Added: 3 years ago
From: AronRa
Views: 193,714
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (1,760)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • The cute redhead towards the end of the video could potentially make more guys intrrested in science :)

  • That muslim chick is hot, but she needs to shut up.

  • if most mutaions are neutral, then most mutations are ether selected o rejected by random genetic drift, NOT BY NATURAL SELECTION.

    ¿would it be fare to asume that natual selectin plays a minor role in mutation selection?

  • @Answerquestions1 Relatively speaking, yes it would be fair to say that. However, if you're looking for what would make the most radical changes, you're looking for good or bad ones, because those can be selected for and thus will cause a larger impact on the population.

  • I was with him up until the "information" part. There is a mystery as far as discovering evolution's genetic mechanism. Mutations can only alter pre-existing genes. Mutations can replicate genes, but they are still just replicas of pre-existing genes carrying the same "information". Like children with Down's Syndrome. They have a extra chromosome. Its just a replica. If the extra chromosome had different "information", that wouldnt be a human child we would be looking at.

  • @ScholarVisual But nothing stops that duplicate gene from mutating later. Once it does, wouldn't that be 'new information'?

  • @Slanguaj Well Aronra dose have a point with the same letters creating new combinations hence new "information". Like SPLINE turning into LINPSE. But what mutations cant do is turn SPLINE into YRETS. And thats whats necessary for macro evolution. And the problem with duplicate genes mutating later is gene duplication is a negative mutation. When human have an extra chromosome we get Down's Syndrome. We would need a long geneolgy of Down's Syndromed hominids in order for humans to evolve.

  • @ScholarVisual You're assuming that gene duplication is always negative. This isn't correct. I get frustrated when ever i hear 'macro evolution' because creationists tend to just change the meaning to what ever we haven't seen happen yet. First it's one species changing into another, but once you show them this happening they say 'oh no, macroevolution is more than that'. Once you have a duplicate gene, that gene can undergo mutations over generations until it becomes a new gene.

  • @Slanguaj No its not always negative to other species, but to humans its always negative.Resulting in Down's Syndrome. Now in yeast there are no side effects. 100 million years ago yeast duplicated its genes. And now over 90 percent of its duplicate genes were lost. And on top of that, none of the duplicate genes mutated adding new "information". Yeast stayed Yeast. And it had over 100 million years for a duplicated gene to mutate. And it didnt happen. So that theory is a lil fuzzy to me.

  • @ScholarVisual downs syndrome is a duplicate chromosome. A gene is just a small section of a chromosome and both the original and new copy of the gene will stil reside within one copy of the chromosome. These happen all the time, but in humans , because most of our DNA is junk, all it does (usually) is make more junk,

    however other mutations that alter the letters can work later on this new copy (or the original) to change it from junk to something of use. If its use is beneficial, bingo

  • @haz020190 Gene duplication causes Parkinson disease, Alzheimer's disease, Pelizaeus-Merzbacher disease and so forth. Its still a very negative mutation. And still I hate to be redundant but, Yeast duplicated its genes millions of years ago. And it stayed yeast. It did not evolve. None of the duplicate genes mutated. So the gene duplication is thoery is not impossible, its just not convincing enough for me to believe in it. I have a lack of beleif in it.LOL

  • @ScholarVisual @ScholarVisual all those diseases that you stated are duplications of a specific gene. that's not to say we cant make progress by duplication of the other 99% of genes. u forget that duplications like that, without modern medicine. would be eliminated through natural selection.

    Im not sure where u got your yeast idea from =/ there are hundreds of species of yeast.

  • @haz020190 Well i stated yeast stayed yeast. The pre-exsitng genes were altered. And created different kinds of yeast. But yeast still remained yeast. And thats all mutations can do. Only alter. Evolution didnt create anything. It can only alter what is already there. Mutations cant create anything. Only alter or take away what is already there. Yeast didnt evolve into a rabbit.

  • @ScholarVisual well u stated there had been no mutations. but If we have hundeds of species that is pretty much wrong.

    What is ur source for this yeast angle??

    also which 'yeast' do u refer to? as the word isnt a strict scientific abel and there are organisms from two completely different phyla that are termed 'yeast'

    Also why a rabbit?? thats about as far from yeast as u can get. most yeast are single celled. it took around 1-1.5 billion years to reach rabbits from single cells =S

  • 8:01 Hey that's not a round worm, its a flatworm isn't it? minor point lol

  • Question -- could lactose tolerance be correctly described as a beneficial mutation?

