You get that TheoreticalBullshit is more philosopher than scientist, thought right? Both are perfectly acceptable pathways to understand the universe, and they often go hand in hand, but it is like you are claiming to outsmart a rocket scientist by asking him about ancient Chinese history. He might be able to give you a good answer, but it is not his field.
You get that TheoreticalBullshit is more philosopher than scientist, thought right? Both are perfectly acceptable pathways to understand the universe, and they often go hand in hand, but it is like you are claiming to outsmart a rocket scientist by asking him about marine biology. He might be able to give you a good answer, but it is not his field.
You are offering your incredulity as a reason not to accept evolution, but have somehow disguised this to yourself. It's an argument from ignorance. You have little understanding of vast amount of time it takes for an evolution like this to occur. You will never be able to see it happen in your mind in real time or visual fast forward.
The species DOESN'T need change at all! Forget about the need!The species change because the replication process is NOT perfect! There is always change. Most of the time this accidental mutation kills the organism!If it is a big change it is more likely to kill it! If it is small change the creature is more likely to survive though even small mutation would more likely kill the organism.But eventually sooner or later it is inevitable that some mutation will occur that will preserve the organism
Why even debate "land animals evolving to whales"?
Face it. Facts are facts. And just the fact that whales have vestigal pelvic and leg parts and the DNA shared with some land animals is more than enough. It's case close, and there is absolutely no need for debate. It's not debatable.
If you think about it even porpoises are a step between land mammals and true whales. I wouldn't even expect many semi-whales shallow dwellers would survive in many places with crocodilians living worldwide.
You say you are a rational person but you choose not to read up on the subject. You demand that someone tell you how exactly a LBM changed into a whale. You want the the direct observation of it happening. It isn't a simple question and from watching your video you will accept no evidence. I watched TheoreticalBullshit and he gave good answers to your question. I never heard "it just is" from him.
I don´t see how putting parrots in a line one by one can create a 42 miles parrots line. I don´t see why it would happen. After all, you are just assuming that adding successively more parrots in a line in a given direction will eventually increase the size of the line until the 42 miles goal is reached. We never saw a parrot´s line of this size, so we can safely conclude that such line can´t exist. And because no such line can be created, this proves that God is the creator of the Universe.
It takes study (at least a text book) to answer that question.
They didn't come up with this shit out of the blue, they tested every theory we've heard of and opted for the one that was the most consistent with the evidence.The falsifiable theory has never been falsified & thus is regarded as fact. If your not prepared to read the evidence, how do expect to gain an answer?Do you really want one?
Evolution is a popularity contest. Survivability is secondary to popularity. This is why many species go extinct - because the most sexually popular members of the species were not capable of adapting to climate and other environmental changes. Evolutionary success is a lucky combination of sexually impressive traits mixed with survivability. In a world where catching fish is the ultimate sex symbol the mammal with the biggest webbed feet gets to have sex with all the females.
@npage85 Over and over you say, "I don't see how..." or "I don't see why..."
Well, I don't see how or why your lack of education and understanding of evolution adds anything of value to the conversation.
Your incredulity is not evidence against the science.
RE: the specific inference that land mammals evolved into whales, nothing needs to be taken on faith. The fossil and anatomical evidence perfectly fits the theory, so it is accepted.
Ok, you're trying to claim you need an explanation for how whales came from land-based mammals. Why? What part of the change from the LBM to the whale is not possible through incremental change that we know mutation can provide and natural selection select for? Name a feature that whales have that LBM don't that couldn't arise from mutation and selective pressure on the LBM and it's descendants.
Read the Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins. It is an excellent book and will answer your questions. You have to read to understand evolutionary biology. It is quite elegant.
One mistake I think you've made is anthropic. It's easy to take the whale as the conclusion and marvel at how evolution could reach that, just as you can take the results of any given lottery result and marvel at the incredible odds that those exact numbers came up. Truth be told, there could be any one of a near infinite number of possible evolutionary paths for a mammal to take to evovle to survive in the ocean.
it's true because we make it so! an animal without teaching or laerning already knows to escape from danger! that is the reason why this can happen. because animals already have the instincts to get away from danger then they escape from danger with the small advantage they have. if there happens to be an adaptation to improve that advantage then it will usually stick around unless certain circumstances stand in it's way. it is this way because animals make it so! animals make evolution happen.
you're being so intellectually dishonest..sure, vestigial organs can adopt secondary functions, but, c'mon man, use your head..the pelvic bone on whales obviously had a primary function. and that was to act as the socket for the top ball of a femur bone, like all pelvic bones are primarily known to be for..some whales have even been found with this femur bone, and some even with full feet digits.
but, that's not the best example..eyes on moles are blatant vestiges. there's a species of golden moles in africa that are completely blind..they even have a thick layer of skin covering their fully formed EYES underneath..how on earth can u explain this?..sure, u can concoct some irrational route around this, but, the theory of evolution actually PREDICTS this..and whaddatya know.
does intelligent design explain eyes on an animal that is completely blind?..if so, i'd sure like to hear it..
I made it to 3:23 but then got so frustrated I had to turn it off. Please try to have a litlle understanding about evolution before you try and refute it.
... because related mammals which do not develop these advantageous water-hunting strategies will be less nourished and less likely to survive and to breed (and transmit their genetic code). Hence, the random mutation becomes more common to the point where essentially *all* members of a species have it. (Species, by the way, is an extremely fuzzy, dubious term)
Dude. You need to go to a university, and attempt to obtain a degree in biology. Your question is pretty (arrogantly) ignorant.
If you stay alive - you can breed. This is middle school stuff. Breeding and transmitting your genes requires you to be alive long enough to do so. Animals tend to fall into environmental niches in which their needs are most met. A mammal on the land that finds aquatic hunting an advantageous strategy will tend to develop mutations to assist in that.
I suppose the simplest answer to your questions here has to be: there are reasons that we to conclusions in science as "evident[ly]" the case. They're driven by evidence. and not someone's inability to postulate an informal logical argument from first principles. Alas, there are explicit reasons why in science we do not consult philosophers for answers: they have none. To the extent that one might get it right, it's entirely by accident.
