I was hoping to see the DarBabies evolve into two separate species A and B, with A getting intelligent and B not so intelligent. A starts hunting B for food and wearing their skin.. B eventually grow extinct and stuff. of course in between A would branch out to different species as would B.
Totally useless point is, people who eat or kill primates are cannibals and murderers. I dislike primates.
Does the demonstration comes from a specific book ? Because it's exactly the same, word for word, as the one cdk007 released in 2007: How Evolution REALLY Works Part I & II
Good video...one thing i would've but in though is that predators evolve along with prey in a evolutionary arms race.....the cheetah gradually gets as fast as it physically can....but its prey also gradually become more agile........the arms race keeps nature balanced.....but once again good video....sort of a natural selection for dummies...lol:)
See, now you said quantum and made me think of another hypothesis: Do you think an organism's desires/needs, however undeveloped, have an effect on the evolutionary changes via quantum processes?
@k7leetha All animals will seek to mate with the most "efficient" according to their value system.
Nature is about efficiency. Hence we do not do too well in comparison to the majority of species. For example Sharks 400M yrs homosapiens 160 yrs, and facing possible extinction as the narrow bandwidth of Eco system necessary to sustain us is under threat from ourselves.
@Kinkspace ...okay? Still a random variable, bruth lol. It can be expected that an animal will try, but that doesn't mean it will succeed, due to the environmental hazards, including predators. Additionally, mating does not guarantee a successful reproduction, which I think was the point of showing constants and variables, so in the end, while it is expected, and of course required for the continued existence, it still must be calculated as a random variable.
@k7leetha Constant variable by definition are not random variables. Even if we take it does to the quantum level it is not random. ie: The butterfly effect and quantum entanglement etc. Point being nature will always favor the most efficient, if one is not efficient one is not favoured, this is not random.
@k7leetha What I have described is natural selection, what you have described is artificial evolution, both were observed by Darwin. Where we differ is you appear to be of a mind set that artificial evolution from the human perspective which is nothing more than prejudice illusion and delusion is actually natural selection. It is not.
@Kinkspace I'm not sure how anything I said refers to artificial evolution, on the contrary I am arguing specifically for natural, hence my disagreement about mating not being random - in a natural environment mating is a random variable because it cannot be predicted, that is directly about the system of natural selection, environment versus propagation.
@k7leetha Its not a question of v's environment it is a question of efficiency and balance as part of that environment, natural selection is not separate from the environment.
Artificial evolution challenges the environmental factors.
@Kinkspace Perhaps we're talking about the same thing for a different reason lol - I am of the mindset that mating, that is the act of sex for procreation, and the actual birthing of an offspring (completing the purpose of mating) are both random variables in the process of evolution happening *or not* happening. In other words, evolution happens regardless of mating, but the chance of a change *continuing* is varied by whether or not it can be passed on to an offspring, hence, random variable.
@k7leetha Interesting. OK I can see how as humans this is the case, but we are inefficient. “Artificial Evolution” is the manipulation of a species. "Artificial evolution" is adaptation through selective breeding. In the case of humans it could be said to correlate to political agenda environment. So it could be said that humans as a result of political ideology, are for all intensive purposes in a breeding program which sustains that political economic ideology.
@k7leetha Had we not of taken this path the variants would be less, although admittedly we are dealing with large numbers in an calculation. The difference in school room maths comparatively to that of quantum mechanics.
When we observe animals or plants the variants become less, still big numbers though. The bottom line is what appears to be chaos is indeed less random than that. Google the 30 year study on Darwin's finches by Peter R. Grant and B. Rosemary Grant.
@k7leetha Again there is the environmental factors which in the analysis are referred to as "unpredictable". But if Chaos mathematics are applied a model can be constructed to accommodate the variants. This is a clear case of of one science being of aid to another but I come across this time and time again where people expert in their field see the tree but miss the forest.
So we are agreeing I think ;) But as you say coming at it from different perspective mathematically speaking.
@Kinkspace Aaaah k, now I see what you mean. Yes, Chaos theory, from the accumulative perspective does change how we evaluate the "rules," so to speak. I do understand now what you mean. Agreed!
What evolved into the Darbaby? How can the predator be so much stronger?
Is the Darbaby a mutated predator? Is the predator a mutated Darbaby?
A giant explosion occurred > explosion evolves into elements,molecules,etc > Molecules, etc evolve into 'stuff' > Stuff evolves into life > life evolves into....
@ReneVanHeel : Actually the problem seems to be that superstitious people breed like cockroaches. Mostly because they enslave their girls and women and use them as baby-factories.
@bary1234 Normal? lol..... ATheist only represent 2.3 percent of earths population. Out of that %, many atheist are part of the New Age movement. Wiccan's are also mostly atheist. Buddhist are atheist & many other atheist like Richard Dawkins and Michio Kaku believe in ET's, not even factoring in atheist who believe in Bigfoot and reincarnation. Many people get the false impression that many atheist are not superstitious. Atheism simply means not believing in God but everything else, well?
@IvanderHaisley "ET is not a fairy tale .its real , ET life is a very credible thought"
Credible simply means, able to be believed, and the fact that you are able to believe something, does not mean that it is scientifically quantifiable. If you can prove they exist empirically then please do so.
@benthemiester this is not blasphemy or anything , but GOD , the deity your so blindingly worshiping , has no proof for his existence , so , can you even comprehend the scales at which science is presently dealing with ? NO , NO you can't .,, science has long disproved the existence of "GOD"
@IvanderHaisley There's no such thing as proof in the historical sciences. Science has never disproved God nor has it ever claimed to do so. In fact in the last few decades many former atheist & Darwinist have converted & renounced atheism based on scientific evidence in the form of the Fine Tuning Problem as well as the integrated complexity, digital encoded information & nano machinery within the cell. Theres absolutely no evidence for abiogenesis through chemical evo but Im sure u believe it.
@benthemiester It should be noted that scientific research is supposed to be objective and unbiased. Things like: 'It's too complex to have evolved! There must have been a designer!' are ABSOLUTELY INCONSISTENT with scientific thinking. If we don't know something, we don't know...and we should look farther to find out, NOT make conclusions! ID proponents often argue about the complexity of cellular organelles, but they forget that Eukaryotes are the latest cellular organisms, not the first!
So over time through evolution the animals start to blend in more and more but how does evolution know I mean like how does evolution know to change the camoflauge to the enviromet when obvoiusly evolution isnt a living thing but sut a process?
Evolution doesn't know, but when it the color of an organisms child randomly changes to better match the environment it has a greater chance to survive and therefore mate and spread its beneficial color to its children.
So, evolution doesn't know, but if a change of color is good. Then it will spread to the next generation (unless the individual with the color change is unlucky and dies, or is unable to find a mate)
@SnipersScope55 It doesn't know anything, because, as you say, it's only the process being described. It simply happens because the creatures that best blend into their surroundings are able to pass on their genes (in this case their color) to offspring more often than those that are not. This happens because predators eat those who stand out most from the environment. If we imagined some sort of predator that only ate those that blended in best, we'd find high contrast descendants instead.
where does 50% subject to random mutation come from? Saying mutations passes on is like saying I can get cancer because my mom had it when I was born. I don't understand? Any help would be welcome.
@calebstone22 Mutations to DNA reflects the not-quite-perfect way DNA replicates. If a DNA mutation doesn't kill the organism, then it remains in the DNA and is passed on to offspring, generation after generation.
