Added: 1 year ago
From: witswebsite
Views: 33,612
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (358)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I saw a program on Nat Geo channel on this species. They hand fully 'modern' hands and feet, were bi-pedal, but with disproportionately long arms, suggesting that they were still spending some time in trees. Obviously they were adapted to exploiting a wide range of resources.

  • really informative and interesting

  • interesting video and very informative

  • love the video man

  • love the video man

  • interesting video and very informative

  • @Bossk333 well if it were that open you would be dead

  • @Bossk333 you miss read what i said but i don't see the point of trying to tell you what i believe in you would not listen nor to i have the time nor the patience to talk to a close minded liberal

  • @Bossk333 i don't believe in god so what would i be teaching?

  • very interesting thanks

  • All i gotta say about creationism is that if you honestly believe aliens came from a galaxy far far away to gentically create a new species ie homo sapiens then you must have a few wires loose in your brain, there is no inteligent designer there are no ancient astronauts that visisted this planet and made us and taught us science we evolved from apes period

    ps Hominids are still alive and kicking Yetis Yerens Yowies Almas Sasquatch and Orang Pendek

  • @248thEvan What's your definition of human? Every 'human' before Homo habilis was, on average, 1 metre tall.

  • @248thEvan Homo floresiensis?

  • Comment removed

  • @TheHunturkCCC im sure you dont care what my opinion is but this is all really a test i dont believe in hell but i do believe if you hurt someone in this life we will be punished for but we will not be set on fire this is what i believe im not trying to force my opinion on you but its been proven in science when you break down any cell to its smallest point its light with means we are compressed light waves thus said is what we know as our soul

  • @TheHunturkCCC yes i do and it dose most are to caught up in there own business to pay it any attention and its goofy to call it a he or she its no man in a robe with a beard

  • @TheHunturkCCC im sorry but to believe that there is not something that created this universe is stupid but so is believing in religion. religion is man made people need to be more open minded

  • @TheHunturkCCC The opposite!

  • @TheHunturkCCC I don't think so...

  • MOST IMPRESSIVE. OBI WAN HAD TAUGHT YOU WELL! Sorry, iI could not resist.

  • AND GOD SAID " LET ME GIVE THEM EVIDENCE THAT I DO NOT EXIST so that I may judge them Harshly if they do not "

  • @ETECHJOEs By the current definition of existance you must be able to sense the thing in question or at the very least the direct effects of said thing with at least one of you're five senses.

    Air: toutch

    Gravity: toutch/sight

    Energy: touch

    Deities: ...

    There's your proof. They do not exist.

  • Novel about an alternative view of evolution see video book trailer

  • @Honkmeister actually with our fossil record we can see the gradual increase in brain size from Sahelanthropus tchadensis being about 300 cc, Australopithecus africanus moving to from 500-700 cc, A. Sediba and Homo Habilis coming aroun 800cc then Homo erectus breaking the 1000 cc. Neandertals having actually a larger brain size then modern humans, and modern human cranial capacity. So there arent as many gaps and "ignorance" as you say there are. Just research a bit

  • @Honkmeister Well obviously evolution does't take leaps. No scientist will tell you we have all the answers, science does not work that way. The fact is we are still looking and working to fill the gaps in our knowledge and understanding. Do we have all the fossil records of every stage of human evolution? No. That doesn't mean they don't exist. Intact skeletons which are millions of years old are not easy to come by. We have very good fossil records tracking the evolution of many other animals.

  • i am not a monkey..maybe you are but I'm not

  • @ishamar039 No, you're an ape. Monkeys have tails for the most part. Bipedal, mostly hairless, verbose, but still an ape.

  • @NorthForkFisherman eh to be more technical, we are hominids not apes.

  • @GiggleHz This much is true. But the gist of my commentary is on target, wouldn't you agree?

  • @NorthForkFisherman unfortunately yes, when it comes down to it, humans are apes, that walk upright, and know they are going to die.

  • @GiggleHz I don't get why being an ape is so unfortunate. THUMBS BITCHES!

  • @GiggleHz I believe cladistically we are hominids and apes and monkeys and mammals and animals and eukaryotes. watch?v=4A-dMqEbSk8

    Turns out you're a monkey mate!

  • Lee Berger is a known crackpot.

    watch?v=rNJTUU3lI1k

    The fact that he could go from bum to hero in a few months shows what a pile of junk science is paleontology.

  • man has become so intelligent that we now think we come from apes and that there is nothing out there, there couldnt be anything more intelligent out there than stephen hawkins and the likes of darwinism ( sarcasm) this is a belief the earth is 1, 6943, 8992, 89,82 and not 1,6943,6992, 89,82 the last two hundred years through the use of universities has aged the world by about 50 million years per day and it changes from hour to hour depending on which dick is talking

  • @daraj123 guessing yuo believe a big scary parental figure in the sky started it all huh?