You said that you don't need to a read a big book to get a simple answer. Your question is not a simple question. It is a loaded question which necessitates a wealth of education to understand its answer. For example, how can you understand how one gene can make a difference between a large human and a small human? Consider that "simple" question. Would anyone be able to explain the answer to you without your prior knowledge in the basics of biology? You get the point.
who cares if a land based mammal can change into a whale. all religion is more difficult to believe. you don't need to read a big thick book to get an answer? man, it is so very obvious that theolocgicalbullshit is so much more intelligent than you. at any rate, the absolute most important thing for any thinking individual is the following: what are you doing right now, to make the world in which you live better?
Rationaly, when you look at a car (for instance), what is the striking feature that lets you know it was designed by a human or evolved by nature? - when comparing say two different types of car (say BMW and FIAT) what tells you both were designed by the same 'creator' (humans)? - both will share many features, and the FIAT may have four gears and the BMW 5, both have the same rubber composition tyres etc. - similar parts, similar styling, similar arrangement - designed, not evolved from nothing
I want to know all about the rise and fall of Rome, but I shouldn't have to read a history book. So why can't someone explain the whole thing to me? It is easier to not understand and blame someone else for my ignorance.
you don't believe it because you refused to get a decent education and you refuse to get a decent education because your ignorance is somehow appealing to yourself.
Your attempted impeachment of the fossil record is ludicrous. Explain, if evolution is not possible, why whales are not seen before the era in which they appear and why the species from which they allegedly evolved are not seen afterwards.
Such changes don't need to be progressive, merely random to avoid a fallacy of composition. The rest of your video shows that you know fuck all about what evolution actually claims. What you're asking is about as simple as asking why people on the bottom of the earth don't fall off. Where would you start with that one?
I'm to lazy to make a YouTube video but evolution can be demonstrated by your feet. Yep, feet. You walk on them all day, you get thicker skin on your feet. You don't walk on them all day the skin isn't thick and can be pricked through easily. Its not really for survival its more to prevent damage to the body. Tada
With you reasoning about fossils I would say : Your brain is just a bunch of atoms, it does not mean you are capable of thinking at all, it is just a big pile of atoms standing there..
Plz explain that whole e =mc^2 to me I don't real get it. "Read this book I will expain it". What just expain that little thing why would I read about dosn't seem to be so complicatet its only like three variables.
You don't think you have to read a book to understand something? Understanding a subject like math, physik or biology is not easy that why people studie it for years.
You are an arrogant brick to just demand that somebody explains to you how evolution works in a youtube video.
You have a serious problem with your reasoning and lack understanding of evolutionary theory. You are working this completely backwards. Its not that we observe small changes and guess that over time they must lead to large evolutionary changes. From fossil records and genetics and a host of other sources we allready KNOW that these changes happened. Evolution just explains the mechanics of how it happened. As TB says - you need to read up on this, and thats not meant as a taunt, but real advice
You strike me as reasonably intelligent, but you don't have a very good grasp of evolution. (For example, you appear to be under the impression that the evidence for whale evolution is limited to what the fossil record shows us.)
If you truly pride yourself on being a rational person, you will make a concerted effort to educate yourself on the subject (perusing creationist propaganda doesn't qualify). You will find that much of your current incredulity is simply unjustified.
Thought about what you wanted again, maybe this will help. Each species searches for it's Niche in the eco system. Try researching that, there aren't easy answers.
That is why it is easier to say "faith" but that is wrong, please use your logical thinking skills.
Were you taught creation or evolution as a child? Just curious
Seals and the Platypus are living examples of the transition from land mammal to aquatic mammal. Judging by this diatribe, I doubt you even understand what the mechanism of evolution is to begin with. Educate yourself in basic biology before you vomit all over the ONLY explanation we have for the diversity of life on earth.
Give a seal a few million years of "small changes" , you might see a creature that looks similar to a modern day whale. The only "progression" evolution needs is time itself.
I did believe in creation before I listened to this video. Wow TBS really pwned you hard. Even yesterday when I was still a creationist i had a lot better arguments than you.
IS JUST A BUNCH OF WHAT ARRANGED IN A WHAT, YOU STUPID MORON? And why should I believe in a giant cosmic invisible force who is trying to organize that?
This bunch of fossils arranged in a column are just the proof of every, or almost every single life form who passed on Earth. And they are fossils TODAY, just like YOU will be in some centuries, if some major cataclism don't mess up with everything.
You know, you don't need to read a big giant book to know about evolution. All you have to do is go to a natural story museum and read the explanations. Or ask to your biology teacher. And frankly, faith to what? To see that a land based mammal needed to eat and have babies, and that the ocean was offering better perspectives? That's not about faith, is about probability.
You said at the start of the video that you were pretending to be a young earth creationist. I get the feeling at 4:47 that you are pretending to be a rational person.
I'm confused what your asking. It sounds similar to asking me to have an explanation for why it is possible for any man would kill 6 million jews, before accepting the evidence that adolf hitler killed the jews. That seems ass backwards to ask proof for specifically how a complicated event in the past did occur before accepting the inductive evidence that clearly supports evolution.
Wow, you are really dumb. "I don't need to read a big, thick book to get an answer for such a simple question." The ideas contained within evolution may be intuitive, but don't assume anything is simple. Read the damn book.
"why is it the case that to get from a land based mammal into a whale, you only need a change in the direction of survivability?"
Why? Because the adaptations that benefit animals help them survive long enough to reproduce, thereby passing the adaptation on to its offspring. If the adaptation (or mutation) is not beneficial or is even detrimental, the animal won't survive long enough to reproduce, therefore the adaptation won't be passed on to any offspring.
In short, the 'just so' stories are all we will ever have to go on in order to explain these things, unless we can somehow time travel. It it true, that the just so stories will always be vague and can never be proven, just like how you could NEVER prove that the can of soda was blown over by the wind. After all, even though we HAVE shown that the wind can blow over the can, we don't know if it blew it over on that particular occasion.
I mean, you're not really asking reasonable questions. Even if evolution is not responsible for the existence of whales - I mean, for all we know an alien ship could have dropped a bunch of them off on our planet thousands of years ago - but even if we could somehow prove that this happened it STILL wouldn't devalue evolution theory.
So please, get your lazy ass to a library and quit deluding yourself that you've somehow out-thought some of the smartest people who ever graced this planet.