Cancer in non-reproductive cells does not get passed on since only reproductive cells are involved with procreation. Cancer in reproductive cells almost certainly would leave the parent sterile (so that DNA never gets passed on.)
@calebstone22 It's somewhat arbitrarily chosen for the demonstration, but an OK estimate, and no it isn't. I'd recommend going to your local library, or check out some youtubers like AronRa, some other of Cassiopeias vids on the subject, cdk007, DonExodus2, dprjones, potholer 54, Thunderf00t and so on, 'cause it's way too big to explain in a small youtube comment!
I wish that CDK007 had been given credit in the video description or at the end of the video. You've plagiarized from him terribly. Very disappointing.
@pacogoatboy Well, this is basically what you have to say when doing an intro on evolutionary biology. CDK didn't come up with the theory and neither did he come up with this particular way of demonstrating it. It's just a standard that works, everyone use it.
@Scurmicurv I never implied that cdk007 had come up with the theory, or even with this means of presenting it. What I am stating is that it would appear that you've copied, almost verbatim, a fair chunk of a video that he published 3 years earlier. If this is an excerpt from a video that existed before 10/2007, my apologies, but if that is not the case, plagiarism is plagiarism. Perhaps both of you copied the work of a previous author and neither attributed anything to that person?
then how come some idiots evolved to be such religious assholes? what benifit does being religious have? i know evolution is real. gotta wonder how thinking patterns fit into it though.
I find it difficult to understand how random events could give rise to the eye or the brain or even muscles. How long would it take for 20 monkeys on type writers to write War And Peace just by typing random letters. I think that they would not get there for quadrillions of years if at all. For something to get somewhere it needs a goal. The goal for life is Survival and it seems like it is more than random events getting it there.
@cdmackay ... that is another great mystery, actual time involved.. would it even be enough time for such evolution as we now observe to occur 4.7billion years ago.
"How long would it take for 20 monkeys on type writers to write War And Peace just by typing random letters"
It would only take a long time if you would want it all in one time, if you would however only keep the good letters and discard the bad (like in evolution) it would happen a lot faster
@nakedapedude Thanks for your response. I was really referring to the changes to an organism over generations. With natural selection and random mutations being the main reason for a species developing variation or picking up a new traits (like the eye or hearing), it seems that these "changes" are attributed to random occurrence according to the theory of evolution - If these changes help survival then they stay. Are these changes not random?
Yes, the DNA molecule is subject to random mutation during replication but evolution isn't a random process.
The fact that you can't uderstand or are incredulous isn't a good argument, what that means is that you need to do more research, for example, there is a wealth of information out there about the origins of the human eye and the evolutionary process which formed it.
@nakedapedude - You are right. I should do more research. I am interested in Evolution but I have only read Darwins work. There are probably more advanced studies I haven't seen.
There are many good books and I certainly wouldn't be starting with reading anything darwin wrote, "why evolution is true" by jerry coyne would be a good start if you are interested.
1. Random variables and concepts for evolution has been clearly shown in this simulation, however what was not clear to me is this : @ initial condition ( 2:13 ), every sample started with 10000000 then came the 1st generation ( 2:48 ) a mutation has occurred ( 3:48 ). How was this mutation ( i.e 1000000 to 10010000 ) considered in the program, what parameters were included so that a green bit of "1" would occur to the next generation of the sample genome ?
2. Evolution does happen, but can this model even take us even further when only the microbes were evolving to complex species such as those in the pre cambriam period ? The model thus prove evolution but it had not yet addressed actual evolution of a species ( i.e ape to human ). Its hard and tough job but that would be the ultimate test for the development of the program you have made. I can see in that if this program will be perfected it should smoothly link to the bigbang program ...
For example , if your brother went to another country then he stayed there for good and had siblings. If his siblings would go back to their homeland, their features will be very different. Major parameters are culture ( affects perception thus lifestyle ), kind of food eaten everyday, local climate. Evidence to this are countrymen who went abroad and had their families there. Their siblings are very peculiar to ours specially height, skin color, voice and weight.
The main reasom both our countrys went to war was becouse of George Walker Bush junior, your prime minister wanted to be his best friend and followed him blind (and so did mine)
Bush probably did what he did becouse he was funded by the oil companies but that is impossible to prove...
That's why we have to elect leaders to do that for us, in the best way they can, and if they do not come to good results we have the media and free speach to direct them.
@Geertpieter couldn't be any worse we probably wouldn't be able to kill all those Iraqis then. make nuclear weapons that threaten my child in her bed whilst she sleeps.
@Geertpieter fair trade billions for oil, pennies for coffee who gets to set the rules. The Americans have been in charge of the opium fields in Afghanistan for years now and of course they got rid of all of it. No they planted more. Nice American drugs running about your country at the moment enjoy. Why do we need fair trade we don't seem to have to have these guidelines for trading fairly with other Western nations
"Why do we need fair trade we don't seem to have to have these guidelines for trading fairly with other Western nations"
We do have fair trading inside the EU the problem is that if some african person would sell his prodict at the european market he will have to pay a very high tax
wow climate change denial? evolution denial? conspiracy theories? evil world governments? could you be any more of a cliche? what's it like living your entire life in paranoid, ignorant fear? you're like child
@nakedapedude Cliche would be believing the massed produced rubbish that you digest so readily. I'm afraid of nobody I used to be but not any more. I'm not afraid of death And if i thought it would do any good would readily lay down my life. Yes thats right like a child that accepts every piece of garbage their loving governments do for them. Like a child that blindly carries on eating their mountain of french fries whilst people are starving. That luxuriate in hot water whilst people thirst.
You're claiming that anthropogenic climate change and evolutionary theory are some sort of conspiracy that the general population is being fed and that they aren't really true?
Where is your evidence for this fantastic and absurd claim?
Of course there are people better off than me and worse off than me, do you have a point?
Ok now your speaking sense but what do we do about it. The scientists natural need to know, is being used against the world. I originally came on this thread feels like a month ago now to try and reduce the amount of people knocking theist views and to get the theists to my camp, and to point out that views in science can be similarly challenged. I just don't see the benefits, this world is simply disgusting. I agree with your knowledge relating to Zionist Jews helping Hitler liquidate Jews
Difference between science and religion, try to get that one first. Why are atheist like me battling against creationism, fundamentalism? We do this to show how fucking bad religion is. All the wars (except vietnam) have a religious background, all of them. We try to combat extremism. Creationists are mostly also pro-life, anti-gay rights, anti-feministic, anti- equal rights, anti-science. We try to fuckign do something about that. Do something about that instead
@sandpaperify religion is dogma. bud sadly look at the people whom religions have been based around and they make a lot of sense. Nobody listens because blood curdling leaders don't want us too be free.
@Geertpieter Exactly so why did they give their work to blood thirsty scoundrels that are in power. The EU is a scary future federal state don't worry The uk will join fully as soon as the Euro is stable (might be a long time). Research the power of the Bank of England and realise that when UK joins in its over for Europe they are all in cahoots. Countries could do things that make you proud though, they dont because they are run by evil tyrants that want the peoples natural power.
Don't u think it is realy stupid to think all people in charge are bad?
Most people in politics are doing it becouse they think that what they do is the best for the country, we should go even further and do not what is best for the individual or country but what is best for the whole world.