  • This is garbage, blaalh blahhhh blahhhhhhhhhhhhhh blahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

  • @polos505 Well thought out statement. How do you know?

  • @samurai2828

    If you really think our origins started in south Africa, then your science knowledge has been obtained from videos like this.... Read real researches about the origin of humanity, then come back...

  • @polos505 it is called the cradle of human kind because more fossils have been uncovered their than anywhere else.

  • The body has to be energy efficient , so smaller more complex brains evolved and it looks like agriculture plaid a role in this , our bodies became smaller too .

    I believe that judging other mammals using our skill set as a model is wrong, for example dolphins can jump over water but they never jump over fishnets , some may consider them stupid but have you ever wonder what the dolphins are thinking of us destroying our only habitat ?

  • @paulbuys2010 i am not a specialist so i do not know any other tests of self awareness, of course there is the "box test" and some other memory ones that prove the ability some animals show on reasoning & working memory both parts of intelligence.

    It looks like size isn't everything, early Europeans (Cro Magnons) and Neanderthals had bigger brains yet at least the second failed to adapt in changing environments and not even imitation helped them .

  • @psofic actually neandertals and humans interbred in those areas, and it just so happened that more modern human offspring than neandertal offspring was the result. If you can trace your lineage to Europe or Asia, then your DNA contains 1-4% of the neandertal genome. They didnt just simple die off.

  • @paulbuys2010 , other apes are as self aware and group aware as we are (other species like bears and dolphins are too) , our social and mental qualities are not that different from the other family members.

    I don't know about the mental abilities of Lucy, Ardi and Sediba what i know is that if they lived today they wouldn't have a voting right , on the other hand hominid species like Neanderthalenis & Haidelbergenis could have run for the presidency

  • @psofic Thanks for your reply to my questions. Dan Golding, author of Emotional Intelligence which became a best seller around the world, didnt actually break any new ground in his book. Even though the average layman found the book somewhat interesting, in theopinion of Phsycologists his work was actually quite trite. For a while now I have wanted to write a book on our origin as a species, not as a scientific master piece, but just something from an average joe, to be read by others like me.

  • So thank you for your help in this regard. I do however have some more questions. Is there any more realiable test besides the mirror test to confirm the self awareness of other species of animal? And is it safe to say that brain size has little to do with making a creature top of the chain? After all the african elephant has a brain that can weigh up too 4.2 kgs yet still lacks the edge to be able to rule over humans. Once again thanks for your time in this regard.

  • @paulbuys2010 bipedal locomotion pre-existed big brains (by millions of years) and our time line indicates that big brains were not enough to push us into innovativeness and creativity (for example Neanderthal brains were 20% bigger than ours).

    Mental qualities evolved in order to serve us and so did in other hominids , other great apes( ex : chimps) are better than we are when performing some mental tasks (short time memory) but of course they are much more modern than any Australopithecus .

  • We didn't came from apes , we are apes , we belong to a tree with many transitional branches and we will branch into new species as well .

    This new discovery just adds one more species in the long list , homo sapient (us) exist for only 195.000 years and yet we shared the planet with at least other 4 hominids , just think how many more came and extinct since Ardi (~4.5m years ago).

  • @psofic Thanks for your reply. Ok this is purely my opinion and i'm open to discussion, but I feel that the physical form of a creature cannot completely explain its characteristics. For example, we dont have to walk upright to support the survival of our brain. I feel there is no reason why a human brain could have formed in a less upright animal resembeling chimps (a larger version of course).

  • @psofic What I'm getting at really is that our (humans) physically defining characteristics are paled in significance when compared to our mental, Phsycological and self awareness qualities if compared to our animal family tree. Is it safe to say that an understanding of autralopithcus' mental abilities is true proof of their closer link to homo sapiens? Walking upright really proves little, if that were the case my parrot is the missing link :) hope to have comments on peoples views.

  • Hi, i hope there will be a reasonable person who can answer my question. I'm neither creationist nor evolutionist, but i'm open minded, i just want to know, how does this discovery prove we came from apes? i hope for none opinionated answers. P.S, when replying please remember i'm a lay person. thanks

  • LMAOOO Another stupid video.

  • what a load of crap!

  • Just watch the video and learn something.

  • @gregrutz

    "Just watch the video and learn something."

    already watched it and posted from an evolutionist professor who says this guy is a fraud and regularly hypes up discoveries to be something they are not.

    listen & research so that u dont regurgitate the nonsense that people feed you.

    u end up like a mushroom otherwise.

    kept in the dark and fed bullsh.......