  • @darastarscream

    It is. So is ccr5-delta 32 mutation, which conveys resistance (and if homogygous, COMPLETE IMMUNITY) to AIDS.

  • @darastarscream I think that may depend on the environment. After all, there are no inherently "beneficial" and "harmful" mutations. The effect that a mutation has, positive or negative, has everything to do with the nature and life cycle of the organism. For example, increased bone density might be percieved as a "beneficial mutation" among grizzly bears, but if the same mutation occurred in birds, they might become too heavy to fly, which would become a "harmful" mutation.

  • Fabulous video--very informative.

  • I found a mistake in your video. @ 7:57 the girl says "twice the number a roundworm has.." The picture you show is of a planarian which belongs to the acoelomate phylum Platyhelminthes which are often called flatworms. Roundworms belong to the pseudocoelomate phylum Nematoda. Just thought I'd mention it. Huge fan by the way.

  • What I want to know is, has anyone come up with a hypotheses as to why puffer-fish has no junk DNA?

  • I have never seen god so i cant tell is he real, but stupid says "god is not real" how you can tell that, have you seen god that he is not real?

  • @miksulder What a stupid, stupid question. Have you seen a unicorn to prove that THEY don't exist?

  • @TioPhillippe Ah, to have 2,000 different types of pussies to choose from. If there's a heaven....

  • TECHNO VIKING!!!!! :D

  • She pronounced 'dwarfism' as 'diforfism'. Wat.

  • @tcktrc

    good point. i was referring to more western clothing. Depending on the country she's from they do have western dress. That is why i almost got in trouble when i was in the UAE

  • The muslim girl may only be pretending to be a scientist... but you HAVE to admit that she looks hot in that lab coat... I can only imagine what she looks like in regular clothes...

  • @Meraneus Unfortunately probably like a shapeless blob. Burkas don't do much for the female form. The chick at the end of this video is cute too. This video is definitely my favorite in the series for women!

  • 'if not immune, to aids'

    - Will and Grace comes up, lmao.

  • 7:02 "it has 100 tipes of pussies"

    Man, that's intelligent desing right there.

  • taht blond girl is cute

  • Nylon eating bacteria

  • Here is a fun allegory about "mutation".

    When languages mutates, even a single word is DEADLY to mutate from its original meaning. You all can find one word to mutate and make the explanation of your own.

    Here is mine:

    Word "jew" originally refered to a hebrew person, then it MUTATES with a word "parasite". Cause of the mutation, ppl started to persecute these "jews" and some of them were killed in holocaust(yes, IT HAPPEND, only the details are false but VERY profitable)..

  • Wow he said that “natural selection weeds out detrimental mutation and selects for beneficial mutations..”

    If they are small and are not useful then natural selection can’t select them. So the 1st step in this imaginary process wouldn’t be selected since it has no advantage. The fundamental falsehood of genetic evolution. That small unseen changes in the genetic make up will be selected for when they don’t offer any advantage to the organism until later random mutations add to them.

  • @BornHomophobictOO

    I see you've decided to totally ignore the mentioned point that most mutations are neutral towards survival advantage. This is part of something called genetic drift, which you probably don't know anything about.

    Your post doesn't seem to have a point. Sounds like you're alluding to your straw man of what evolution is.

  • @TheZooCrew Gentic drift or a change in Alleles over time is not evidence of evolution (change of one kind to another) it is a PRATT... They are neutral, but they build up until they be come detremental not benificial which is the evolutionist belief. So the genetic mutation model fits Creation better than evoultion.. Why are you agianst science?

  • @BornHomophobictOO

    Why are you copypasting creationist-websites?

  • @sonykroket  When did this happen?

  • @BornHomophobictOO

    Why are you a pair of fascist maggotballs?

  • @sonykroket Ahh I love it when the epitaths come out it shows that you are winning...

  • @BornHomophobictOO

    Ahh, i love it when insane whackjobs like you are exposed.

    It saves time showing who the enemy is

  • I have an immunity to diabetes.

    My body rejects it.

  • I was just watching this video for the first time. When that girl in the lab coat came on I immediately said (out loud to the monitor I admit) "She's no scientists". Then on screen followed the caption "the lab coat is a disguise".