BTW: I'm from Holland and believe me if i say that things in Britain are not better than over here (only some scandinavian countrys could make thet claim)
@Geertpieter if they work for an evil regime all their actions no matter how good the intent will always produce evil. I'm saying that the Uk is a lot worse than most countries as you will find out when the UK joins EU properly.
@Geertpieter This country is awash with money. The people don't have any though. How would you like to find out that the bank of your country at a time that it owned the biggest empire the world has ever seen bankrolled the enemy of your people. Well research Bank of England funding Hitler through the Rothschild blood money empire.
Think about what would happen to u if u would suddenly be the ruler of the whole word, all people would like to talk to u and want you to do what they would want and what would be best for them.
The biggest treat in our civilization at this moment could be individualism...
If you would have no rulers we would have to continue like it is at this very moment or descent towards anarchy becouse there would not be annyone to change the rules, or we would all change the rules just for our own bennefit.
Why would u be chocked to hear that the Bank of England went for the gig money in the world (i do not know if it's true) but there are many accamples of diferent compannys who made some good money from both sides.
@Geertpieter No my problem is not just capitalism, i have problems with every type of power structure this crazy world has ever produced. They have all been created to control you, read some literature read Karl Marx or just read a bill gates lecture. National socialism fascism, they are all the heads on the same animal.
Sorry to have to burst your bubble but i have read abou all forms of goverment and i know that if there was no form of control we would end up in chaos and annarchy.
But again i do not believe democracy to be the best we will ever come up with, but would u be willing to be part of a sollution if it ment that u would give up your believe in god?
Conservapedia, go to it, and then tell yourself how this fucking bullshit crap hate stuff is possible to exist. This should be banned, misinformation, dumbing out the people. FOX news for example, they censor stuff, are corrupt, just to get votes, they are also the same group that deny evolution. Denying facts is horrible. Denying global warming, that can only cause harm. THAT should be changed, not the way around...
@sandpaperify Every time the government wants to get away with lies out come the scientists only too helpful do get their grant money. They are using their brains for evil. Fox are misinfo. But scientists support this CO2 is bad for the planet rubbish. Therefore lets kill everyone.
No, Co2 money are mostly donated, keep that in mind, like copenhagen. CLimate scientist even get an enormous amount of hate mail, death treats (it does even get into the newpaper here) and all these things. Scientists do not get much money actually since they are in research, just a little above average. If they want money, they go into bussiness, and climate scientists aren't in bussinesses, of course...
No, you're right. Science is used for harm waaay too many. In GMO's too.
But there are many more positive thing to it. And science is never the cause of the harms. If a bological weapon is used, or a plane (science) is flewn into a building it's because of religion and not because of science. It's extremism that causes the harm. The gas used in the gassing chambers was invented by a Jew and used as insecticide first.
@sandpaperify arn't guns like applied science. Governments have it far too easy, and look at the destruction they have caused. Nobody has to work in a gun factory or design guns or come up with any way to kill for a government.
Governements that cause problems are mostly extremists. The republicans in America(still too fucking big), the communists in russia, extreme right movements, neo-nazism, fundamentalistic islam, whatever else. Also, your own hands are there to pick stuff up, but also to strangle and kill people with. They allways been there, just like science. Use them wisely, same with science...
@sandpaperify I agree again what's going on. Nuclear weapons are only the tip of the iceberg and we need to be much more careful whose hands we put them in. Don't open Pandora box and give the key to the extremists of every nation. You have personal responsibility what you do with your time.
Yes and that is a reason why holding elections like in america where it has become more like a popularity contest could end up being a problem in the future (and it has been in the past, the best example was bush who was bought by the oil companys)
But true democracy and transparancy of all information is still the best way to live.
It's not the science that kills, it's the people. Guns don't kill people, people kill people, with guns. Guns were created (like bows) to hunt, not to kill other people.
Everything is used for doing harm to each other. Don't blame the object, blame the people that use it.
@sandpaperify You say people kill people and how many people under the floorboards in you house. I don't feel this urge and I'm sure you aren't holding back everytime somebody annoys you. Evil governments and mentally unstable people. (amounts to the same thing), Kill. we already knew how to hunt why did we need guns it might of been greed. you can kill more with a gun. Think of one thing that your country has done that made you proud.
No, instant kill, faster reloading, more ammo to carry. Same reason why they use guns on battlefield instead of arrows. "Think of one thing that my country has done that made me proud": I live in Belgium, we were allways a part of some other empire, like austria, spain, england, the netherlands. So nothing there to be proud or mad about. We did invent many beers, french fries, our people aren't fat, we have equal rights, pro-abortion, only country where euthanasia is legal
Euthanasia is not misused, Yet. For the rest, dunno, not many things else, except that human rights are pretty centralised here. And like you probably think: humanity is still the cancer on the planet. We gotta try to turn this around. Start with America, let them get some respect for nature. Copenhagen failed because of them (even though the democrats are the good party there, republicans want moar oil, moar money, more corruption). Begin with creationism and what it causes...
@sandpaperify Equal rights between men and women or rich and poor. How much of your land is owned by the poor, none. like everywhere else. I cant talk about the other items in your last writings because I don't fancy living in this thread forever.lol. I'm from that beautiful country England, Rule Britannia what a lovely country i come from I wouldn't have time in my whole life to discuss all the technology and achievements of this small isle. But all of it was evil ask the world.
Lol? We have social security. If yo don't work, you get (pretty much) money. We even pay too much (since there went too much money to a part of our land). If your parents are poor here, and you want to go to university, the state finances it. Our land is much more owned by the poor then america (or britain maybe). We also were the center of the creation of the European union and unlike britain, we adapt to the rest...
CO2 is indeed not harfull at all (for the planet) but the effect of a higher level in the atmosphere will result in a rather extreme change in weather patrons wich are able to wipe out whole nations....
@Geertpieter This sounds like you fell for the climate science Co2 is bad scenario. Dont plants like co2 maybe they might grow more. Doesn't CO2 dissolve in water and we live on a water planet.
What i know is: if temp. on the planet will rise by 0,5 degrees the weather intensity will almost double!
We can buil structures to couter that and we have already begon doing just that but most of the wold is not so fortunate, and big parts of the world will be hit (just like New Orleans)
We already had our lessons 50 years back, but most people are forgetting how it was to see people floating in the streats....
Een nieuw eco-systeem heeft geen vervelende gevolgen voor ons de verdubbeling van de kracht van een storm wel, daarom gebruik ik liever een andere manier om hetzelfde te zeggen
@Geertpieter How much good and how much evil. Think of the genius Tesla his experiments could have destroyed the world and he did them anyway I'm sure he was a brilliant minded gentleman but was he thinking morally. where is the 'the choice is ours' here. You can't uninvent things.
If we would all chose to folow these very simel rules we (all people) would be able to use the kwnoledge for good.
U would not need anny knowledge to do evil and knowledge is not good nor evil.
Yes smart people are capable of dumb actions and power corrupts and i do not believe democracy to be the ultimate form of goverment but it's the best we have at the moment...
