Darwin's Revolution - Evolution Song

[SuperImready]

An elegant presentation, it might help out those misguided souls who don't even know the difference between Evolution and Cosmology or Abiogenesis!

[dunkersonleann]

tthey said that darwin theory of evolution is fake? is true

[shagoosty]

@dunkersonleann Yea, I'm sure 150 years of research and billions of years of evidence is just one big conspiracy.

[EVonTV11]

I love you. Its not only smart, its a good song too! Lol

[ukgreaterlondon]

creatures evolving into other creatures has not been proven .

ladies are god , males are satan

now lets knock down all churches and build white european heroes places to learn reality for example charles darwin .

[verzen]

@ukgreaterlondon

Gravity has not been proven either. Science doesn't work in proving anything.

[Riptaliator]

also the imagination song :P

i guess that was the one hehe

[Riptaliator]

dude this melody makes me think of South Park :P I believe Randy is singing a song that osunds equally to this one XD

[Superviruset]

I totally LOVE this song! Im using it in my exam om Darwin and evolution if you dont mind! :)

And also, do you have any chords for this? That would be great!

[u2bMonkey]

@Superviruset

I don't mind. And I don't remember the chords. I just threw it together one day.

[Superviruset]

@u2bMonkey Well, I figured the first chord is an F, after that a C after that I havent figured yet. I will probably stop here tho, cause my exam is in 12 hours! :-P

[allie6612]

i need the lyrics!!!

[esskotee]

Even if we accept that god made everything in 7 days (and I actually belive in god) as a fact it is small-minded to think that nobody changet the Bible in 2000 years and God has written down EVERYTHING he has done. Most parents know that you can't tell your Kids everything. Even if they ask. You tell them what they need to know to understand, to learn and to grow up. He is allmighty. He can make the whole evolution by now or he can set the Tagret of evolution even before he started the process.

[cocacolaligification]

@esskotee The bible wasn't written by God at all, the bible is a book based on random people's stories and several quotes from the Jewish Torah. And I'm not sure if you really understand Evolution, evolution is simply death. What you are saying is that God can predict Evolution, but evolution isn't predicted, it is shaped by the Environment by random changes. If what you said is right then God haven't started the Evolution, he simply kills all inferior creatures who are worthless in his eyes.

[hicksi61]

Most geneticists will tell you that nature does not like variations of any kind and very few if any are actually helpful n any case. Which puts the theory of evolution into the position of a six sided dice trying to make a 7

[u2bMonkey]

@hicksi61

Beneficial mutations are often very slight mutations. The *noticeable* ones are often unbeneficial. Look at yourself in the mirror and your parents, that's how slight beneficial mutations tend to be.

[hicksi61]

@u2bMonkey the problem here is that the so called 'beneficial' mutations you speak about bring no real benefits at all and are likely to be bred out. Also humans are a very poor example because when it comes to choosing partners we often make very poor selections according to evolutionary criteria.

[SubTachyon]

@u2bMonkey Thats not really a case of mutations though.

[Irmo89]

@hicksi61 that's why statistically a mutation often happens to be mortal. But, you can guess, the story is much longer than the song

[RECKOGNING1]

@hicksi61 thats because today there alot more variation in species then there was a millions of years ago

[inanevenator]

Go Darwin, Vanquisher of Creationism!

[zepeterinma]

@GorillaAtheist ok, thank you for the refferal.

[puncheex]

The video animation is from a Cosmos series program, for those who like to know these things.

[PS3angelus72]

You need download links for your songs.

[u2bMonkey]

@zepeterinma

Something to remember is that natural selection in relation to mutations shapes a species to fit its environment. If the species is surviving just fine as is then it won't change much, as natural selection will see to it that it stays perfect in relation to the environment. If the coelacanth is surviving just fine as is, then any mutations that would change it would be weeded out. So apparently, it's faced little change as it remains fit in a stable environment.

[zepeterinma]

@u2bMonkey thank you.