    I just about fell out of my chair laughing. :-)

  • What accent is that? She sounds like a deaf German in an ESL class!

  • This doesn't prove creationists are wrong... just that chicks can be smart! :-P

  • The gene for detecting blue light is somewhere near the beginning of the human genome, yet the green light detecting gene and the red light detecting gene are right next to each other, on the X chromosome (near the end of the human genome), and are 98% similar. coincidence?

  • @robokill387 come to think of it, why would an intelligent designer put such important genes on the X chromosome when a second copy of the gene has a 50/50 chance of not being inherited? what's the logic in intentionally designing something in such a way that it exposes half of the population to a higher rate of red-green colour-blindness than the other half?

  • @robokill387 So your logic is that because you dont understand why some one made something one way or another that is must have evolved?

    Hey my laptop battery does not last for months, I guess it must have evolved as well since it has something I personally perceive to be a flaw.

    that kinda logic huh!

  • The biologist from Texas A&M is just crazy hot. There is nothing sexier than a gorgeous science chick.

  • Best series on youtube, thanks.

  • creationism:because farmers that lived 3000 years ago knew more about biology, astronomy,geology, radiometric dating,genetics,chemisty and medicine than modern scientists. wait...........what the hell?

  • lol this is sooooo much fun.

  • Let's see, the stupidity of creationism makes me watch videos about science. I've learnt more about science than i would've had. It's a miracle

  • I'd like to point out something in the beginning of this video, the "person in a medical doctor's coat" is VERY often used to display authority on a subject and is often a deception to falsly assert authority over a subject based on a preconceived notion that a medical doctors attire coincides with knowledge in the medicinal field. This is a common form of deception that is often seen in many advertisements on television or in magazine/internet articles. Don't fall for this bullshit.

  • what is that whoree doing not wearing her headscarf? if she isn't careful someone's gonna see her ears and be forced to think sinful thoughts about her. who knows what might happen after that. whatever happens its her fault for not wearing her hijab.

  • Eric the Viking truly is a classic

  • i know this hasn't gotten out to much yet but look up the children being born with a triple helix DNA structure

  • That Muslim woman's accent is terrible. The way she says "mutation" is awful.

  • She's HOT and spray worthy

  • 0:16 "Hiroshima, Miyazaki, Chinaville, that is that, disabled, and the freaks of nature."

  • These are great videos. I appreciate the work you put into them.

  • That lady forgot to add creationism to the list of deformities.

  • At 6:12 I was almost certain he was going to spell out "penis".

  • Language is pretty fascinating isn't it? Just watched a pretty interesting talk by Daniel Everett on Fora TV and his look at the Piraha tribe. That talk only shows up on YT because of some atheistic quotes from about 3 minutes of the 1 hour+ talk, but it is quite an interesting look at linguistics and loss of knowledge due to languages going extinct.

  • These mutations that he lists are mindboggling, I can't even begin to imagine the practical applications of further study into these.

  • These mutations that he lists are mindboggling, I can't even begin to imagine the practical applications of further study into these.

  • @somethingdifferable And when they don't daydream in church

  • Will the real science chick be quiet and assume the position?

  • @HimesInu You're nuts. IF there was a woman I could hold a conversation about something like this and has great tits at the same time I'd be in heaven.

  • @Reip187 So you aren't gonna agree with my girlfriend, this profile is used by two people, and say you'd bang her? Interesting. But I do agree, if there is a heaven, I live it every day because I have a girl who can hold a conversation and has an amazing body.

  • Comment removed

  • If creationism is correct and of course it is not. Why then do we have such a variety of dogs (direct desendents of wolves) in such a short period? A few thousand years years ago there were no dogs.(selective breeding by people) The same can be said for almost all domesticated animals. In just a few thousand short years they didn't exsist at least in their present state. If these dumbass religious folks got a real education they would know this. Thats what happens when people daydream in class.

  • I can't place her accent... Is she Turkish? The sentence structure is precise, but the delivery of English seems unnatural (not that I could speak Turkish, or Farsi worth a damn)

  • @xander55577 I can't figure it out either... hmm..

  • I want to bone the muslim creationist <3

  • Only 2000 different types of pussies? I thought there would be at least 3 billion, if you're counting humans. :)

  • if all accidents are destructive, how do you explain the chocolate in my peanut butter?

  • It sound like she's saying beauticians xD

  • That guy who's not the father at 9:20 is awesome!! I wish he was the father!!