@Geertpieter Yes you seem quite open minded but democracy is not the best model its the worst model that humans have ever lived under, Corruption like the world has never been seen before to a level that threatens our very existence. I think a change in consciousness is coming about that would achieve just what you state. I wonder if you will submit to having microchips placed in your body. How could that ever be good to give that power away to leaders with the morals of sewer rats. Sorry rats
@Geertpieter Please don't discuss what you want to upgrade!. sorry couldn't resist. Do you not scare yourself with your own complicity. what do you put microchips in washing machines for mmmm to control it.
How about giving up just a little bit of personal wealth and freedom for the well being of your friends and family.
And yes I know I'm a bit socialist here so don't bother telling me. But I find the thought of cooperation appealing. You know a lot of people standing together keeping each other healthy and safe. Instead of one individual trying desperately to survive.
Yes i also believe that by cooperation we are able to accomlish greatness and i would agre to give up some of my wealth but none of my freedom!
If it is needed to give up freedom for something or someone only bad can come from it (nazisme, comunism, religion etc.)
But ofcourse i share about half of my wealth with the rest of my nation wich is being redistributed by the goverment and about 1,5% with the rest of the eropean nations.
Well the freedom bit was just another way of saying "giving up some time to go to work".
And the socialist bit was just an act of caution. Some yanks don't like the word social. I personally don't understand it. The human species is a social species so cooperating is basically within our genes.
I don't want to be a mindless drone either. And if you ask me on my political views I'd say I am a liberalist. A moderate conservative who still thinks it's a good idea having universal healthcare.
Tesla experiments where childrens toys compared with modern experiments!
Tesla couldnt destroy anything with those big electric towers he wanted to build, that was just pure and innofensive electricity, any natural storm lighting has very much power than teslas coils, and dont destroy the world.
Search google for tesla coils if dont believe me...nowadays those coils are used in schools for students to play with.
Time is an invention by man and does not realy exist, the only thing that does always exist is the present. (nothing more and nothing les)
The past has been and will never be again and the future will always cume but never be. (cous when the future is, it is no longer the future but the present)
"Understanding the existence of God is Science"
Science is based on actual proof and rusults from experiments so something undetectable can only be theoretical at best
science people seem very closed to new ideas the process of science actually cuts the connection to consciousness as science for many people is about never coming up with an idea of their own. But following years of dogma. Their logic must win out. The same type of logic has helped scientists to produce horrible diseases, all in the name of progress. Don't blame me they shout i only pressed the button that lit the ovens. Nazi scientists ended up in the USA, you can always use a good scientist.
You stupid cunt, science is the only tool we have to find out true things about the universe, if you have another method, please, feel free to present it here or get the fuck out, you ignorant, incredulous, piece of crap.
@nakedapedude its easy to swear on you tube isn't it but you would do it to my face. had a look at your diatribe on your profile, just to point out that time is created within this system just in case you fancy learning something.
some really good stuff here
samjenkinssam 1 month ago
brilliant video
staranjela 1 month ago
some sweet info here
distractionxx 1 month ago
thanks for the video..
TheSanovita 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm glad I found your video
TheSanovita 2 months ago
Very Cool !
andreeaweed 2 months ago
Good Video, Thanks for shared Very Infomative
Spasatcom 2 months ago
Cool Video, Thanks for the video.
directorygod 2 months ago
Very Good Video!!..
ngeliatduit 2 months ago
Great video
MyDavidsun 2 months ago
What if all of them were Forever Alone? D:
1055boy 2 months ago
I was hoping to see the DarBabies evolve into two separate species A and B, with A getting intelligent and B not so intelligent. A starts hunting B for food and wearing their skin.. B eventually grow extinct and stuff. of course in between A would branch out to different species as would B.
Totally useless point is, people who eat or kill primates are cannibals and murderers. I dislike primates.
notfree25 2 months ago
mating isnt completely random... unfortunately
Well maybe the dar-babies didnt care much for looks or money
notfree25 2 months ago
why does the blackest ones get unlucky ?
IvanderHaisley 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
why the dark one get 6 girls ? is that have to do with his big penis ? lol
msms47 5 months ago in playlist More videos from Best0fScience
Comment removed
msms47 5 months ago in playlist More videos from Best0fScience
god ftw
msms47 5 months ago in playlist More videos from Best0fScience
Does the demonstration comes from a specific book ? Because it's exactly the same, word for word, as the one cdk007 released in 2007: How Evolution REALLY Works Part I & II
leumaserdneg 7 months ago
darbabies are really ugly
agsiar 9 months ago
I think I'm gonna call myself a CassioPeian from now on!
CorruptDeviant 1 year ago
Good video...one thing i would've but in though is that predators evolve along with prey in a evolutionary arms race.....the cheetah gradually gets as fast as it physically can....but its prey also gradually become more agile........the arms race keeps nature balanced.....but once again good video....sort of a natural selection for dummies...lol:)
23Tev 1 year ago
Does anybody know who does the music for these videos? I would like to know that relaxing song that starts at about 1 minute.
Thanks
DJJEFFM 1 year ago
See, now you said quantum and made me think of another hypothesis: Do you think an organism's desires/needs, however undeveloped, have an effect on the evolutionary changes via quantum processes?
k7leetha 1 year ago
Great video but the predator eyes scare me!!
bagospannerz 1 year ago
Mating is not a random variable, know the currency you are dealing in.
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@Kinkspace The Gaia Theory - Daisyworld
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@Kinkspace So all animals can expect to mate in a predictable pattern? No, they cannot. That's why it's a random variable.
k7leetha 1 year ago
@k7leetha All animals will seek to mate with the most "efficient" according to their value system.
Nature is about efficiency. Hence we do not do too well in comparison to the majority of species. For example Sharks 400M yrs homosapiens 160 yrs, and facing possible extinction as the narrow bandwidth of Eco system necessary to sustain us is under threat from ourselves.
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@Kinkspace ...okay? Still a random variable, bruth lol. It can be expected that an animal will try, but that doesn't mean it will succeed, due to the environmental hazards, including predators. Additionally, mating does not guarantee a successful reproduction, which I think was the point of showing constants and variables, so in the end, while it is expected, and of course required for the continued existence, it still must be calculated as a random variable.
k7leetha 1 year ago
@k7leetha Constant variable by definition are not random variables. Even if we take it does to the quantum level it is not random. ie: The butterfly effect and quantum entanglement etc. Point being nature will always favor the most efficient, if one is not efficient one is not favoured, this is not random.
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@Kinkspace That I agree with.
k7leetha 1 year ago
@k7leetha I thought you might ;)
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@k7leetha I have no idea why I wrote "does" it should read "down to" ;)
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@k7leetha What I have described is natural selection, what you have described is artificial evolution, both were observed by Darwin. Where we differ is you appear to be of a mind set that artificial evolution from the human perspective which is nothing more than prejudice illusion and delusion is actually natural selection. It is not.
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@Kinkspace I'm not sure how anything I said refers to artificial evolution, on the contrary I am arguing specifically for natural, hence my disagreement about mating not being random - in a natural environment mating is a random variable because it cannot be predicted, that is directly about the system of natural selection, environment versus propagation.
k7leetha 1 year ago
@k7leetha Its not a question of v's environment it is a question of efficiency and balance as part of that environment, natural selection is not separate from the environment.
Artificial evolution challenges the environmental factors.
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@k7leetha How can you agree with my former statement then make this comment?
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@Kinkspace Perhaps I'm confused. Wasn't your original statement that mating wasn't a random variable?
k7leetha 1 year ago
@k7leetha LOL Mating is not, genetics could be is this where we have crossed wires?