  • assjth @1:00 'and a team of more than 50 scientists from..... around the world, have beem making remarkable discoveries.''

    Nice try, watch it again and learn something.

  • @ewilson1 Now on to Australia. 1.Not in a recession. 2. Strongest banks in the world. 3. No race wars. 4. full employment (5%) 5. free healthcare 6. infrastructure in good condition 7. No legal guns being carried to shoot each other. 8. best beaches in the world. Not bad for a bunch of dumbasses.
  • @ewilson1

    "No wonder half of your country is full of morons."

    i understand racist views r the norm in USA.

    we dont enslave our black people.

    Also coming from a country that brought us such great world events as the Global Financial Crisis, Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan etc that is most hilarious.

    U do realize that u have become the laughing stock of the world dont u?

    U have a world series that is played amongst teams entirely from America(1 canadian team) lol.

    The most arrogant nation ever.

  • @ewilson1 The main difference between creationists and scientists is that scientists think for themselves, creationists allow preachers to think for them.

    TO be honest with you there are a few arguments that these tea kettles could use that are valid, like irreducible complexity, it can be said that IC can be proven, and how it can be proven. Unfortunately (for those of us who actually like honest intellectual debate) IC theory doesn't even propose it as a prediction let alone how to present it

  • @salitica

    "The main difference between creationists and scientists is that scientists think for themselves, creationists allow preachers to think for them."

    of course this is a lie.

    a creation scientist is a scientist who has a different faith to an evolutionist/atheist & there4 doesnt eliminate God as a possibility. They then analyze the evidence in light of that instead of having to resort to evolution as a fallback answer to everything.

    Design thinking produces better results in medicine.

  • @salitica

    "(for those of us who actually like honest intellectual debate) "

    u dont like honest debate. u like slander, lies, defamation, strawmen arguments & general hate crimes.

    U listen to murderers like Hitler over honest men. u call white black & black white.

    u have not put up any arguments for your beliefs but have simply launched ad hominem attacks on creationists.

    This was the way black people were treated as well. just generally lesser people & deserving of any bad treatment they got.

  • @salitica

    "like irreducible complexity"

    Behe believes in common ancestry & evolution as well. so he may be a nutcase. after all who would believe in such things?

    your argument with him is that design is impossible & nothing is irreducibly complex. (despite dawkins saying that things give the appearance of design)

    y does dawkins say this?

    becos design is something we recognize&need2 b brainwashed 2 deny it.

    however its possible.

    an individual can be talked out of a correct position by a group

  • @ewilson1 dont be a stupid ass.

    u have no idea what the word scientific theory means.

    yeah i was born yesterday too.

    ur attempt to belittle me is a waste of time.

    You pose a question and try and answer it.

    arguing semantics doesnt relieve you of the facts. Creationists can do exactly this process and it is science no matter how you much u wish it wasnt.

    do u realize how boring it is hearing u say things u read off talk origins?

  • @ewilson1

    " I especially love his idiotic ice shield and his "one drop of water" theories."

    isnt science about proposing theories and having them tested and the ones that stand are accepted and the ones that dont arent?

    or is there a new law that you cannot propose a scientific theory until it has been 100% proven?

    such hypocrites.

    u all claim that scientific error is part of the process & yet condemn someone for making a mistake.

  • @arsjth "isnt science about proposing theories and having them tested and the ones that stand are accepted and the ones that dont arent?"

    no it isn't. Theories are not proposed they are arrived at based on experiments and data. Darwin wasn't actually the scientist who proposed evolutionary theory, he compiled his data and supported the theory with his evidence.

  • @salitica

    u can play semantics over th way the term is used but u know that Darwin's hypothesis was accepted as a theory long b4 there was any proof.

    He even admitted that his 'theory' would b in trouble if the intermediates would not be found. which they werent. Which means that it was always a hypothesis.

    What evidence did darwin compile for his theory?

    finches?

    did the finches become non-finches?

    Nothing there to prove the origin of all species....it was a hypothesis.

    but nice bait & switch.

  • @arsjth STUPID BIBLE FUCKER are the pages sticking together?

    Anyone who knows anything about Darwin's work knows one thing, HE ALWAYS REGRETTED NOT CATALOGING THE FINCHES he brought back from the Galapagos. They alone provided evidence enough to provide proof of Natural Selection.

    Did you know that, taxonomically, Chihuahua's are not in the same species as Great Danes? They can't reproduce at all.

  • @salitica

    "They alone provided evidence enough to provide proof of Natural Selection."

    hey stupid narrow minded, bigoted, hate filled,murderous atheist....is your brain stuck together?

