Addendum nb 2: in video info of the Power of Love. Nb1

Addendum nb 3: in video info of Big Bang of the Mind. Heretics Insight

Both on this channel.

[mutadis1]

Use the word - developing - for things that grow, like a human, a forest, a city, a colony of bacterias, a project, etc, in a defined context. Mixing these concepts imprudent into the evolution principle, will throw you into a dangerous jungle, in which gods, prophets and even scientists are hiding behind the trees, eating your last hope for a safe escape. ;)

[mutadis1]

Adaptations and improvements in evolution, wrongly suggest that there is an intentional property inside individuals and species to do so. Each generation's properties differ because they got differences in genes. Evolution is the result of randomly elimination by natures coincidence.

Coincidence, itself is an inaccurate concept. Read my booklet.

[mutadis1]

Evolution and bible stories sound similar.

The good ones survive in Heaven, the bad ones die in Hell.

The adapted and improved survive, the unadapted disappear.

Our human mind is too weak to deal with a cold and ruthless truth.

[mutadis1]

Yes, species evolve out other species. Adaptions? This popular word creates a curtain of blurriness. Suppose a tsunami hits a population. The majority of survivors will most probably be people that learned to swim, while majority of victims could be the ones that didnt. After the event we see new scenery, the red balls on the pool table won. Survivors not really adapted to a changed environment. We see the result of endless chain of causal events due to (boring) laws of physics and mathematics.

[mutadis1]

Oh, I caused confusion with this clip!

My point is: Living material, molecule, and cell have a natural battery and generator to multiply.

The cells of living organisms have a natural memory to multiply. A common natural law affects on these vulnerable memory molecules, causing changes. Notice that, before you obtain full insight in the Darwin Principle of evolution. Read my booklet.

[mutadis1]

Expl. A4: What is the difference between Moral ( non-religious) and Religion ?

Both are inventions of the human mind.

Both are created to organise, steer and control a society of people.

The ones that benefit the upmost of this, are the ones, that organise, steer and control.

I call it the BigBrothers, in any shape, form or level. (SIC)

[mutadis1]

Expl. A3: and invite the same spectator. Now he might think that the white balls became red, while the truth is: all white died and the reds reproduced too much!

-adaptions, as long as they are an improvement for the specie( quote D.A.): Nature has no brain, and is merciless. Adaptions of improvement in one era, leads almost certain to extinction of the specie in a later era. As examples are numerous. Read A4

[mutadis1]

Expl. A2: It is very nice telling stories: fish got legs, came on shore, after billions of years humans evolved from it. Less nice is telling, although we not descent from apes, we had same ancestors, while most people still look like and act as apes (Just a joke). I still like my comparison with the optical illusion watching a movie. Here, I invent another one: fill a pool table with 98 white balls and 2 red ones, and invite an spectator. Next day replace all white balls with red ones... A3

[mutadis1]

Expl. A1: Nature and species are developing?

Yes, if you see children as a development of the parents. Linguistic blur. Blurriness is an obstacle to discover truths. Over half of world population never heard from Darwin nor evolution. The majority of people that believe to understand the evolution principle, dont understand it at all.

Mystery of origin of life and evolution is inside the physico-chemical process of the genes, while the Darwin principle is an overall acting secondary factor.A2

[mutadis1]

I would be the last to pretend Attenboroughs evolution docu makes no sense. In opposite, I love it. However, putting Idols in a context, is never accepted by their fans. Atheists and religious differ not, both soon become fanatic believers in their own imaginary truth.

The moral and intention of this documentary actually is, to open peoples minds, and questioning todays truths , that may be adjusted tomorrow.

[whiteymcqueen]

you make no sense. Attenborough and evolution make PERFECT sense. Please try harder to understand

[mutadis1]

Read the online book the 3 Laws of Life by M.Mutadis.

Three visionary 1-line rules, unique by its simplicity, amazing by its outcome, but explaining so much.

A popular description how I discovered them. Less than 50 pages, suitable even for the laziest reader. Eat one hamburger less, and spent the 5 dollars to obtain it.

Evolution started with the beginning of the universe.

[mutadis1]

Why I dare to mention inaccuracies in King Attenboroughs excellent documentary?

Read my answer added here in the video info window beside, because this comment window here allows a 500 characters answer only!

[mesiekie]

zeg mutatis, als je gewoon boekjes wil verkopen kun je dat gewoon zeggen hoor

[mutadis1]

Sure, You buy them, so I dont have to make videos and dont have to wash dishes no longer.

[mutadis1]

Thank you very much for your remark.

The mix of first names of the Attenborough brothers, due to an error in a local written press.

However it is not possible for the moment, to adjust this error in the video itself.

I apologize for this inaccuracy, but as in evolution, nothing is perfect. ;)

m.m.

[atrax1]

Sure, blame the local written press. Is that where you learn about the greatest nature documentary narrator alive today?

It's really an indication of how illiterate you are on the subject of evolution.

I recommend you to read the book "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins. I assume this video will be deleted shortly after you've read the book.

[mutadis1]

It is not a shame to be illiterate. Understanding reality is very difficult, even for literate people.

[Mackeson3]

DAVID Attenborough! Richard is his brother.