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@Kinkspace Perhaps we're talking about the same thing for a different reason lol - I am of the mindset that mating, that is the act of sex for procreation, and the actual birthing of an offspring (completing the purpose of mating) are both random variables in the process of evolution happening *or not* happening. In other words, evolution happens regardless of mating, but the chance of a change *continuing* is varied by whether or not it can be passed on to an offspring, hence, random variable.
k7leetha 1 year ago
@k7leetha Interesting. OK I can see how as humans this is the case, but we are inefficient. “Artificial Evolution” is the manipulation of a species. "Artificial evolution" is adaptation through selective breeding. In the case of humans it could be said to correlate to political agenda environment. So it could be said that humans as a result of political ideology, are for all intensive purposes in a breeding program which sustains that political economic ideology.
cont...
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@k7leetha Had we not of taken this path the variants would be less, although admittedly we are dealing with large numbers in an calculation. The difference in school room maths comparatively to that of quantum mechanics.
When we observe animals or plants the variants become less, still big numbers though. The bottom line is what appears to be chaos is indeed less random than that. Google the 30 year study on Darwin's finches by Peter R. Grant and B. Rosemary Grant.
cont...
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@k7leetha Again there is the environmental factors which in the analysis are referred to as "unpredictable". But if Chaos mathematics are applied a model can be constructed to accommodate the variants. This is a clear case of of one science being of aid to another but I come across this time and time again where people expert in their field see the tree but miss the forest.
So we are agreeing I think ;) But as you say coming at it from different perspective mathematically speaking.
Kinkspace 1 year ago
@Kinkspace Aaaah k, now I see what you mean. Yes, Chaos theory, from the accumulative perspective does change how we evaluate the "rules," so to speak. I do understand now what you mean. Agreed!
k7leetha 1 year ago
@k7leetha LOL I knew we would get there in the end, we where some how quantum entangled ;)))
Kinkspace 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@k7leetha How can you agree with my former statement then make this comment?
Kinkspace 1 year ago
What evolved into the Darbaby? How can the predator be so much stronger?
Is the Darbaby a mutated predator? Is the predator a mutated Darbaby?
A giant explosion occurred > explosion evolves into elements,molecules,etc > Molecules, etc evolve into 'stuff' > Stuff evolves into life > life evolves into....
Ding bork glip wiggle tick jager sproing whir flop.
Its all rather simple; when you think about it.
For those who take themselves, very serious.
Very (-.-) <--- serious face.
It was a joke.
SunPuppet 1 year ago
@SunPuppet Its a matter of what the currency is as to the value of strength. We are territorial predators living in the 3rd dimension.
Kinkspace 1 year ago
Comment removed
SunPuppet 1 year ago
@Kinkspace O.k.
SunPuppet 1 year ago
Good demonstration. Not good enough to cure superstitious people from stupidity but good for normal people.
bary1234 1 year ago 20
@bary1234
Natural Selection will filter superstitious people. We have different predators on this day than our forefathers had.
ReneVanHeel 1 year ago
@ReneVanHeel : Actually the problem seems to be that superstitious people breed like cockroaches. Mostly because they enslave their girls and women and use them as baby-factories.
bary1234 1 year ago
@bary1234 Define normal.
SorrellsAV 7 months ago
@SorrellsAV : Non-superstitious. Atheists.
bary1234 7 months ago
@bary1234 Well, you're an idiot.
SorrellsAV 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SorrellsAV : Provide the evidence for your god or fuck off.
bary1234 7 months ago
@bary1234 Normal? lol..... ATheist only represent 2.3 percent of earths population. Out of that %, many atheist are part of the New Age movement. Wiccan's are also mostly atheist. Buddhist are atheist & many other atheist like Richard Dawkins and Michio Kaku believe in ET's, not even factoring in atheist who believe in Bigfoot and reincarnation. Many people get the false impression that many atheist are not superstitious. Atheism simply means not believing in God but everything else, well?
benthemiester 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@benthemiester : So, provide the evidence for your jebus or admit that you are superstitious.
bary1234 7 months ago
@benthemiester ... ET is not a fairy tale .its real , ET life is a very credible thought .
IvanderHaisley 4 months ago
@IvanderHaisley "ET is not a fairy tale .its real , ET life is a very credible thought"
Credible simply means, able to be believed, and the fact that you are able to believe something, does not mean that it is scientifically quantifiable. If you can prove they exist empirically then please do so.
benthemiester 4 months ago
@benthemiester this is not blasphemy or anything , but GOD , the deity your so blindingly worshiping , has no proof for his existence , so , can you even comprehend the scales at which science is presently dealing with ? NO , NO you can't .,, science has long disproved the existence of "GOD"
IvanderHaisley 4 months ago
@IvanderHaisley There's no such thing as proof in the historical sciences. Science has never disproved God nor has it ever claimed to do so. In fact in the last few decades many former atheist & Darwinist have converted & renounced atheism based on scientific evidence in the form of the Fine Tuning Problem as well as the integrated complexity, digital encoded information & nano machinery within the cell. Theres absolutely no evidence for abiogenesis through chemical evo but Im sure u believe it.
benthemiester 4 months ago
@benthemiester It should be noted that scientific research is supposed to be objective and unbiased. Things like: 'It's too complex to have evolved! There must have been a designer!' are ABSOLUTELY INCONSISTENT with scientific thinking. If we don't know something, we don't know...and we should look farther to find out, NOT make conclusions! ID proponents often argue about the complexity of cellular organelles, but they forget that Eukaryotes are the latest cellular organisms, not the first!
CreativeVisionary92 4 months ago
So over time through evolution the animals start to blend in more and more but how does evolution know I mean like how does evolution know to change the camoflauge to the enviromet when obvoiusly evolution isnt a living thing but sut a process?
SnipersScope55 1 year ago
@SnipersScope55
Evolution doesn't know, but when it the color of an organisms child randomly changes to better match the environment it has a greater chance to survive and therefore mate and spread its beneficial color to its children.
So, evolution doesn't know, but if a change of color is good. Then it will spread to the next generation (unless the individual with the color change is unlucky and dies, or is unable to find a mate)
Holgmeister 1 year ago
@SnipersScope55 It doesn't know anything, because, as you say, it's only the process being described. It simply happens because the creatures that best blend into their surroundings are able to pass on their genes (in this case their color) to offspring more often than those that are not. This happens because predators eat those who stand out most from the environment. If we imagined some sort of predator that only ate those that blended in best, we'd find high contrast descendants instead.
pacogoatboy 1 year ago
Long live the Darbaby!
mrblacksheep1o1 1 year ago
Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
InvertedHorizon 1 year ago 19
YAWNS!!
ahmology 1 year ago
where does 50% subject to random mutation come from? Saying mutations passes on is like saying I can get cancer because my mom had it when I was born. I don't understand? Any help would be welcome.
calebstone22 1 year ago
@calebstone22 Mutations to DNA reflects the not-quite-perfect way DNA replicates. If a DNA mutation doesn't kill the organism, then it remains in the DNA and is passed on to offspring, generation after generation.
Cancer in non-reproductive cells does not get passed on since only reproductive cells are involved with procreation. Cancer in reproductive cells almost certainly would leave the parent sterile (so that DNA never gets passed on.)