[TheEnchantedCereal]

@u2bMonkey that is correct, but another thing to keep in mind is that, well, kent is a liar, in actual fact the coelacanths of today are a fair bit different to the ones of the past, fundamentally, they haven't changed much, but the chang is there...

[hlyleh]

@u2bMonkey Sweet! I never thought of it that way. I believe that Coelacanth has lived in a relatively similar environment for that whole time, so you are most certainly correct. Any mutations that have come up just haven't been more beneficial to it.

[muffinman514]

@u2bMonkey

Not to mention that you can't take anything Hovind says to be true. Not only is he a fool, but he's a liar.

[ChazMaz816]

@u2bMonkey

Yep! It's called stabilizing selection. It's why ginkgo trees and cockroaches and sharks all look roughly the same as they did millions of years ago.

[69Kambash64]

@u2bMonkey Which is one of the reasons crocodilians haven't changed much since the Triassic.

[puncheex]

@zepeterinma: And how does he know that it didn't? Did he date one in high school? (Turn around is fair play, I assume.)

Seriously, how does he know it didn't? Not all changes are visible. Secondly, where does it say, that if the environment that an animal lives in doesn't change, that it must?

Ther are two species of coelecanth alive today; there are about 30 species of Order Coelecathiformes. Sounds like it has been changing.

[unfad1ng]

@zepeterinma

because it didnt need to evolve in order to survive. Evolution only occurs when benefical mutations occur, if the mutations arent beneficial then they wont reproduce

[ganados0]

@zepeterinma He's a liar, there were multiple species of this fish, it has evolved, while the resemblence is still there the two living species aren't in the fossil record.

[KoljiSK]

@ganados0 You're taking all the fun out of it :(

[KoljiSK]

@zepeterinma Coelacanth is a whole order that includes more species. Which one of these species is the one that survived for 325 million years?

[Tatarize]

@zepeterinma The truth is it didn't. It's a bit like the crocodiles. Where they don't really change that much in form but do quite clearly evolve. You could say that fish haven't evolved much in 400 million years, because tuna fish look pretty much like fish back then. But, it's hugely wrong because as far as radiative forms go the fish back then evolved into humans and every land based mammal and even sea based ones. Something very similar to the base form exists, why shouldn't it?

[Darkstarfire69]

I love it! More people need to watch this! Evolution is a natural process and I feel bad for those who don't know about it or they do know about it but refuse to accept it. Great video!

[joeiacovino]

my kids love this (2 & 4 yrs old)

[SuperMexicanNINJA]

will u post a link so i can down load this

[jameslangstonevans]

Evolution is bad science too. there is a difference between adaptation and full blown evolution. adaptation happens, but evolution couldn't possibly. there are too many interdependent mechanisms in every species. one wouldn't be able to develop unless both mechanisms developed fully at the same time in the same specimen. like wings would never develop without both hollow bones and feathers, and vice versa.

Its easy to feel smart when everyone agrees with you.

[zepeterinma]

I strongly agree with what you said. there are limitations which organisms cant pass. they can change, and In the bible during Noahs ark, Yaweh (god) told Noah to take two of every kind, not species, "like wolves" which then changed into dogs. which proves that animals can adapt and change, but not evolve. After all, we dont see deer that are smaller than dogs or larger than elephants, there just is a limit to how much organisms can change. no matter how much time passes.

[GodofCider]

@zepeterinma I disagree that there is a limit, in so far as physical limitations of an organism.

[gamesbok]

@zepeterinma Can you suggest a mechanism that imposes this putative 'limit'?

Look up Chevrotain before using deer as an example.

St Bernard and Chiwawa are now incapable of breeding. That's speciation in anyone's book.

[zepeterinma]

@gamesbok Think about it logically, your asking me to prove why cant a bug become a cat. Why isn't their a limit, Is your question. Since i have only lived on this planet for a certain amount of years, i cannot prove it. This is called shifting the burden of proof. Instead, you prove to me that there is No putative limit. I would like a source with reliable proof. I look forward to hearing from you :)

[gamesbok]

@zepeterinma A bug, or at least a modern bug, becoming a cat would not be a prediction of evolution, as the Tree of Life is indeed a tree, not a net.