    If you knew one single thing about creationism then you would know they dont deny natural selection but accept it as a very important part of creation. A rigid non-changeable creature would not survive very long.

    but u wouldnt know cos u just read talk origins & have no real idea what creationist are saying.

  • @salitica

    "STUPID BIBLE FUCKER"

    only an evolutionist / atheist would think that u could have sex with a bible.

    but then u do think that the whales came from a 4 legged wolf size creature so i guess u might believe that evolution would occur...perhaps a new species of human is possible.

    U must be a teenager becos u still think u know everything.

    u go to university & they pump your head full of your own importance & u believe it. U think u r better than others.......

  • ....yet u dont realize that adults with no education are allowed into university becos a mature mind beats an educated young mind every time.

    But u think that u r incredibly smart.

    answer this one. if evolution ie GTE is true and man has evolved from apes. why has man evolved the need to invent religion? what was the survival benefit to this?

    once u give me your 'just so' answer i will then ask you why u fight against natural evolution? If we evolved this way it was natures way & for a reason

  • THIS FINDING DOESNT PROVE HOMO SAPIENS EVOLVED FROM Australopithecus sediba. THIS VIDEO PROVES ONLY THAT ALL HOMO GENUS BEFORE "HOMO SAPIENS" WERE EVOLVED FROM Australopithecus sediba.

    HUMANS WERE CREATED BY GOD. AND WE LOOKED THE WAY WE USED TO LOOK FROM THE BEGINGIN OF OUR EXISTANCE

  • @jcage007 youre a fucking retard

  • @stprimeflyer u in fact did evolve from fuken chimpanzee but not completely. stupid motherfuker. if u wana call people retards on the internet who u dont even know u obviosly got ur braind dried out fucko

  • @jcage007 why the fuck would i need to know you to know youre a retard, you think the earth is 5000 years old, youre a fucking retard its as simple as that

  • @stprimeflyer i didnt say it was 5000 years old dumb fuck. go fuck urself miserable piece of shit

  • @stprimeflyer fuken chimp, u have a brain size of a fuken wallnut. just how fucked up someone gotta be to piss ppl off on youtube who havent done shit to u ???

  • @jcage007

    dont pretend to represent christ with that sort of language and attitude.

    Your attitude in no way reflects any of the teachings of christ nor is it appropriate in a public forum.

  • @arsjth im sure it doesnt, im not saying im saint but at the same time im not gonna tolerate wen some fuck is talking shit 2me. would u like that?

  • @jcage007 Clean up your act, pal! Use better words.

  • @filmfans1961 how about u tell this to "stprimeflyer" who started it. wen i posted my first coment i didnt call anyone retard. chek the coments history bud

  • @jcage007 You are right to an extent. A.Sediba is not a human ancestor, it is a offshoot of A.Africanus, and completely did not predate the human (homo) line. At the same time you are wrong, because you are making extraordinary claims that have 0 evidence

  • @salitica claims on wat? wat 0 evidence? i dont need any evidence and so other people who believe in God lol

  • @jcage007 you claimed "HUMANS WERE CREATED BY GOD" and the fact you do not need any evidence regarding what you are claiming proves that all you are is a liar and a hypocrite. Sheep like are worthless

  • @salitica

    "HUMANS WERE CREATED BY GOD" and the fact you do not need any evidence "

    its hasnt stopped you promoting your naturalistic nonsense.

    you have no evidence that the world came into being by an undirected explosion.

    u have no evidence of a single cell evolved from chemicals.

    u have no evidence that this cell changed into every creatures on earth.

    but hey go ahead pronounce it like its fact. ignorance talks loudest.

    real evolutionary biologists roften mor conservative in their views

  • @arsjth here is a meat of an argument I can on this statement. I use no faith to convince me that things have developed the way they have developed. As for religion, what makes you think that your god, the god of the bible, is not a human construct, every appearance, every word, every aspect of the bible is borrowed from earlier cultures. Yahweh, God and Allah are the gods of deception, their followers are the Cult Of Lies. Intellectual Honesty is a path, not a hallmark

  • @salitica there is no recorded culture earlier than Abraham. Not every aspect of the bible is proceeded by other writings and so far, nothing has proven the text to be incorrect with the exception of a few scribal errors that do nothing to change the messege of the text

  • @charlitunaman2002 ummm...really....ummmm...wow..­.I am trying to figure out if you are a theist or not, because this is bordering on a Poe's Law kinda sorta thingy. Ummm..(note to self assume they are serious) ummm.. (>me. I really am at a loss that somebody wouldn't know about China, or India, or Sumeria or Egypt) The Bible makes an excellent middle east historical reference, but is poor on the details accompanied by an exploitative narrative. It is not reliable

  • @salitica Unreliable in what sense? So far, history and science have been playing "catch up" for a few thousand years. Don't worry where I stand, go with the evidence

  • @arsjth "you have no evidence that the world came into being by an undirected explosion."