So what exactly will it take for you to 'believe that a land mammal can become a whale?' You've taken one example of something and asked for an explanation of it, which may or may not be floating in the knowledge banks out there somewhere. I doubt we could ever know the exact answer to this question because of the nature of the research which would be required to establish that answer.
What do you want me to do? Build a time machine and go back to record the progression for you?
You're really not being intellectually reasonable in these videos, and I am forced to side with TheoreticalBullshit on this matter and I, too, think you ought to research the evidence for yourself instead of demanding it to be served on a plate to you over the internet.
The principle that a 'change in the direction of survivability' (as you call it) can lead to widespread change in a population have been irrefutably demonstrated, and so has speciation. I will continue this post in a mo.
What i hear is "I dont think" and "i dont see how", which is essentially saying. Because i dont understand something, it can therefor not be possible.
YES IT IS AN ANSWER Mister..! The Quantity accumulations lead to Quality changes! Everywhere IS, Always was, and will be. in Physics, Chemistry, Society, even EDUCATION. When you know more, You will see connections. You have a long way ahead, and yet, you are making videos TOTALLY unprepared for this. You don't have a shame! I pity you, really... No Concious Being will self humiliate that much as you just did...
ugh, just go with TBS's short answer. Your questions on evolution are N/A. The question demonstrates that you dont actually understand what evolution says, otherwise you wouldnt ask the questions you do. So to quote TBS "Go to a f*king library" Actually try reading what scientists say evolution says. Not what people who are against the theory claims it says. you have to have an education on the topic to be taken seriously.
If someone came up with the idea and then had no evidence to back it up, that's one thing, and you are justified in not believeing him. But when you see the evidence and try to form a hypothesis based on it, and that hypothesis is confirmed over and over and over, that is not taking something on faith.
This is just a small part of what you said that bothers me... @2:05 Technically it was small marine biology changing into land based animals..you're backwards on that argument.
3:13 YES YOU DO, YOU DICK! What a fucking chode! Of course you need to read a "big, thick book" to get BIG ideas into your THICK skull! They teach TWO WHOLE years of biology in American High School, and that still isn't enough time to convince some people! GO READ A FUCKING BOOK BEFORE YOU SPECULATE ANYMORE!!! If you simply spent a week reading "The Greastest Show on Earth", you WOULD have an idea of how it all works. If it doesn't work then you have something to argue about, but it will.
If there are factors acting on, with or against species, be it competition in mating, habitat, feeding or predation, and a species does not evolve to meet the demands presented for survival, that species will go extinct. Whales didn't happen in a jump, and we have an impenetrable fossil record of it.
Have you read "On the Origin of species", in it's entirety, or really any book which supports the theory of evolution? I'm going to anticipate your answer... "No".
You need to quit being lazy and actually read material relevant to your "simple" question. Sometimes when you talk to experts on certain subjects, you end up learning something that you never thought of before which is the entire point of education....
"Why the transition from a landbased mammal to a whale only needs a change in the direction of survivability"
Your turning things around. The transition occurs because the change in that landbased mammal leads to survivability.
Let me give you an example:
Say there's a group of rats and their natural enemies being felids.
If, because of some mutation, one of the rats can run faster, the likelihood to escape from the felid becomes greater and therefor the likelihood for it to live longer as well.
Say it's a male rat, so if it lives longer it can mate with more females than the other rats, thus getting more offsprings. Those offsprings are likely to have the same genetic deviation passing it on to their children as well.
That's how a large group of faster-running rats would develop.
It's completely logical...
To conclude, you clearly don't understand anything about evolution, so if the guy you debated with pointed you to books, he was completely right.
Little adaptations occurs during millions of years, that's why species change. There is no direction of something like that, is the survival of the organism to fit best the "enviroment" requirements what produce a selection in a certain population. nothing else.
If you are doing this videos to attract attention over the clown you made it very well, but if you try to do this in a serious fashion you are a big fail.
Wow... You're really are stupid o.O The biology i learned @ school as a 11 year old answers this question for me. The stupidity and ignorance you show in this video is staggering.
Will they slowly develop gills and be complete water creatures due to the ammount of time they spend under water, whales still need oxygen to live but in a thousand or so years if the asshole japs havnt killed them all, will they no longer need oxygen to breath air, our native bird the kiwi (just an example and not so complexe) lost the abilitie to fly due to no natrual preditors, now that we have consumed its natrual habitat its wings are slowly growing back due to wild animals.
Evolution i like to think its a simple step to what was but i understand its a very complexe and senstive topic, to observation and history knowledge i have come to learn that it is possible for a land based mammal to have slowly formed to a creature for water, but the question im stumped buy what was first, was it water to land land to water or can it progress both ways, i see aligaters and crocs spend most of there time in water but are still land based creatures. ^
well to answer your question requires a complex answer because its a complex change.
Basically what you are saying is, I want a simple answer to this question. And it if it isnt, then I'm going to pretend there is no answer. So to answer your question how do you know its possible? Because physical evidence (fossils) SHOW that very same gradual change.
In otherwords....it happened.....so its possible. and you can check by reading said books that show said fossils.
I know what lets make up a bunch of fallacies to suit this pseudo intellectual bullcrap.
If you atcually knew what you were talking about and had ANY experience in this shit you wouldn't even need to have to think about this shit it'd be learned.
These questions come up because people are fucking ignorant.
Would you seriously contest quantum theory without understanding the math behind it?
If you really want answers, READ A BOOK, that's the only good advice applicable in your case. Why should anybody take the time to educate you on the basic principles of evolution or give you shortcut explanations if you can't be bothered to pick up a textbook and find the answer for yourself?
You are trying to run before you've even learned how to crawl.
There is no Evolutionary 'concept' called 'Direction of survivability'
Where did you get this idea? Did you come up with it as a Graduate Student? Since it isnt really valid within the context of natural selection or any realm of evolutionary theory I doubt that is the case but I am interested in your term.
Wow, that is some interesting sentence structure. Let me see if I can sort this out...
You want to know WHY a 'change in the direction of survivability' promotes some traits to be passed on and leads to an incremental progressive change?
Okay well, as Darwin put it, limited resources plus animal populations not growing exponentially leads to the inevitable conclusion that not all members of a species reproduce. The members more likely to survive are more likely to reproduce.