  • @copycatmillionaire I have already responded to that fraud, Ian Juby, the huckster who tries to pass himself off as a professor. I have also already made the one correction required by his video. I cited the the wrong paper initially, but have since proved that the mutation he said did not exist -does, albeit by another name. I corrected a number of his other accusations too, and those I missed were addressed by WildWoodClaire1.

  • @AronRa why not just take it down if it has that many flaws?

  • @Lacocacolaman There were only two corrections required, one of them slight. Both were clarified with an annotation.

  • @AronRa Where, I's like to see it.

  • @AronRa No, I meant the Ian Juby rebuttal

  • @ThePuppyTurtle

    Find it yourself. There's no much substance; Juby is a fraud.

  • @ThePuppyTurtle  AronERRata /watch?v=uzVbfVDDpok

  • @copycatmillionaire Ian Juby! BWAHAHAHAHHAAH

  • @copycatmillionaire

    Just, Wow. I felt my IQ points draining as I read your post.......

  • @copycatmillionaire Talk about missing the point. He was not saying that language mutates in the same way that DNA does he was simply pointing out that by rearranging pre existing material you can make something new. This is a simplification of what genetic mutations are so that even retards like you can understand. It would appear you're too stupid even for that.

  • Comment removed

  • Sorry to lower the tone gentlemen.... But Christ, that woman near the end of the video had GREAT knockers.... ^^

  • @Lackofcoitus You're not just lowering the tone, you're rendering unimportant her scientific expertise.

  • OMG! Crystal is freaking HOT!

  • I would submit Crystal has not so much DNA but more TnA which I think is worth further study. We need to get more visual information however to tell how much "junk TnA" she has.

  • @sinistar99 Cursory observation isn't revealing any junk at all in that TnA. That's biology one can really sink one's teeth into.

  • 95% Junk? I thought it was only 88%

  • What kind of birds are those at 6:50??

  • Ma cherie....eet ees i, LeClerc..........can i dip my croissant in your vichysoisse (or however you spell that)

    Rien ne va plus

  • 7:34

    i think i might be in love

  • 1:25 ain't nothing wrong with that mutation.

  • This video is made more awesome by the fact that this lying woman sounds like Borat. "Mewtishans"

  • she's hot though...

  • I thought she said "magicians" instead of "mutations" and was confused for a while.

  • Thumbs up, if only for the "Techno Viking" in the video.

  • When you were talking about language, I'm surprised you didn't throw in a clip from Disney's "Atlantis".

  • Why is that accent always associated with insultingly ignorant claims?

  • 2:37 No, it´s not the "rythm" gene. LMAO!!!

  • When I watch that Aggie chick, something happens in my jeans, er, uh, I mean TO my GENES!!!

  • I'm genetically programmed to hate Aggies, but damn that Aggie chick is TOTALLY HOT!!!

  • the poor duck :(

  • 4:00

    Super-bones? Super-muscles?

    I love reality. That's fucking cool. Super-humanity, here we come!

  • Most mutations that occur in DNA are corrected by the cell's machinery. Those that do either

    1) Do Nothing

    2) Cause the cell to die

    3) cause the cell to turn in to a cancer cell.

    2 + 3 could be considered bad.

    Also, for a mutation of pass off to an organism offspring (in the case of higher order animals) the mutation has to occurring in the cells/tissues that are involved in reproduction. A mutation in a cell in your hand, is not going to be passed to your kid.

  • @thelogster ...and of the 100+ mutations the average person inherits which do have effects but do not kill the cells or turn cancerous?

  • @AronRa That must be the "secret plan" god has for us all... XD

  • @thelogster just to clarify, a mutation occurs only of the exchange of a base, base pair or whole segment of the dna is not corrected anymore

  • just just ..jus shut uthe fuk up. god made everything but evolution right...

  • Evolutionary Biologist- Let us learn and make the world better

    Creationist- Lets enjoy all science has given us - mock it- then take credit for it while telling those who have created this bounty of knowledge that they are idiots

  • @Cougar139tweak this is the most intelligent youtube comment i have seen in a week that wasnt made by aronra. you deserve pie.