    What are you talking about? Big Bang is a misnomer, more like accelerated expansion, did you know that space and time are expanding .00000001 mm per minute right inside one brain cell of yours. "Evidence, my dear Watson, comes when it comes, but you know it is there."

    or perhaps you refer to our Solar system being the product of a supernova.

  • @salitica

    "The main problem of th big bang cosmology is th very existence of th big bang. 1 may wonder what was b4 the big bang? Where did th universe come from? If space-time did not exist 4 times less than 0, how could everything appear from nothing? What appeared first: th universe or the laws determining its evolution? When we were born, the laws determining our development were written in the genetic code of our parents.But where were the laws of physics written when there was no universe?

  • @arsjth good statement my friend

  • @salitica

    "Big Bang is a misnomer"

    good to see you acknowledge that which your evolutionary mates have no idea about. still quoting outdated science as fact.

    todays scientific fact is tomorrows misnomer. lol

  • @arsjth "u have no evidence of a single cell evolved from chemicals."

    Chemistry is an amazing field, you can make a lot of things with a good chemistry background. Now for the record, due to an inconsistency in Terran formed life (Abiogenesis Pan Terra hypothesis) i hold to the Panspermia hypothesis, but still Panspermia still requires a literalistic definition of Abiogenesis, just not on earth.

    "u have no evidence that this cell changed into every creatures on earth."

    Actually I do Have it

  • @salitica

    "Chemistry is an amazing field, you can make a lot of things with a good chemistry background."

    how is this relevant to what we are discussing? Physics is an amazing field, so is biology, medicine etc.

    "i hold to the Panspermia hypothesis"

    i am sure you do...as proof is not really relevant to your 'beliefs'.

    it would be simpler to say..'i have no idea' and in lieu of a plausible idea i have chosen to believe the 'aliens did it' theory despite no evidence aliens even exist.

  • @arsjth actually I do not believe aliens propagated life on earth, it is possible, far more possible than an eternal, perfect god waking up one day and making everything in a 6 day period.

  • @salitica

    ""u have no evidence that this cell changed into every creatures on earth."

    Actually I do Have it "

    great share it with us.

    its no wonder u lie about creation scientists u r a whacko who believes in aliens.

    show me one.

    prove they exist.

    dont ever criticize someone who believes in God.

  • @arsjth In 1983, Boraas reported that a single-celled species of green algae began to form multi-celled colonies shortly after the accidental introduction of a flagellate predator. The multi-celled form was a mutant strain that had enhanced chances of survival in that enviroment. Initially, colony size ranged from 4 to 32 but stabilized at 8. The multi-celled colonies technically belong to a completely different family of green algae. there are hundreds of such experiments and results

  • @arsjth dont ever criticize someone who believes in God.

    Why not, you and your gods are a bunch of lying pieces of garbage and should be disposed of

  • Was this an announcement of a scientific finding or an ad for the university?

    More science, less promotion, please.

  • @mistergarth umm it was the advertisement for continued funding for the Malapa site. The announcement of the finding took over an hour

  • I love how all the evolutionists and atheists think that everything in the Bible is literal and therefore prove their own ignorance.

  • @kwelakwela1623

    I love how theists make excuses for the stupidity and/or their lack of following of the harder parts of the bible by categorizing it into literal,metaphor,no longer applicable,applicable,story,fa­cts,faith,science with often no evidence of the writings as to what goes into which group.

    Following the bible proves human ignorance and hypocrisy.

  • @ewilson1 Kent Hovind does not require a superior intellect only a superior argument. And you atheists are bankrupt at that! In debate after debate, Hovind whipped one professor after another.

  • @filmfans1961 "In debate after debate, Hovind whipped one professor after another." Too bad Rev. Hovind got whipped by the US justice system then.

    "We're not related to chimps of mice at all." We are apes.

    "Your science is faulty if based on the lies of evolution and the dating methods are highly inaccurate." What does radiometric dating have to do with the change in allelic frequencies in reproductive populations over time?

  • @whitefox998 Believe the fairytale if you want to. Your intellect is wanting if you think that we came from a rock!

  • @filmfans1961 just because a brainwashing expert is able to present a convincing argument does not invalidate any aspect of theory.

    All Kent Hovind is good at doing to lying

  • In an article in The Weekend Australian national chief correspondent Hedley Thomas commented:

    Renowned University of California paleoanthropologist Tim White savaged Berger on the release of his subsequent book, The Official Field Guide to the Cradle of Humankind, calling it in many ways worse than useless, given the astonishing density of errors and misleading statements. He added that it showed a disturbing pattern of fabrication.