I thought the same thing with birds having ancestry with dinosaurs. I just couldn't see how a reptile could gradually change to the point where it was able to fly. Then I read a book about it, and looking at the fossils, it actually made a lot of sense.
The scientists don't disagree on whether evolution is a fact. There's a consensus. So arguing because of your religious/political agenta ignores that evolution is a fact. We don't have faith because we accept facts :)
that's why creationists will never learn evolution. Because they ask "simple questions" which are actually quite complicated, we give a simple answer...and then they get confused and start debating with their logic. When u have scarce information about something, how do u apply logic? Theoretical bullshit told him to study a book exactly when he should have, cause the transition into a whale happens in accordance to many factors. I'm not a paleontologist so I too would point to a book...
mammal starts swimming the better swimmers pass on there genes they get better then some more then u got a fucking whale not complicated the duck with bigger webs on there feet swim better less likely to be ate like the mammal to whale evolution we have the fossils the homolouge structures uhhh lungs like a creator says u live in water buuuutt im gonna give u lungs isnt that really stupid and mean
Hi.. uhm you do realise that archeologists don't just find a skeletton pick it up and guess what it is and how it could have behaved, right?
they analise the timeperiod and the climatic envoirement found along with the fossil too... That means they look for fossilised plants, the type of stone aso... when they find 3-5 fossils in sedimented sand next to fish fossils and tropical plants (big leafes) they conclude that the species must have lived in lagunes.... par exemple
A lot of people misunderstand the concept of natural selection. Imagine this: You take a bunch of darts and throw them at a target. Some hit the bull's eye, some hit around it and some miss completely. That is an example for how random mutations work (the throwing of the darts) and how natural selection only allows some of them to survive (hit the target and stick to it). The reason for the mutations can be anything and nothing, but they always happen. NS means that the best traits persist.
actually i dont really find it worth it to tell you now that i think youre ill informed. but im feeling nice today so im just gonna tell you straight out: i think youre a dumbass.
i mean really i learned that in like 9th grade dude. and it was that exact example tht my teacher used to teach that DAYS criteria. thats right, what i suspect youve been pondering over for quite some time now, i learned in 1 fucking DAY. take theoreticalbullshits advice and read a book man.
I can tell you the answer to your question. But not in as many characters as im given so im going to ask you something instead IE the following: Have you even read the origin of species?
Random mutation isn't an adaptation, though the most useful mutations increase survivability and therefore persist. You could call survivability a direction, but as you said no one strives for it actively. Progressing towards that goal is a passive process that depends on random mutations, where only the random few have what it takes to survive.
This guy is not educated in the accepted form of biology otherwise, he would see how absurd his arguments are. Clearly he does not know about any of the evidence for evolution. Because he does not know about any of the evidence, in his mind evolution is false. How can an honest and rational person come to this type of conclusion.
Show us without paper, show us without Majority, show us without (eg. Charles Darwin said so) show us today with non doctored video, show us without manifesting the results in a lab.
BTW saying we cant because it takes too long/MILLIONS OF YEARS is a copout. Scientifically you cant prove it. You can only demonstrate through we believe there for AGAIN Show us a living example of one living organism giving birth to a new species that can breed back. Variations dont count (eg. breeds)
You sir... are a retard! I take it you don't belive in the theory of electromagnetism either? Obviously, because you can't see it... electricity is not responsible for powering your computer... but it is infact a magical computer which powers itself? If you believe electricity is a real phenomena... prove so, by sticking to the same criteria which you say one must use to prove evolution to be a real phenomena! I bet you can't you fucking douche!
your lack of intelligence is shown by the insults you throw. so I'm not going to bother trying to teach you the error of your system due to the total dis-regard for the respect of others in your speech.
separate lesson for you is though, if you want to be taken seriously do it as an intellectual and don't use insults or profanity to claim your validity.
''your lack of intelligence is shown by the insults you throw''
Your lack of intelligence is shown by the general content of your comments!
''I'm not going to bother trying to teach you the error of your system''
Cop out! It is your system for evaluating evidence which is full of errors! You are a dou9che and your blatant disregard for any science which contradicts your holy book is pathetic considering it is science validated by the same criteria every science you accept is!
He does have a point though. Don't insult your adversary if you wish them to take you seriously. Don't give them a cop out. Just show a little decency and be respectful.
I agree with your point, just be more respectful when presenting it.
''Don't insult your adversary if you wish them to take you seriously''
He threw the first insult by trying to insult every rational persons intelligence. I understand what you are saying though... but believe me... Ive tried the ''nice person with patience'' tactic for long enough with creationists and have come to the the conclusion that aggressive ridicule is the only way to deal with these blatant fucktards! Given an inch... they take a mile and you never get anywhere!
You don't have to call them good things, just refrain from bad things. For example retard, fucktard, moron, stupid, idiotic and so on. Ignorant and arrogant are much better if you feel they truly deserve an insult, but refrain from the more vulgar phrases.
By insulting them you are only causing them to be more close minded to your idea. Even if you completely destroy their argument, they still won't agree with you for the sole reason that you were/are an asshole.
I cannot believe that evolution is still unaccepted by such a large minority of people. There is such a large amount of data proving evolution and little or none to disprove evolution that it shouldn't even be a topic of discussion anymore. Creationists, use your head a little bit.
But you have to admit, some of their arguments are pretty creative, even if completely wrong. They may not be the brightest or most open minded bunch, but they certainly can be original.
variety of species we witness. as for your analogy, it of course is proven that the wind CAN knock over the can.the procces of evolution is witnessed daily on bacteria. and viruses. there are now bacteria that feed exclusively on radioactive isotopes that did not exist on this planet 40 years ago(the isotopes),and the mutation that started the species was WITNESSED. is this not proof that the wind can knock over the can? if not please elaborate
i'm sorry i don't really understand your point. the point of the theory of evolution is to try to explain how such a variety of species came into being by trying to find an explanation using "forces" we witness around us. we know for certain that cells mutate, and that some mutations are badly suited for survival, and others better, so some species die and some live,imagining this process happening over time and the changes being cumulative you get a perfectly reasonable explanation for the
Really how in the world are you coming up with this logic,Im sorry but you got creamed by theoreticalBullshit,take the lose like a man.
jadm7777777 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You get that TheoreticalBullshit is more philosopher than scientist, thought right? Both are perfectly acceptable pathways to understand the universe, and they often go hand in hand, but it is like you are claiming to outsmart a rocket scientist by asking him about ancient Chinese history. He might be able to give you a good answer, but it is not his field.