  • @MoralRapist Thanks much (even being mentioned in the same breath as aronra is an honor in itself), and a phrase I'm most likely never to type again in my life.....Thank you MoralRapist :)

  • @Cougar139tweak my username is a joke about catholic priests. you know how catholic preists frequently molest children (or at least a large portion of them do)? well, they claim that "atheists are immoral" and i, an atheist, look at that and say, well, they should be the most "moral" by the standards of religious people, but they are rapists.....hence, MoralRapist.

  • @MoralRapist No worries, you'll have to listen to David Cross and his "In touch ministries" bit, certainly see the pun. Could you imagine what would happen if a group of atheists did the same thing the Catholic Church did?

  • @Cougar139tweak we would be burned at the stake and stoned. i dont see why the catholic church hasnt had war declared on them by the U.S. . i mean, they have MONEY! and they ACTUALLY DID SOMETHING unlike someone else *cough cough* IRAQ! *cough cough*

  • I am in love with Crystal who graduated from Texas A&M University with a degree in Agricultural Leadership and Development with emphasis in Genetics and Biochemistry. She's my kind of gal. lol

  • @derman077 Gotta love hot women with brains. xD

  • Is she saying "mutation cows"?

  • Technoviking BEAT hiv!

  • outstanding video. keep making them!

  • I thought when she said processes that she said pussys.

  • I'm such a perv, I had to pause when the girl with the large tongue was on.

  • @pchtermino1 Me too. And when Crystal/Krystal from Texas A&M was on...and even that Muslim faux scientist. Gotta love a little delicious eye candy to go along with our nutritional brain meal.

  • 6:54 "2000 different type of pussies" 6:59 "The human organism has 1000 different types of pussies".

    Someone should have quoted this already... what's wrong with you Internets?

  • @PureInertia PROTEINS :P not pussies.

  • @PureInertia thats a lot!.. and would be tiring

  • @PureInertia i cant stop, im ROFLMAO i heard "the human orgasm has a 100 times a pussy"....

  • @PureInertia i caught it, but i thought she said "2000 types of pussies"

  • Haha technoviking :) "Rhytm gene" lol

  • i hate what she stands for but still can't help but be extremely attracted to the chick in the lab coat on this video.

  • @BillKiernan See........evolution.......... thats that part of your brain thats evolved enough to know you shouldn't (have the hots for a religious zealot) but too primal to help yourself (but dude!...... she's hot).

  • Did Aronra ever come back with answers to the response video?

  • @Moussyed

    Not yet, I'm waiting for that too. As soon as he does that, all of his subscribers will know about this little "debate" Ian has no clue about the deluge of 'dislikes' his video is going to get, never mind the tons of comments refuting his nonsense.

    I'm curious in the numbers, of 'likes' vs 'dislikes' after that.

  • An excellent video AronRa very well presented! Additionally the ignorance displayed in some of the comments is breathtaking.

  • Nonsense

  • The "tank" from Texas had been challenged by a magot,

    I rub my hand in anticipation of the onslaught

  • Ian Juby completely dismantled this bogus video. You should take it down.

  • @9pt9 I completely dismantled Ian Jubys video, you should check the comments over there.

  • @9pt9 Ian Juby's video was completely destroyed by TheScienceFoundation in the comments on Ian's own video.

  • @ppsimmonsuncensored is he your bodyguard? Lol. Guys a douche. Aaronra is completely demolished and exposed as an uneducated liar and fraud.

  • @9pt9

    "is he your bodyguard?"

    What are you 8 years old? What's wrong in TSF analysis?

  • @9pt9 Yes 9pt9, I'm also waiting for you to point out where I was wrong in my comments on Ian's video.

  • @TheScienceFoundation I haven't read your comments but I'm certain you fail like every other evobot. Why not post a video response about it? Can you show any good mutations such that could explain the invention of endocrine systems and reproductive organs? Ofc you can't.

  • @9pt9 'I'm certain you fail like every other evobot.'

    That's certainly the claim you've made, now can you read the comments and point out a single instance of me being wrong?

    'Can you show any good mutations such that could explain the invention of endocrine systems and reproductive organs? Ofc you can't.'

    Sounds to me like you're not wanting an answer, but yes, we've seen entirely new organs and chemical production systems evolve, IE the cecal valves of the italian wall lizard

  • @TheScienceFoundation Like I said, of course you can't. Cecal valves in italian wall lizards? That is FAR better explained by the expression of already exisiting genes. 150 years of the theory and that's the best evidence? Aren't you embarresed?? That is a tiny crumb of evidence that doesnt have NEAR the explanatory power needed to explain the existence of endocrine systems and brains from zero. But keep the faith!