    Pattern of Fabrication???

    mmmm sounds familiar

  • @arsjth Tim White has had a thing about Lee Berger ever since they were in HIGH SCHOOL together. Can't say that I blame him, Berger is one hell of a ham, and scientists don't like show offs. As for the book itself, it ain't a scientific paper, and scientists often times embellish statements to clarify things that normal people would not understand.Pattern of fabrication is a catch all from White, he likes to use those words with everybody he does not agree with, it is the worst scientific insult

  • @ewilson1 So unsure of yourself, you're not even sure that what you believe is right.

    Well lets see, if aliens came down and said they put us here and they have "proof" would you believe them?

  • @mh4777abc yes and no, I would believe if the said that they came to earth and planted life on a barren world. I would not if they said they came here and placed humans and other critters here whole cloth, the evidence strongly supports that multicellular life arose out of single cell life and the multicellular life evolved over long periods of time to where it is at today, but there really were no "First Humans"

  • @ewilson1 believe whatever you want, one of us is right.

    It's amazing how many atheists find faith on their death beds.

  • Yeah, God, flat earth, sinner homosexuals LOL!!! What bronze age ideas!

    It is hard to believe this is 21st century and there are people who still believe in such nonsense as supernatural powers, and all stupid stuff in the so called holey book.

  • @ewilson1 It's a matter of faith all religions are. How do you know he doesn't exist have you scientifically proved that he doesn't? I'd wager my religion over science any day because any excuses science comes up with such as evolution is meaningless when it doesn't even hold an explanation of the source of life other then a childish 'big bang' theory. you will never in your life find the answer because the truth of your existence is beyond you.

  • @ewilson1 Mutations can cause change to the genetic material, but the overwhelming evidence suggests that mutation leads to corruption of original information, not enhanced or new information. You don't even have a way to explain how we have a physical brain that is operated by an unphysical mind that has the ability to reason, move body part or protect us from harm.

  • @charlitunaman2002 No, mutations are essentially benign, and in the case of gene duplication, translocation and recombination, can and do ad new 'information'. Your next statement, 'a physical brain that is operated by an unphysical mind' is so glaringly stupid I think I'm going to have to spit to get the taste out of my mouth.

  • @charlitunaman2002 for the record, it can be said that Dolphins are approximately 3x more intelligent than we are.

    The4 brain is a physical device to process sensory information and react , the fact that we think is a side effect of this process. Our mind is also a product side effect.

  • Spectacular, keep me updated on kaelyncruz64@yahoo please

  • @ewilson1 When you can prove that something came from nothing and that cells can become more complex (and youve observed it) without any new dna information and that 99.999% of all mutations arent either fatal or deforming ( and you observed that). I might believe. Your view is utterly absurd. You have more faith than I

  • Creationists bumping here: What a surprise! Vous faites vraiment chier avec votre Bible, vos superstitions, laissez vivre l'évolution du savoir!

  • @wollin20 Whos going by superstitions now????? Show me observed evolution. If it is true, certainly by your claims, standards and requirements....someone observed it in a laboratory setting???? We have untold trillions of diotomatious fossils yet none have been found to have one single positive mutation. Fruit fly experiments, fruitless. Archeopteryx? What the hell happened there? Piltdown man? Shall I continue? Keep shoving the square block in a round hole. In time, it WILL fit. Ask Darwin

  • @charlitunaman2002 bacterias evolve to the point that antibiotics are starting to fail...OK, that's small, but since you need one example, you got it. And, since we all come from one couple of biblical humans (according to you, I guess), why are there different human types ("races")?

  • @charlitun

    perhaps u should look@nested hierarchies.

    "Evolution predicts that living things wil b related2 1 another in what scientists refer2 as nested hierarchies—rather like nested boxes. Groups of related organisms share suites of similar characteristics and the number of shared traits increases with relatedness. "

    in other words if we group creatures into groups with similar characteristics & we look at that chart when we have finished, we see that all the groups have similarities lol.

  • @arsjth .......& we look at that chart.... of nested hierarchies, and we see........

    It is identical to the DNA chart, which

    is identical to the evolution chart.

    Why can't you IDiots see the big picture?

  • @gregrutz

    no its not identical to the DNA chart.

    why dont u idiots see that basic fact?

    why do you persist with your beliefs despite these anomalies?

    why do you ignore that Hox genes show us that Not only do we share similar developmental genes with fruit flies, but also with almost every other creature on the planet!

    how has this changed the way scientists view evolution? Well, since very different animals are made using similar genes, Evo proponents contend that the driving force ......