TheN0username 2 days ago
You get that TheoreticalBullshit is more philosopher than scientist, thought right? Both are perfectly acceptable pathways to understand the universe, and they often go hand in hand, but it is like you are claiming to outsmart a rocket scientist by asking him about marine biology. He might be able to give you a good answer, but it is not his field.
TheN0username 2 days ago
Nice green screen
jennayrubay 4 days ago
I'm pretty sure that it was the other way around, we evolved from the water, to the land.
lexaena 1 week ago
So what you are offering is an argument from incredulity? Really? Weak.
BlankVellum 1 week ago
You are offering your incredulity as a reason not to accept evolution, but have somehow disguised this to yourself. It's an argument from ignorance. You have little understanding of vast amount of time it takes for an evolution like this to occur. You will never be able to see it happen in your mind in real time or visual fast forward.
Explorer766 1 week ago
Argument from ignorance:
"I cant see how a land mammal became a whale"
OK I believe you - so what?
richo61 1 week ago
No mate, you DO need to read a great thick book. I advise you read a few actually...
Amernee 2 weeks ago
It's a shame that there are people who actually think like this
Andrew06923 2 weeks ago
The species DOESN'T need change at all! Forget about the need!The species change because the replication process is NOT perfect! There is always change. Most of the time this accidental mutation kills the organism!If it is a big change it is more likely to kill it! If it is small change the creature is more likely to survive though even small mutation would more likely kill the organism.But eventually sooner or later it is inevitable that some mutation will occur that will preserve the organism
lachezar43 2 weeks ago
Why even debate "land animals evolving to whales"?
Face it. Facts are facts. And just the fact that whales have vestigal pelvic and leg parts and the DNA shared with some land animals is more than enough. It's case close, and there is absolutely no need for debate. It's not debatable.
If you think about it even porpoises are a step between land mammals and true whales. I wouldn't even expect many semi-whales shallow dwellers would survive in many places with crocodilians living worldwide.
gvman3670 2 weeks ago
You say you are a rational person but you choose not to read up on the subject. You demand that someone tell you how exactly a LBM changed into a whale. You want the the direct observation of it happening. It isn't a simple question and from watching your video you will accept no evidence. I watched TheoreticalBullshit and he gave good answers to your question. I never heard "it just is" from him.
wraith168 3 weeks ago
I don´t see how putting parrots in a line one by one can create a 42 miles parrots line. I don´t see why it would happen. After all, you are just assuming that adding successively more parrots in a line in a given direction will eventually increase the size of the line until the 42 miles goal is reached. We never saw a parrot´s line of this size, so we can safely conclude that such line can´t exist. And because no such line can be created, this proves that God is the creator of the Universe.
lfzadra 1 month ago
"Direction of Survivability"? Get a book.
yvranx 1 month ago
you dont like reading do you
EisEisBaby 1 month ago
Your an idiot.
Meth0us 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I am unable to distinguish whether or not you are ignorant, or unintelligent.
GuardianKiyoshi 2 months ago
paused at 4:34 after getting really pissed off.
No, your question wasn't simple.
No, it isn't faith.
It takes study (at least a text book) to answer that question.
They didn't come up with this shit out of the blue, they tested every theory we've heard of and opted for the one that was the most consistent with the evidence.The falsifiable theory has never been falsified & thus is regarded as fact. If your not prepared to read the evidence, how do expect to gain an answer?Do you really want one?
MrLittletomdj 2 months ago
@MrLittletomdj You did better than me, I only made it to 3:47.
MrLittletomdj 1 month ago
Evolution is a popularity contest. Survivability is secondary to popularity. This is why many species go extinct - because the most sexually popular members of the species were not capable of adapting to climate and other environmental changes. Evolutionary success is a lucky combination of sexually impressive traits mixed with survivability. In a world where catching fish is the ultimate sex symbol the mammal with the biggest webbed feet gets to have sex with all the females.
ikeahackr 2 months ago
It's not about direction, its about expansion, filling niches, taking advantage of new environments in new ways.
ThMrksman 2 months ago
@npage85 Over and over you say, "I don't see how..." or "I don't see why..."
Well, I don't see how or why your lack of education and understanding of evolution adds anything of value to the conversation.
Your incredulity is not evidence against the science.
RE: the specific inference that land mammals evolved into whales, nothing needs to be taken on faith. The fossil and anatomical evidence perfectly fits the theory, so it is accepted.
Qillz 2 months ago
"How do I know?"
Simple, bud. Educate yourself.
gvman3670 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ok once again. READ A FUCKING BOOK!
MrVanmojo23 2 months ago
Ok, you're trying to claim you need an explanation for how whales came from land-based mammals. Why? What part of the change from the LBM to the whale is not possible through incremental change that we know mutation can provide and natural selection select for? Name a feature that whales have that LBM don't that couldn't arise from mutation and selective pressure on the LBM and it's descendants.
newperve 2 months ago
Idiot
tralalalumpeedoo 3 months ago
Read the Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins. It is an excellent book and will answer your questions. You have to read to understand evolutionary biology. It is quite elegant.
HyperCritical1 3 months ago
4:41 - I dont think you are.
gulamf 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
how did it feel having your ass handed to you by theoreticalbulshit?
theUKatheist 4 months ago
Or, if you're time poor, watch the last 45 seconds of this video (from 4:25).
COEXISTential 4 months ago
You think you know but won't read? *face palm*
Here, have a video, then: watch?v=Lp6KKg1MVtA
Sit down, have a glass of wine, and spend 45 minutes to an hour seeing it all explained very succinctly, with evidence.
COEXISTential 4 months ago
One mistake I think you've made is anthropic. It's easy to take the whale as the conclusion and marvel at how evolution could reach that, just as you can take the results of any given lottery result and marvel at the incredible odds that those exact numbers came up. Truth be told, there could be any one of a near infinite number of possible evolutionary paths for a mammal to take to evovle to survive in the ocean.
ThePzychotic 4 months ago
pick up a book retard,if u dont understand something u have no business trying to disprove it
sirbestnameever 4 months ago
Did you hear that *SMACK!*? That was the world's first collective facepalm.