HarshColby 1 year ago
@calebstone22 It's somewhat arbitrarily chosen for the demonstration, but an OK estimate, and no it isn't. I'd recommend going to your local library, or check out some youtubers like AronRa, some other of Cassiopeias vids on the subject, cdk007, DonExodus2, dprjones, potholer 54, Thunderf00t and so on, 'cause it's way too big to explain in a small youtube comment!
Scurmicurv 1 year ago
I wish that CDK007 had been given credit in the video description or at the end of the video. You've plagiarized from him terribly. Very disappointing.
pacogoatboy 1 year ago
@pacogoatboy Well, this is basically what you have to say when doing an intro on evolutionary biology. CDK didn't come up with the theory and neither did he come up with this particular way of demonstrating it. It's just a standard that works, everyone use it.
Scurmicurv 1 year ago
@Scurmicurv I never implied that cdk007 had come up with the theory, or even with this means of presenting it. What I am stating is that it would appear that you've copied, almost verbatim, a fair chunk of a video that he published 3 years earlier. If this is an excerpt from a video that existed before 10/2007, my apologies, but if that is not the case, plagiarism is plagiarism. Perhaps both of you copied the work of a previous author and neither attributed anything to that person?
pacogoatboy 1 year ago
I can also say: without time nothing is possible.
When all started, also started time...thats called (some name must have) :
The big Bang.
roner61 1 year ago
If time didn't existed in this dimension the world wold never heave been changed only motion
Makaveli97961 1 year ago
@Makaveli97961 Without time, motion is impossible also.
HarshColby 1 year ago
then how come some idiots evolved to be such religious assholes? what benifit does being religious have? i know evolution is real. gotta wonder how thinking patterns fit into it though.
xerophiLIEs 1 year ago
I find it difficult to understand how random events could give rise to the eye or the brain or even muscles. How long would it take for 20 monkeys on type writers to write War And Peace just by typing random letters. I think that they would not get there for quadrillions of years if at all. For something to get somewhere it needs a goal. The goal for life is Survival and it seems like it is more than random events getting it there.
cdmackay 1 year ago
@cdmackay ... that is another great mystery, actual time involved.. would it even be enough time for such evolution as we now observe to occur 4.7billion years ago.
09205479428 1 year ago
@09205479428
Of course it is enough time, it has happened in the time so it is enough time, seems pretty obvious.
nakedapedude 1 year ago
@cdmackay
"How long would it take for 20 monkeys on type writers to write War And Peace just by typing random letters"
It would only take a long time if you would want it all in one time, if you would however only keep the good letters and discard the bad (like in evolution) it would happen a lot faster
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@cdmackay
Evolution ISN'T random.
nakedapedude 1 year ago
@nakedapedude Thanks for your response. I was really referring to the changes to an organism over generations. With natural selection and random mutations being the main reason for a species developing variation or picking up a new traits (like the eye or hearing), it seems that these "changes" are attributed to random occurrence according to the theory of evolution - If these changes help survival then they stay. Are these changes not random?
cdmackay 1 year ago
@cdmackay
Yes, the DNA molecule is subject to random mutation during replication but evolution isn't a random process.
The fact that you can't uderstand or are incredulous isn't a good argument, what that means is that you need to do more research, for example, there is a wealth of information out there about the origins of the human eye and the evolutionary process which formed it.
nakedapedude 1 year ago
@nakedapedude - You are right. I should do more research. I am interested in Evolution but I have only read Darwins work. There are probably more advanced studies I haven't seen.
Thanks
cdmackay 1 year ago
@cdmackay
There are many good books and I certainly wouldn't be starting with reading anything darwin wrote, "why evolution is true" by jerry coyne would be a good start if you are interested.
nakedapedude 1 year ago
I have some questions :
1. Random variables and concepts for evolution has been clearly shown in this simulation, however what was not clear to me is this : @ initial condition ( 2:13 ), every sample started with 10000000 then came the 1st generation ( 2:48 ) a mutation has occurred ( 3:48 ). How was this mutation ( i.e 1000000 to 10010000 ) considered in the program, what parameters were included so that a green bit of "1" would occur to the next generation of the sample genome ?
09205479428 1 year ago
2. Evolution does happen, but can this model even take us even further when only the microbes were evolving to complex species such as those in the pre cambriam period ? The model thus prove evolution but it had not yet addressed actual evolution of a species ( i.e ape to human ). Its hard and tough job but that would be the ultimate test for the development of the program you have made. I can see in that if this program will be perfected it should smoothly link to the bigbang program ...
09205479428 1 year ago
...simulation made by ( MIT? -need to verify this ) as shown in " The Universe ", a History Channel documentary.
09205479428 1 year ago
@vegasdry
For example , if your brother went to another country then he stayed there for good and had siblings. If his siblings would go back to their homeland, their features will be very different. Major parameters are culture ( affects perception thus lifestyle ), kind of food eaten everyday, local climate. Evidence to this are countrymen who went abroad and had their families there. Their siblings are very peculiar to ours specially height, skin color, voice and weight.
09205479428 1 year ago
Why do you assume the world needs ruling. Is that what you feel always need someone to tell you what to do
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
No we do not need to be ruled, but it would be a little impracticle to argue with 6 billion poeple ;P
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter Why do they do it then do you want war
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
The main reasom both our countrys went to war was becouse of George Walker Bush junior, your prime minister wanted to be his best friend and followed him blind (and so did mine)
Bush probably did what he did becouse he was funded by the oil companies but that is impossible to prove...
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@ste6666666
That's why we have to elect leaders to do that for us, in the best way they can, and if they do not come to good results we have the media and free speach to direct them.
Or would u like anarchy?
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter couldn't be any worse we probably wouldn't be able to kill all those Iraqis then. make nuclear weapons that threaten my child in her bed whilst she sleeps.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Yes it would be a problem if we were attacked by Iran with nukes...
But do you not think the awser lies in defence and in a fair world trade policy rather than using deadly force.
I do think we should stay in Afghanistan to complete the job but i think waging war is always a bad choice for all mankind...
But then sometimes it is nessecary, couse if nobody had stopped hitler.....
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter fair trade billions for oil, pennies for coffee who gets to set the rules. The Americans have been in charge of the opium fields in Afghanistan for years now and of course they got rid of all of it. No they planted more. Nice American drugs running about your country at the moment enjoy. Why do we need fair trade we don't seem to have to have these guidelines for trading fairly with other Western nations
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
What evidence do you have that the US government is involved in the manufacture and distribution of illegal narcotics?
nakedapedude 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Becouse if we traded fair it would spread the wealth over all the countrys in the world ;)
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@ste6666666
"Why do we need fair trade we don't seem to have to have these guidelines for trading fairly with other Western nations"
We do have fair trading inside the EU the problem is that if some african person would sell his prodict at the european market he will have to pay a very high tax
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@ste6666666
wow climate change denial? evolution denial? conspiracy theories? evil world governments? could you be any more of a cliche? what's it like living your entire life in paranoid, ignorant fear? you're like child
nakedapedude 1 year ago
@nakedapedude Cliche would be believing the massed produced rubbish that you digest so readily. I'm afraid of nobody I used to be but not any more. I'm not afraid of death And if i thought it would do any good would readily lay down my life. Yes thats right like a child that accepts every piece of garbage their loving governments do for them. Like a child that blindly carries on eating their mountain of french fries whilst people are starving. That luxuriate in hot water whilst people thirst.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
You're claiming that anthropogenic climate change and evolutionary theory are some sort of conspiracy that the general population is being fed and that they aren't really true?