You have suggested a limit. Science sees no such limit. The burden of proof remains with you to provide a mechanism.

[zepeterinma]

You cannot prove there is no limit, and i cannot prove there is. The reason for this is because humans only live a hundred years or so if they get lucky, this is not enough time for us to find out if there is or isnt a limit. But, in my opinion, isnt science supposed to be finding a definitive fact, and not just something that cannot be proven wrong within several generations? I can say If you go to the sun and put my electric cable in it, the sun will turn blue. you cant prove me wrong.

[gamesbok]

@zepeterinma Well, Willian Hurschell was the first guy who attempted to measure the energy output of the sun, and we have better estimates. There is a reason the sun is yellow. and any feasible method to turn it bule would have to pump appreciable ammounts ot power up there. To stop a bug turning into a cat is major. I mean you only have to stop Hox genes changing. I would have thought to limit 'kinds' would have been a simpler, easier mechanism to suggest.

[zepeterinma]

@gamesbok I just meant, that unless after you come up with a hypothesis you prove it, it isn't fact. you cannot just say it can not be disproven, therefore it must be true. you cannot disprove that going to the sun and putting my electric cable in it, the sun will turn blue. Due to the fact that you would burn up before you reached the sun. In the same way i cannot disprove evolution, which has no proof, only evidence. Without proof, there is nothing to disprove. -.-

[gamesbok]

@zepeterinma 'Proof' is limited to Mathematics. All science is probableistic.

'.....there just is a limit to how much organisms can change. no matter how much time passes. '

You have proposed a limit to the morphalogical changes that organisms may exhibit. I ask of you 1) what are those limits? 2) what mechanism imposes those limits?

[zepeterinma]

Limits- Gaining the ability to transfer Domains. Morphing into another species through mutation. (after all evolution cannot occur only by natural selection) as the first organisms were asexual and there was no variation. The mechanism that prevents limit in my opinion is that there are no real mutations that contribute a positive effect, and evolution can not occur only by natural selection. name a mutation that has a + effect, other than sickle cell anemia causing resistance to malaria.

[gamesbok]

@zepeterinma Do you really mean 'Domain'?

' the first organisms were asexual and there was no variation.'. Please tell your doctor that under NO circumstances should you be allowed access to antibiotics.

What have you got against sickle cell anemia, apart from no answer?

Mutation: Boraas, M. E. 1983. Predator induced evolution in chemostat culture. EOS. Transactions of the American Geophysical Union. 64:1102.

from Observed Instances of Speciation

[gamesbok]

@zepeterinma 12% (3 out of 26) random mutations in a strain of bacteria improved fitness in a particular environment.

Contribution of individual random mutations to genotype-by-environment interactions in Escherichia coli

Susanna K. Remold* and Richard E. Lenski

Center for Microbial Ecology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824

[zepeterinma]

@gamesbok Ok, i agree, Im sure your tired of hearing this. But that is micro evolution. Can you please give me one more example of macro evolution? Then i will believe you. I already knew that certain strands of bacteria mutated to become resistant to penicillin and other antibiotics, However with this, i also believe there is a limit, No matter how much they mutate, lead in their enviornment will always be too poisonous for them. I can see however that this conversation is getting us nowhere...

[gamesbok]

@zepeterinma You have a belief that there is a limit. Can you tell me what that limit might be, and what mechanism imposes this limit? Neither the fossil record, philogenetics nor microbiology recognises any such limit. The Borass paper quoted above involves the evolution of mulit cellular organisms from single cells, which incidently, are still asexual.

[puncheex]

@zepeterinma: Nope. Logically, he asking why a carnivore couldn't become cat-like or dog-like, why a dog-like animal couldn't become fox-like and wolf-like. Just because Cameron is stupid-silly about his ideas doesn't mean you have to be, too. Examine the fossils, and the genomes of the various cat and dog-like predators, and you'll see there is no such gaps between their kinds. In fact, there are two videos on it: watch?v=bJ-DawQKPr8 and watch?v=pNrt90MJL08 .