  • @arsjth we share similar developmental genes

    Common Ancestor!

  • @gregrutz

    so any answer = common ancestor?

    Evo proponents contend that the driving force of evolution is not changes in (protein coding) genes, but changes in regulatory DNA (genetic switches) that control the genes. In other words, the evolution of form is not so much about what genes you have, but about how you use them. Yet this contradicts what neo-Darwinists have long told us—According to the modern theory (called neo-Darwinism), changes occur in organisms by mutations of genes.

  • @arsjth So where does Darwin's discovery come into play?

    Creationists think mutations make things evolve. What ever happened to ''natural selection'', which works on ''variation'' of species, which is made by changes in genes?

    You are just like a creationist video>>> ''Evolutionist say...........then they fuck it up.

  • @gregrutz

    in simple language.

    You have been taught & claimed as absolute proven fact that changes occur in organisms by mutation of genes. Yet due to the actual evidence we find that developmental genes r similar across all creatures & we dont see th divergence that evolutionary theory predicted. So we must change the theory again to fit the evidence. This is easy becos the theory doesnt rely on empirical evidence2 begin with.

    so evolution apparently acts of th genetic switches not th genes.

  • .........of evolution is not changes in (protein coding) genes, but changes in regulatory DNA (genetic switches) that control the genes. In other words, the evolution of form is not so much about what genes you have, but about how you use them. Yet this contradicts what neo-Darwinists have long told us—According to the modern theory (called neo-Darwinism), changes occur in organisms by mutations of genes

    DOH!

    if u want some examples of the DNA chart not being identical i can supply

  • Wrong, you don't understand evolution.

    Darwin didn't even know about genes and he figured it out.

    Genes and mutations only add variation in species.

    Natural Selection does the changing of the species.

  • @gregrutz

    "Wrong, you don't understand evolution."

    no one understands evolution becos as a theory it is so flexible & 'god did it' has been replaced by 'evolution did it'.

    anything not understood is assumed to be due to evolution. there4 u get scientific error accepted as fact until it is proven wrong. but we dont change our faith in evolution we just assume that is the 'process' of science to find error.

    The problem is that the predictions made by evolutionary theory are consistently wrong.

  • @arsjth

    Name one prediction that is wrong.

    It predicted where to look for the whale transitional fossils, and they found them.

  • @charlitun

    except when we find features that are similar to other creatures across the chart for eg bats & birds with wings. clearly not inherited from the same ancestor so it doesnt fit the nested hierarchy chart.

    Then we call this disproof of evolutionary theory 'convergent evolution' so it sounds like it still fits. We may call it 'facts that dont fit the theory'. or 'the things evolutionists wish didnt happen'.

  • @arsjth There is nothing similar between bats and birds. Insects fly too.

    That like saying we are like dogs because we both walk.

  • @blankslate3 Obviously I "believe" in dinosaurs since the mere fact that you are part of the human race proves we are not intelligent enough to pull of such a hoax... which gets me wondering, do you think the Bible is nothing more than the biggest hoax of all time?

    And why the sudden outburst of rage and insulting at the end? Are you that insecure in your atheist believes that you have to call anyone who believes in the truth, God and Jesus Christ, a "retard" to attempt to show you are correct?

  • sorry, stupid question, but how do we know for example that skull almost 2 million years old isn't just disfigured, like birth defect? How can it be proven humans looked different years and years ago and then developed all the way to what we are today?

  • @linzki actually the skull is distorted, it says so in the paper introducing the fossil.

  • arsjth and filmfans1061 spamming the same page, you guys should get married.

    Neither one of you knows what science is.

  • @gregrutz

    "Neither one of you knows what science is."

    where as you being a fireman know all about it?

    roflmao

  • @arsjth I also have a BS in Chemistry. And taken Biology and Geology classes.

    You have never read a science book. You get you info, from AIG.

  • @gregrutz

    BS in Chemistry. does that make you an authority to speak on these subjects?

    gee i dont imagine any creation scientist ever thought to take a biology or geology class.

    none of those classes or degrees prove your pet theory conclusively. its assumed and hence u can do a degree be a working scientist and disagree with it.

    try that with gravity or electricity or any proven theory.

  • There is no such thing as a creation scientists. Scientists don't do creationism.

    Theory of gravity proven? LOL They don't even know why mass warps space-time.

    evolution is a process that happens, just like gravity.

  • "That could explain why some of the most ancient fossils now considered human ancestors have such striking mixtures of chimp and human traits - some could actually have been hybrids." Time 09OCT06 page 50.

    On 60 Minutes today (04/11) Bob Simon in fact callled this thing a "hybrid".

  • @Yeah

    quote from Philip Skell.