Where is your evidence for this fantastic and absurd claim?
Of course there are people better off than me and worse off than me, do you have a point?
nakedapedude 1 year ago
Ok now your speaking sense but what do we do about it. The scientists natural need to know, is being used against the world. I originally came on this thread feels like a month ago now to try and reduce the amount of people knocking theist views and to get the theists to my camp, and to point out that views in science can be similarly challenged. I just don't see the benefits, this world is simply disgusting. I agree with your knowledge relating to Zionist Jews helping Hitler liquidate Jews
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Difference between science and religion, try to get that one first. Why are atheist like me battling against creationism, fundamentalism? We do this to show how fucking bad religion is. All the wars (except vietnam) have a religious background, all of them. We try to combat extremism. Creationists are mostly also pro-life, anti-gay rights, anti-feministic, anti- equal rights, anti-science. We try to fuckign do something about that. Do something about that instead
sandpaperify 1 year ago
@sandpaperify religion is dogma. bud sadly look at the people whom religions have been based around and they make a lot of sense. Nobody listens because blood curdling leaders don't want us too be free.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Countys do not do annything so how could i be proud on it? But i am proud of very manny people who did great things for the whole of humanity!
Antonius van Leeuwenhoek invented the microscope and was one of my homies (if we would have lived in the same time)
But people i can be proud of not a portion of land!
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter Exactly so why did they give their work to blood thirsty scoundrels that are in power. The EU is a scary future federal state don't worry The uk will join fully as soon as the Euro is stable (might be a long time). Research the power of the Bank of England and realise that when UK joins in its over for Europe they are all in cahoots. Countries could do things that make you proud though, they dont because they are run by evil tyrants that want the peoples natural power.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Don't u think it is realy stupid to think all people in charge are bad?
Most people in politics are doing it becouse they think that what they do is the best for the country, we should go even further and do not what is best for the individual or country but what is best for the whole world.
BTW: I'm from Holland and believe me if i say that things in Britain are not better than over here (only some scandinavian countrys could make thet claim)
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter if they work for an evil regime all their actions no matter how good the intent will always produce evil. I'm saying that the Uk is a lot worse than most countries as you will find out when the UK joins EU properly.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
I know how it is in the UK (been there a few times)
The sister of my best friend was au-pair in Aylesbury (near London)
And i went to Lonon a few times, i know it has old houses and lots of poverty, how do u think most people think about Poland or Greece?
Yes most people are not willing to share a little of theire wealth...
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter This country is awash with money. The people don't have any though. How would you like to find out that the bank of your country at a time that it owned the biggest empire the world has ever seen bankrolled the enemy of your people. Well research Bank of England funding Hitler through the Rothschild blood money empire.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Think about what would happen to u if u would suddenly be the ruler of the whole word, all people would like to talk to u and want you to do what they would want and what would be best for them.
The biggest treat in our civilization at this moment could be individualism...
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter I would ban rulers of the world.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Yeah, like anarchy solves anything o.O
sandpaperify 1 year ago
@ste6666666
If you would have no rulers we would have to continue like it is at this very moment or descent towards anarchy becouse there would not be annyone to change the rules, or we would all change the rules just for our own bennefit.
Why would u be chocked to hear that the Bank of England went for the gig money in the world (i do not know if it's true) but there are many accamples of diferent compannys who made some good money from both sides.
Maybe your problem is kapitalism?
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter No my problem is not just capitalism, i have problems with every type of power structure this crazy world has ever produced. They have all been created to control you, read some literature read Karl Marx or just read a bill gates lecture. National socialism fascism, they are all the heads on the same animal.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Sorry to have to burst your bubble but i have read abou all forms of goverment and i know that if there was no form of control we would end up in chaos and annarchy.
But again i do not believe democracy to be the best we will ever come up with, but would u be willing to be part of a sollution if it ment that u would give up your believe in god?
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Conservapedia, go to it, and then tell yourself how this fucking bullshit crap hate stuff is possible to exist. This should be banned, misinformation, dumbing out the people. FOX news for example, they censor stuff, are corrupt, just to get votes, they are also the same group that deny evolution. Denying facts is horrible. Denying global warming, that can only cause harm. THAT should be changed, not the way around...
sandpaperify 1 year ago
@sandpaperify Every time the government wants to get away with lies out come the scientists only too helpful do get their grant money. They are using their brains for evil. Fox are misinfo. But scientists support this CO2 is bad for the planet rubbish. Therefore lets kill everyone.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
No, Co2 money are mostly donated, keep that in mind, like copenhagen. CLimate scientist even get an enormous amount of hate mail, death treats (it does even get into the newpaper here) and all these things. Scientists do not get much money actually since they are in research, just a little above average. If they want money, they go into bussiness, and climate scientists aren't in bussinesses, of course...
sandpaperify 1 year ago
science being used for harm is always off topic for science believers
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
No, you're right. Science is used for harm waaay too many. In GMO's too.
But there are many more positive thing to it. And science is never the cause of the harms. If a bological weapon is used, or a plane (science) is flewn into a building it's because of religion and not because of science. It's extremism that causes the harm. The gas used in the gassing chambers was invented by a Jew and used as insecticide first.
sandpaperify 1 year ago
@sandpaperify arn't guns like applied science. Governments have it far too easy, and look at the destruction they have caused. Nobody has to work in a gun factory or design guns or come up with any way to kill for a government.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Governements that cause problems are mostly extremists. The republicans in America(still too fucking big), the communists in russia, extreme right movements, neo-nazism, fundamentalistic islam, whatever else. Also, your own hands are there to pick stuff up, but also to strangle and kill people with. They allways been there, just like science. Use them wisely, same with science...
sandpaperify 1 year ago
@sandpaperify I agree again what's going on. Nuclear weapons are only the tip of the iceberg and we need to be much more careful whose hands we put them in. Don't open Pandora box and give the key to the extremists of every nation. You have personal responsibility what you do with your time.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Yes and that is a reason why holding elections like in america where it has become more like a popularity contest could end up being a problem in the future (and it has been in the past, the best example was bush who was bought by the oil companys)
But true democracy and transparancy of all information is still the best way to live.
Whould u rather live in a theocracy?
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@ste6666666
It's not the science that kills, it's the people. Guns don't kill people, people kill people, with guns. Guns were created (like bows) to hunt, not to kill other people.