Your ball.

[SEEKTRUTH333]

@zepeterinma Ridiculous, of course someone who believes that humanity started with 2 people, could beleive that all the wolves and dogs came from an original 2 that survived the flood. Do some research

read a book other than the bible ,eventually logic will kick in.

[zepeterinma]

@SEEKTRUTH333 i dont care about this shit anymore. Im not even a christian, i tried arguing a christians logic for one day cuz i was bored... that was 10 months ago, now people continually comment on my posts... i need to remove them, cuz in all honesty. the church fucking sucks dick... and it brings nothing but problems, as do all contradictory viewpoints on origins... why cant humans just agree on one fucking thing, human nature sucks, it makes people argue about everything...

[kanmoreti]

@jameslangstonevans You don't understand evolution. Go back to biology class.

[puncheex]

@jameslangstonevans: Nope, wrong. Why cannot multiple changes proceed apace in a single species, particularly if the changes are paced at tens to hundreds of thousands of years? Consider your bird; he uses his proto-wings to glide. A mutation enhances the breast muscles, he can stay aloft a bit longer and avoid enemies. Another mutation lightens his bones, another enhances his lungs, another enhances his eyesight. Each one makes him marginally better, over thousands of years. Show me why not.

[SEEKTRUTH333]

@jameslangstonevans It is easy to feel smart when you are dumb...

[DKmalentergirl]

we heard this song today in our biological class

[marissababexoxx]

this is a great video. i showed this to my class for extraa credittt. reaally good. (:

[theREALiceveela]

there are no beneficial mutations. that's a lie.

[Piatnitskysaurus]

@theREALiceveela - um, lactose tolerance?

[theREALiceveela]

@Piatnitskysaurus

ok, there are beneficial mutations, i had the wrong information. but they usually are not inherited, and even so does not explain how we can be evolved from a monkey.

[Piatnitskysaurus]

@theREALiceveela - that last comment is typical denial. Simple, small beneficial mutations build up over time to produce a new species, that's how we evolved.

[gamesbok]

@theREALiceveela

“I demand of you, and of the whole world, that you show me a generic character, by which to distinguish between Man and Ape. I myself most assuredly know of none. I wish somebody would indicate one to me. But if I had called man an ape, or vice versa, I should have fallen under the ban of all the ecclesiastics. It may be that as a naturalist I ought to have done so.

Carl Linnaeus.

[NeoPsiTom]

@theREALiceveela Gordon J. Glover is the best man addressing "Science & Christian Education".  AiG (Answers in Genesis), CMI (Creation Ministries International), CSE (Creation Science Evangelism) & ICR (Institute for Creation Research) are fraudulent. /watch?v=dc6uhQWQQMQ

[Twilightlover50210]

my teacher played the video and everyone wanted to put it on theyre ipods its good

[marissababexoxx]

@Twilightlover50210 i knooww ! righhtt ?

[ws363139videomakerZ]

its a girl! see the boobs?

[marissababexoxx]

@ws363139videomakerZ PERV !

[bananafreak2u]

do you have an mp3 of this?

[SETIat1420MHz]

Fantastic song and nice touch with the drawings from Carl Sagan's Cosmos!!!

So as always "Support Science, Not Superstition".

[Voodoofreak35]

@SETIat1420MHz Support S

[Plutobobsmutqueen]

Well done, would you mind if I used this in my science classes?

[u2bMonkey]

@Plutobobsmutqueen

Thanks. Don't mind at all.

[deansmithisgreat]

OMG this is so indepth. I was a interventionist before watching this video, but OMG this song was soooo touching and I cried. me. cried. And now I believe in EVOlution!! It makes so much sense. Now I know that there is no imminent morality and can live freely as i please to gratify myself.

I self learned myself.

[mrsstudy]

Does anybody know the lyrics to this song?

It's beautiful

[dommiamm]

A real nice work, both the song and the video.

[grenangle]

Great.