Kith000 4 months ago
it's true because we make it so! an animal without teaching or laerning already knows to escape from danger! that is the reason why this can happen. because animals already have the instincts to get away from danger then they escape from danger with the small advantage they have. if there happens to be an adaptation to improve that advantage then it will usually stick around unless certain circumstances stand in it's way. it is this way because animals make it so! animals make evolution happen.
trapfethen 6 months ago
Yeah, whales have a pelvic bone because it looks cool that way.
RRV85 6 months ago
@RRV85 I'm sorry... I thought they had a pelvc bone so that their junk had something to anchor to... you know, to make baby whales and stuff.
npage85 6 months ago
@npage85
well, why not?..evolution is change. what barrier is there stopping the necessary changes that would lead a land mammal to the water?
itzahazylife 6 months ago
@npage85
you're being so intellectually dishonest..sure, vestigial organs can adopt secondary functions, but, c'mon man, use your head..the pelvic bone on whales obviously had a primary function. and that was to act as the socket for the top ball of a femur bone, like all pelvic bones are primarily known to be for..some whales have even been found with this femur bone, and some even with full feet digits.
itzahazylife 6 months ago
but, that's not the best example..eyes on moles are blatant vestiges. there's a species of golden moles in africa that are completely blind..they even have a thick layer of skin covering their fully formed EYES underneath..how on earth can u explain this?..sure, u can concoct some irrational route around this, but, the theory of evolution actually PREDICTS this..and whaddatya know.
does intelligent design explain eyes on an animal that is completely blind?..if so, i'd sure like to hear it..
itzahazylife 6 months ago
@npage85 And what about leg bones?
ThePoonerBooner 6 days ago
facepalm
travlr3000x 6 months ago
Oh my fuck>!!> what the hell is this. Learn biology, learn logic. learn something@!!
HybridDBela 6 months ago
I made it to 3:23 but then got so frustrated I had to turn it off. Please try to have a litlle understanding about evolution before you try and refute it.
nleger7 6 months ago
fuck you yanks still having the "evolution debate"?! hahahaha DUDE... ITS OVER.
P4PMike 7 months ago
... because related mammals which do not develop these advantageous water-hunting strategies will be less nourished and less likely to survive and to breed (and transmit their genetic code). Hence, the random mutation becomes more common to the point where essentially *all* members of a species have it. (Species, by the way, is an extremely fuzzy, dubious term)
LiptonCB 7 months ago
Dude. You need to go to a university, and attempt to obtain a degree in biology. Your question is pretty (arrogantly) ignorant.
If you stay alive - you can breed. This is middle school stuff. Breeding and transmitting your genes requires you to be alive long enough to do so. Animals tend to fall into environmental niches in which their needs are most met. A mammal on the land that finds aquatic hunting an advantageous strategy will tend to develop mutations to assist in that.
LiptonCB 7 months ago
I suppose the simplest answer to your questions here has to be: there are reasons that we to conclusions in science as "evident[ly]" the case. They're driven by evidence. and not someone's inability to postulate an informal logical argument from first principles. Alas, there are explicit reasons why in science we do not consult philosophers for answers: they have none. To the extent that one might get it right, it's entirely by accident.
integralmath 8 months ago
Three Words: Educate Yourself Fool
darththeo 8 months ago
What a fucking idiot...
MrTruthAddict 8 months ago
You said that you don't need to a read a big book to get a simple answer. Your question is not a simple question. It is a loaded question which necessitates a wealth of education to understand its answer. For example, how can you understand how one gene can make a difference between a large human and a small human? Consider that "simple" question. Would anyone be able to explain the answer to you without your prior knowledge in the basics of biology? You get the point.
hawasawayahawa 8 months ago 33
who cares if a land based mammal can change into a whale. all religion is more difficult to believe. you don't need to read a big thick book to get an answer? man, it is so very obvious that theolocgicalbullshit is so much more intelligent than you. at any rate, the absolute most important thing for any thinking individual is the following: what are you doing right now, to make the world in which you live better?
creaturagirl 8 months ago
I sincerely tried to watch the whole video, but you are too boring and your argument is not very good. Sorry, friend.
lcprandini 8 months ago
Rationaly, when you look at a car (for instance), what is the striking feature that lets you know it was designed by a human or evolved by nature? - when comparing say two different types of car (say BMW and FIAT) what tells you both were designed by the same 'creator' (humans)? - both will share many features, and the FIAT may have four gears and the BMW 5, both have the same rubber composition tyres etc. - similar parts, similar styling, similar arrangement - designed, not evolved from nothing
TREACLE97 9 months ago
Do you not understand that our physical traits are determined by our genetic make up? Do you not understand that random mutations occur?
As far as I can tell that's where your lack of understanding comes from.
747puppyfat 9 months ago
dumbass whoisn't even aware of how stupid he is...pathetic. yeah you love the smell of your own shit don't you nick? you stew in it all day.
you've got hair under your armpits and a ratlike little goatee - you're a fucking monkey. get over it.
scuzzulus 10 months ago
''I don't think i need a big thick book, for such a simple question.''
Dude when u said that right there, was when i stopped watching your video.
TiCkToCkMaRiO1473 11 months ago
I want to know all about the rise and fall of Rome, but I shouldn't have to read a history book. So why can't someone explain the whole thing to me? It is easier to not understand and blame someone else for my ignorance.
OldeVampyr 11 months ago
You're an ignorant fuck. Go read a book dumb ass.
blainethebassist 11 months ago
This guy needs to read a simple biological anthropology book to enlighten himself, OH WAIT IGNORANCE CANT CHANGE SHIT!
vunil 1 year ago
@vunil
What was the name of the 'biological anthropology' book you read?
ElProximo 11 months ago
you don't believe it because you refused to get a decent education and you refuse to get a decent education because your ignorance is somehow appealing to yourself.
g24417 1 year ago
I don't think this guy knows what evolution is..LOL.
Therachh3 1 year ago 28
Your attempted impeachment of the fossil record is ludicrous. Explain, if evolution is not possible, why whales are not seen before the era in which they appear and why the species from which they allegedly evolved are not seen afterwards.
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
Such changes don't need to be progressive, merely random to avoid a fallacy of composition. The rest of your video shows that you know fuck all about what evolution actually claims. What you're asking is about as simple as asking why people on the bottom of the earth don't fall off. Where would you start with that one?