Everything is used for doing harm to each other. Don't blame the object, blame the people that use it.
sandpaperify 1 year ago
@sandpaperify You say people kill people and how many people under the floorboards in you house. I don't feel this urge and I'm sure you aren't holding back everytime somebody annoys you. Evil governments and mentally unstable people. (amounts to the same thing), Kill. we already knew how to hunt why did we need guns it might of been greed. you can kill more with a gun. Think of one thing that your country has done that made you proud.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
No, instant kill, faster reloading, more ammo to carry. Same reason why they use guns on battlefield instead of arrows. "Think of one thing that my country has done that made me proud": I live in Belgium, we were allways a part of some other empire, like austria, spain, england, the netherlands. So nothing there to be proud or mad about. We did invent many beers, french fries, our people aren't fat, we have equal rights, pro-abortion, only country where euthanasia is legal
sandpaperify 1 year ago
@sandpaperify
Euthanasia is not misused, Yet. For the rest, dunno, not many things else, except that human rights are pretty centralised here. And like you probably think: humanity is still the cancer on the planet. We gotta try to turn this around. Start with America, let them get some respect for nature. Copenhagen failed because of them (even though the democrats are the good party there, republicans want moar oil, moar money, more corruption). Begin with creationism and what it causes...
sandpaperify 1 year ago
@sandpaperify Equal rights between men and women or rich and poor. How much of your land is owned by the poor, none. like everywhere else. I cant talk about the other items in your last writings because I don't fancy living in this thread forever.lol. I'm from that beautiful country England, Rule Britannia what a lovely country i come from I wouldn't have time in my whole life to discuss all the technology and achievements of this small isle. But all of it was evil ask the world.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Lol? We have social security. If yo don't work, you get (pretty much) money. We even pay too much (since there went too much money to a part of our land). If your parents are poor here, and you want to go to university, the state finances it. Our land is much more owned by the poor then america (or britain maybe). We also were the center of the creation of the European union and unlike britain, we adapt to the rest...
sandpaperify 1 year ago
@sandpaperify adapting to the rest and complicity has this been a great friend of your country in the past.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Like I said, we started the benelux, it's the other way around. The best thing you can do is look to what the rest does and do the good stuff.
sandpaperify 1 year ago
@ste6666666
CO2 is indeed not harfull at all (for the planet) but the effect of a higher level in the atmosphere will result in a rather extreme change in weather patrons wich are able to wipe out whole nations....
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter This sounds like you fell for the climate science Co2 is bad scenario. Dont plants like co2 maybe they might grow more. Doesn't CO2 dissolve in water and we live on a water planet.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
I'm not affraid of the plants to die ;)
What i know is: if temp. on the planet will rise by 0,5 degrees the weather intensity will almost double!
We can buil structures to couter that and we have already begon doing just that but most of the wold is not so fortunate, and big parts of the world will be hit (just like New Orleans)
We already had our lessons 50 years back, but most people are forgetting how it was to see people floating in the streats....
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter
0,5 graden: heel nieuw ecosysteem, nog erger dus ;)
sandpaperify 1 year ago
@sandpaperify
Een nieuw eco-systeem heeft geen vervelende gevolgen voor ons de verdubbeling van de kracht van een storm wel, daarom gebruik ik liever een andere manier om hetzelfde te zeggen
Geertpieter 1 year ago
A video which explains evolution in a simple and understandable way will always bring out the science deniers. -- Colby's Law
HarshColby 1 year ago
@HarshColby
Maybe u should write a paper on that one! ;)
Geertpieter 1 year ago
I see the beauty in science also i also see the danger for the world as the scientists thirst for knowledge is used against the people of the world
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Yes knowledge is power.
And with great power comes great resposibility.
All knowledge can be used for good and evil.
The power of the atom can be used to make a H-bom or to cure cancer, the choice is ours...
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter How much good and how much evil. Think of the genius Tesla his experiments could have destroyed the world and he did them anyway I'm sure he was a brilliant minded gentleman but was he thinking morally. where is the 'the choice is ours' here. You can't uninvent things.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
Have u ever heard of "the filosofy of freedome"?
If we would all chose to folow these very simel rules we (all people) would be able to use the kwnoledge for good.
U would not need anny knowledge to do evil and knowledge is not good nor evil.
Yes smart people are capable of dumb actions and power corrupts and i do not believe democracy to be the ultimate form of goverment but it's the best we have at the moment...
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter Yes you seem quite open minded but democracy is not the best model its the worst model that humans have ever lived under, Corruption like the world has never been seen before to a level that threatens our very existence. I think a change in consciousness is coming about that would achieve just what you state. I wonder if you will submit to having microchips placed in your body. How could that ever be good to give that power away to leaders with the morals of sewer rats. Sorry rats
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
I believe that if we would be willing to give up some of our freedome for a little security we will gain neither and lose both!
But i would want to have the option to upgrade my body if the technology would ever be invented ;)
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter Please don't discuss what you want to upgrade!. sorry couldn't resist. Do you not scare yourself with your own complicity. what do you put microchips in washing machines for mmmm to control it.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@Geertpieter
How about giving up just a little bit of personal wealth and freedom for the well being of your friends and family.
And yes I know I'm a bit socialist here so don't bother telling me. But I find the thought of cooperation appealing. You know a lot of people standing together keeping each other healthy and safe. Instead of one individual trying desperately to survive.
jxvwp 1 year ago
@jxvwp
Yes i also believe that by cooperation we are able to accomlish greatness and i would agre to give up some of my wealth but none of my freedom!
If it is needed to give up freedom for something or someone only bad can come from it (nazisme, comunism, religion etc.)
But ofcourse i share about half of my wealth with the rest of my nation wich is being redistributed by the goverment and about 1,5% with the rest of the eropean nations.
What is wrong with being social/socialist?
Geertpieter 1 year ago
@Geertpieter
Well the freedom bit was just another way of saying "giving up some time to go to work".
And the socialist bit was just an act of caution. Some yanks don't like the word social. I personally don't understand it. The human species is a social species so cooperating is basically within our genes.
jxvwp 1 year ago
@jxvwp I dont like socialism other form of mass control of people. I don't need to be controlled.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
No you misunderstood me.
I don't want to be a mindless drone either. And if you ask me on my political views I'd say I am a liberalist. A moderate conservative who still thinks it's a good idea having universal healthcare.
jxvwp 1 year ago
@ste6666666 im sorry but..:LOL!
Tesla experiments where childrens toys compared with modern experiments!
Tesla couldnt destroy anything with those big electric towers he wanted to build, that was just pure and innofensive electricity, any natural storm lighting has very much power than teslas coils, and dont destroy the world.
Search google for tesla coils if dont believe me...nowadays those coils are used in schools for students to play with.
roner61 1 year ago
Understanding the existence of God is Science
God is not visible like Radio waves are not visible with naked eye or like Time it self is not visible but we can see the results of Time.
Makaveli97961 1 year ago
@Makaveli97961
Time is an invention by man and does not realy exist, the only thing that does always exist is the present. (nothing more and nothing les)
The past has been and will never be again and the future will always cume but never be. (cous when the future is, it is no longer the future but the present)
"Understanding the existence of God is Science"
Science is based on actual proof and rusults from experiments so something undetectable can only be theoretical at best
Geertpieter 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Makaveli97961
Wrong, we cannot see the results of time, if you don't believe me go ahead and give me an example.
nakedapedude 1 year ago
science people seem very closed to new ideas the process of science actually cuts the connection to consciousness as science for many people is about never coming up with an idea of their own. But following years of dogma. Their logic must win out. The same type of logic has helped scientists to produce horrible diseases, all in the name of progress. Don't blame me they shout i only pressed the button that lit the ovens. Nazi scientists ended up in the USA, you can always use a good scientist.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666
You stupid cunt, science is the only tool we have to find out true things about the universe, if you have another method, please, feel free to present it here or get the fuck out, you ignorant, incredulous, piece of crap.
nakedapedude 1 year ago
@nakedapedude its easy to swear on you tube isn't it but you would do it to my face. had a look at your diatribe on your profile, just to point out that time is created within this system just in case you fancy learning something.
ste6666666