    "Darwinian explanations 4 such things r often 2 supple: natural selection makes humans self centred&aggressive-except when it makes them altruistic & peaceable. Or nat select produces virile men who eagerly spread their seed-except when it prefers men who are faithful protectors & providers.When an explanation is so supple that it can explain any behaviour, it is difficult to test it experimentally, much less use it as a catalyst for scientific discovery."

  • @arsjth fallacy of "Argument from authority"

  • @YeahOkTerrific

    The partial skull is what it is and really proof of nothing. Other scientists have already disputed their statements about its significance.

    read some good creation websites or ID ones to get some perspective.

    In the media u tend to get the evolutionary hype & spin.

    The guy who found it just wants fame & financial grants and will hype it for all its worth.

    At least creationists give another perspective.

    in the end evolution as a science is useless anyway.........

  • Dear mh4777abc

    In response to you calling me a satanist. I am not a satanist as I do not believe in the little red devil. And, like you, I believe in a God. The only difference is that the creative energy that I believe in is not restricted as your biblical god and you do not have a free will. This is a scientific video - keep it so.

  • @blankslate3 How foolish will you look when you die and find out there IS a God and your faith in science is completely misguided and wrong?

  • @ewilson1 How do you know? It's not like there's any proof that human have evolved, there are only similar humanoid species and only the assumption we have changed just like the assumptions that other species have changed because of similar species found. If that is all the evidence you refer to then your trust in evolution as proof is weak.

    Just because you don't believe in God nor because he doesn't reveal himself and his power to you doesn't mean he doesn't exist.

  • @ewilson1 Not for time eternal. The creation story maintains that the Earth is about 6000 years old, not billions of years old. BTW: there is no "proof" for evolution. It is a dying religion surviving only on tax dollars as Kent Hovind would say. The latest "missing link" is no more than another dead ape. And oh yes, we are not apes. Although I cannot speak for you.

  • @filmfans1961 a Christian, a devote Evangelical Christian, is the one who called us apes. and A sediba is not being called a missing link, as it is not an ancestor of the human stock.

  • @salitica keep "thinking" that

  • @charlitunaman2002 I can't figure out quite what you are talking about, but it was a Protestant Christian from a fundamentalist sect that defined humans as "Primate", we are not just descended from apes we are apes

  • @salitica

    " we are not just descended from apes we are apes"

    no you are an ape.

    we are a separate creature called humans.

    your categorizing of humans as apes is based on certain similar traits not on anything factual.

    why are apes not humans?

    Y are they not categorized as being in our group?

    your answer will make it clear that its your evolutionary view on life that makes u think u r an ape.

  • @The Believers - I assume you believe earthquakes happen when god plants dinosaur bones in the ground too ....(sarcasm)

  • Unbelievers are always like, "but where is the sceintific proof that God exists? We need sceintific, logical FACTS!!" ... but that is the whole reson why belief in God and Jesus is called FAITH because we do not need "facts" to "prove" that God exists, we already know He does (yet there is a lot of proof that He does exist anyways, such as fulfillment of Bible prophecies)...

    And is it not logical that if there is a watch, there must be a watchmaker?

  • @kwelakwela1623 Because a watch is complex does not mean all things complex had a ''maker''.Snowflakes are complex and each unique.There is no evidence that each is forged by a divine snowflake maker.[Asserting] a ''god''' did it [which you most likely will do] is only that...an assertion.

  • kwelakwela1623 said, "such as fulfillment of Bible prophecies".

    Do you realize the the prophecies that have been fulfilled are only fulfilled IN the Bible?

    And how do you know a watch has to have a watchmaker? When you answer that question, you will understand that it is an irrelevant analogy.

  • @kwelakwela1623 Actually, you *do* need proof to make the assertion that such an entity exists. How would you "know" something exists with ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE? As far as prophecies go... you're kidding, right? You mean the so called predictions that say there will be war, disease and famine? Things that predate the Bible, Yahweh, and Christianity all together. However, theres a list of unfulfilled prophecies that would reach into next week. lol. Your god was wrong? Not infallible? Explain.XD

  • @kwelakwela1623

    "...we do not need "facts" to "prove" that God exists..."

    Fine. Just keep your faith out of my science.

  • You creationist morons and ID whack jobs NEVER cease to amaze my rational, scientifically skeptic, freethinking consciousness. It puzzles me how you say "there's no transitional fossils", WHILE WATCHING THE VIDEO! There's an entire catalog consisting of a vast, beautiful variety of extinct Hominids. They're being discovered constantly. However, aside from "missing links", there's this thing called "genetics". Yeah, Chimps share 99% of Homo Sapien DNA. Explain that one.

    Evolution is a fact. XD