MrMZaccone 1 year ago
Believing in a land mammal walking into the ocean and turning into a fucking whale sounds completely absurd
Tight2go 1 year ago
@Tight2go because that is absurd. that doesnt happen. haha
Sc0ttPrian 1 year ago
I'm to lazy to make a YouTube video but evolution can be demonstrated by your feet. Yep, feet. You walk on them all day, you get thicker skin on your feet. You don't walk on them all day the skin isn't thick and can be pricked through easily. Its not really for survival its more to prevent damage to the body. Tada
cassidyteufel 1 year ago
With you reasoning about fossils I would say : Your brain is just a bunch of atoms, it does not mean you are capable of thinking at all, it is just a big pile of atoms standing there..
ssijak 1 year ago
hmm, fail?
karlijean93 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you lost and your ugly
blurock29 1 year ago
Shut up, douche
Regurtless 1 year ago
Plz explain that whole e =mc^2 to me I don't real get it. "Read this book I will expain it". What just expain that little thing why would I read about dosn't seem to be so complicatet its only like three variables.
You don't think you have to read a book to understand something? Understanding a subject like math, physik or biology is not easy that why people studie it for years.
You are an arrogant brick to just demand that somebody explains to you how evolution works in a youtube video.
21nickik 1 year ago 2
You have a serious problem with your reasoning and lack understanding of evolutionary theory. You are working this completely backwards. Its not that we observe small changes and guess that over time they must lead to large evolutionary changes. From fossil records and genetics and a host of other sources we allready KNOW that these changes happened. Evolution just explains the mechanics of how it happened. As TB says - you need to read up on this, and thats not meant as a taunt, but real advice
TheStigma 1 year ago
You strike me as reasonably intelligent, but you don't have a very good grasp of evolution. (For example, you appear to be under the impression that the evidence for whale evolution is limited to what the fossil record shows us.)
If you truly pride yourself on being a rational person, you will make a concerted effort to educate yourself on the subject (perusing creationist propaganda doesn't qualify). You will find that much of your current incredulity is simply unjustified.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
You have the video editing skills of a 10 year old with Windows Movie Maker. Also, You're a dumbass.
Foible237 1 year ago
Thought about what you wanted again, maybe this will help. Each species searches for it's Niche in the eco system. Try researching that, there aren't easy answers.
That is why it is easier to say "faith" but that is wrong, please use your logical thinking skills.
Were you taught creation or evolution as a child? Just curious
CerisePsyche 1 year ago
Your ignorance is astounding. Please look at the fossils we have and you will see what has happened over MILLIONS and MILLIONS of years.
Sorry, no faith is needed, you just need some more education. No one can put the ability into your head so maybe it is beyond you. Pity you..
My grandchildren understand evolution and they are young.
CerisePsyche 1 year ago
Seals and the Platypus are living examples of the transition from land mammal to aquatic mammal. Judging by this diatribe, I doubt you even understand what the mechanism of evolution is to begin with. Educate yourself in basic biology before you vomit all over the ONLY explanation we have for the diversity of life on earth.
Give a seal a few million years of "small changes" , you might see a creature that looks similar to a modern day whale. The only "progression" evolution needs is time itself.
ScienceIsKnowledge 1 year ago
I did believe in creation before I listened to this video. Wow TBS really pwned you hard. Even yesterday when I was still a creationist i had a lot better arguments than you.
IsaacSloan 1 year ago
This video makes you look really ignorant. TBS pretty much pwned you.
rubberchickenbutthea 1 year ago
Didn't even watch the video. Disliked.
BlanBlan19901990 1 year ago
IS JUST A BUNCH OF WHAT ARRANGED IN A WHAT, YOU STUPID MORON? And why should I believe in a giant cosmic invisible force who is trying to organize that?
This bunch of fossils arranged in a column are just the proof of every, or almost every single life form who passed on Earth. And they are fossils TODAY, just like YOU will be in some centuries, if some major cataclism don't mess up with everything.
lalishelaide 1 year ago
You know, you don't need to read a big giant book to know about evolution. All you have to do is go to a natural story museum and read the explanations. Or ask to your biology teacher. And frankly, faith to what? To see that a land based mammal needed to eat and have babies, and that the ocean was offering better perspectives? That's not about faith, is about probability.
lalishelaide 1 year ago
You said at the start of the video that you were pretending to be a young earth creationist. I get the feeling at 4:47 that you are pretending to be a rational person.
Naxos99 1 year ago
Haha why does creationists generally making so many weird faces and question themselves? Do they have a mentally disorder or something?
Lubben 1 year ago
You lost me when you admitted that you have no interest in reading book on evolution.
Inorance is not something to be proud of.
What do you even mean by 'the direction of survivability'?! It seems to me that you don't even have a basic understanding of the pertinent science.
singring76 1 year ago 2
ur fucking wrong, educate ur self.
Menla1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You have no idea what you are talking npape85. You should educate yourself.
thesparitan 1 year ago 2
Deoxyribo Nucleic Acid is not "wind".
Period.
jinitron 1 year ago
You were pretending to be a YEC? Bull shit! STOP BEING A LIAR AND ADMIT YOU GOT SPANKED!
mythicalhell 1 year ago
Do you know what an axiom is?
ZeroSwitch 1 year ago
you're an idiot and TBS schooled you, so hard. quit while you're behind.
three7eightyfive 1 year ago
Are you saying that there could be a direction of change *away from* survivibility?
Naiant 1 year ago
I'm confused what your asking. It sounds similar to asking me to have an explanation for why it is possible for any man would kill 6 million jews, before accepting the evidence that adolf hitler killed the jews. That seems ass backwards to ask proof for specifically how a complicated event in the past did occur before accepting the inductive evidence that clearly supports evolution.
RuinSonic 1 year ago
Wow, you are really dumb. "I don't need to read a big, thick book to get an answer for such a simple question." The ideas contained within evolution may be intuitive, but don't assume anything is simple. Read the damn book.
xxpbdudexx 1 year ago
If it doesn't survive, it can't reproduce. Simple.
autumnsylver 1 year ago
"why is it the case that to get from a land based mammal into a whale, you only need a change in the direction of survivability?"