  • @9pt9 'Cecal valves in italian wall lizards? That is FAR better explained by the expression of already exisiting genes'

    Evidence of this already existing gene? Because the genomes have already been compared and the actual geneticists have yet to find it.

    'and that's the best evidence?'

    Of course not, it's a proof of concept that new organs and entirely new secretory systems can evolve.

    It's so sad that you think you're making valid arguments

  • @TheScienceFoundation Before evolution required hundreds of thousands of generations now it only takes 40 years in a dramatic lamarckish fashion? Its FAR, FAR more likely existing gene activation and not evo-magic from nothing. I shouldn't have to tell you that but you're desperate for any tiny crumb that helps your religion.

  • @9pt9 Evolution to the current level of biodiversity still took billion of years and as many generations, your argument against evolution here seems to be that evolution CAN occur rapidly. There's nothing LaMarckian about it, certain traits appeared and were favored

    'Its FAR, FAR more likely existing gene activation'

    Again, evidence of this already existing gene? Because the genomes have already been compared and the actual geneticists have yet to find it.

  • @9pt9 'not evo-magic from nothing'

    Utterly retarded strawman.

    Given your (lack of) working knowledge of even basic genetics, you're not in a position to try to tell anyone anything about evolutionary theory.

  • @TheScienceFoundation What was "selected for" to invent a valve that didn't exist there before? If it wasn't there it couldn't have been selected for unless POOF! Evo-magic . Some part of the lizards body perceived a need to accommodate the vegetation? Natural selection "knew" that the survival of the animal depended on the valve? This is hilarious. Keep the evo-faith!

  • @9pt9

    9pt9, god changed the DNA of the lizards to grow the cecal valve,

    but it wasn't the Christian god, it was the flying spaghetti monster

  • @9pt9 'What was "selected for" to invent a valve that didn't exist there before?'

    Wow, you have less of an understanding of biology than I originally thought, *that* would be LaMarckian evolution. We now know that traits occur through mutation and a few other processes independently of the environment but are then selected for by the environment.

    You understand that morphology is controlled by genes and that genes mutate, yes?

  • @TheScienceFoundation And where did the nerves and blood vessels to supply it come from? And a control center in the brain for it mutated in there too? Riiiiiiiiiiight. Perhaps you should put a little bit more thought into your comments before someone like me closes your mouth for you.

  • @9pt9 'And where did the nerves and blood vessels to supply it come from?'

    It's called co-option or modular evolution

    'And a control center in the brain for it mutated in there too? '

    It's a valve in the digestive tract, where did that question come from?

    'before someone like me closes your mouth for you.'

    No, correcting your willful ignorance is productive, whether you personally learn from it or not.

  • @TheScienceFoundation Exactly,co-option. The lizards digestive tract found a new use of an existing trait. In this case a cecal valve that with an extremely high probability already possesed the trait.

    You must hate it when your evo-babble backfires on you. You left me no choice.

  • @9pt9 The blood vessels existed, the cecal valves did not.

    'In this case a cecal valve that with an extremely high probability already possesed the trait.'

    I'm still waiting on your evidence of this, especially considering that it specifically wasn't found when the two sequences from the two populations were compared.

    Yes, I've left you no choice but to express your willful ignorance of even the basics of population genetics for all to see. It's the only option if you're a creationist.

  • @TheScienceFoundation I don't have evidence for it. I have by far the more probable scenario. You have no evidence that the vascularity and neurology were there before. You just infer it evo-magiced into existence from an undirected random process. Adding a cecal valve is an intelligent decision that promotes survival though isn't?

  • @9pt9 No, you don't because the gene is specifically not present in the parent population.

    'You just infer it evo-magiced into existence from an undirected random process'

    Again, borderline retarded strawman

    'Adding a cecal valve is an intelligent decision that promotes survival though isn't? '

    Typing more slowly doesn't help, but I'll try to break it down into simpler terms. Genes control and express traits, genes mutate and confer new traits. Which part is hard to understand?

  • @ABriefHistoryOfTime How typical, trite condescension from an indoctrinate. What caused the gene to mutate in the exact way that specifically produced the cecal valve?

  • @9pt9

    mutations are random; natural selection isn't.

  • @9pt9 You are an idiot.