Why? Because the adaptations that benefit animals help them survive long enough to reproduce, thereby passing the adaptation on to its offspring. If the adaptation (or mutation) is not beneficial or is even detrimental, the animal won't survive long enough to reproduce, therefore the adaptation won't be passed on to any offspring.
autumnsylver 1 year ago
In short, the 'just so' stories are all we will ever have to go on in order to explain these things, unless we can somehow time travel. It it true, that the just so stories will always be vague and can never be proven, just like how you could NEVER prove that the can of soda was blown over by the wind. After all, even though we HAVE shown that the wind can blow over the can, we don't know if it blew it over on that particular occasion.
Dragon0007 1 year ago
I mean, you're not really asking reasonable questions. Even if evolution is not responsible for the existence of whales - I mean, for all we know an alien ship could have dropped a bunch of them off on our planet thousands of years ago - but even if we could somehow prove that this happened it STILL wouldn't devalue evolution theory.
So please, get your lazy ass to a library and quit deluding yourself that you've somehow out-thought some of the smartest people who ever graced this planet.
Dragon0007 1 year ago
So what exactly will it take for you to 'believe that a land mammal can become a whale?' You've taken one example of something and asked for an explanation of it, which may or may not be floating in the knowledge banks out there somewhere. I doubt we could ever know the exact answer to this question because of the nature of the research which would be required to establish that answer.
What do you want me to do? Build a time machine and go back to record the progression for you?
Dragon0007 1 year ago
You're really not being intellectually reasonable in these videos, and I am forced to side with TheoreticalBullshit on this matter and I, too, think you ought to research the evidence for yourself instead of demanding it to be served on a plate to you over the internet.
The principle that a 'change in the direction of survivability' (as you call it) can lead to widespread change in a population have been irrefutably demonstrated, and so has speciation. I will continue this post in a mo.
Dragon0007 1 year ago
What i hear is "I dont think" and "i dont see how", which is essentially saying. Because i dont understand something, it can therefor not be possible.
hockeygod9911 1 year ago 2
all creationist are idiots
ngpage85 is a creationist
therefore npage85 is an idiot
Farf420 1 year ago 2
So we could point you toward evidence, but your response would be 'yeah, but show me evidence'.
Even a brief review of the literature will answer your questions - go forth and read some Dawkins, or Gould.
symsee 1 year ago
YES IT IS AN ANSWER Mister..! The Quantity accumulations lead to Quality changes! Everywhere IS, Always was, and will be. in Physics, Chemistry, Society, even EDUCATION. When you know more, You will see connections. You have a long way ahead, and yet, you are making videos TOTALLY unprepared for this. You don't have a shame! I pity you, really... No Concious Being will self humiliate that much as you just did...
AtakanNW 1 year ago
ugh, just go with TBS's short answer. Your questions on evolution are N/A. The question demonstrates that you dont actually understand what evolution says, otherwise you wouldnt ask the questions you do. So to quote TBS "Go to a f*king library" Actually try reading what scientists say evolution says. Not what people who are against the theory claims it says. you have to have an education on the topic to be taken seriously.
boorens18 1 year ago
There is a difference between:
"Hey, I can fly!"
"Really? Show me."
"... i can't."
vs
"See me up in the air?"
"Holy crap! How are you doing that?"
"I can fly!"
If someone came up with the idea and then had no evidence to back it up, that's one thing, and you are justified in not believeing him. But when you see the evidence and try to form a hypothesis based on it, and that hypothesis is confirmed over and over and over, that is not taking something on faith.
DeeEmarr 1 year ago 2
@DeeEmarr great example just for this comment we should be friends lol
InsertingSuppository 1 year ago
This is just a small part of what you said that bothers me... @2:05 Technically it was small marine biology changing into land based animals..you're backwards on that argument.
kristina040192 1 year ago
3:13 YES YOU DO, YOU DICK! What a fucking chode! Of course you need to read a "big, thick book" to get BIG ideas into your THICK skull! They teach TWO WHOLE years of biology in American High School, and that still isn't enough time to convince some people! GO READ A FUCKING BOOK BEFORE YOU SPECULATE ANYMORE!!! If you simply spent a week reading "The Greastest Show on Earth", you WOULD have an idea of how it all works. If it doesn't work then you have something to argue about, but it will.
metallicrazy8891 1 year ago
If there are factors acting on, with or against species, be it competition in mating, habitat, feeding or predation, and a species does not evolve to meet the demands presented for survival, that species will go extinct. Whales didn't happen in a jump, and we have an impenetrable fossil record of it.
Have you read "On the Origin of species", in it's entirety, or really any book which supports the theory of evolution? I'm going to anticipate your answer... "No".
If not; you have no argument.
AtheosPhyve 1 year ago
You need to quit being lazy and actually read material relevant to your "simple" question. Sometimes when you talk to experts on certain subjects, you end up learning something that you never thought of before which is the entire point of education....
Drums1881 1 year ago
"Why the transition from a landbased mammal to a whale only needs a change in the direction of survivability"
Your turning things around. The transition occurs because the change in that landbased mammal leads to survivability.
Let me give you an example:
Say there's a group of rats and their natural enemies being felids.
If, because of some mutation, one of the rats can run faster, the likelihood to escape from the felid becomes greater and therefor the likelihood for it to live longer as well.
LanteanKnight 1 year ago
Say it's a male rat, so if it lives longer it can mate with more females than the other rats, thus getting more offsprings. Those offsprings are likely to have the same genetic deviation passing it on to their children as well.
That's how a large group of faster-running rats would develop.
It's completely logical...
To conclude, you clearly don't understand anything about evolution, so if the guy you debated with pointed you to books, he was completely right.
LanteanKnight 1 year ago
Little adaptations occurs during millions of years, that's why species change. There is no direction of something like that, is the survival of the organism to fit best the "enviroment" requirements what produce a selection in a certain population. nothing else.
If you are doing this videos to attract attention over the clown you made it very well, but if you try to do this in a serious fashion you are a big fail.
guyver2095 1 year ago
i read books to find answers to questions that i have
garylevoxfan4life 1 year ago
Wow... You're really are stupid o.O The biology i learned @ school as a 11 year old answers this question for me. The stupidity and ignorance you show in this video is staggering.
dahwan3D 1 year ago
Will they slowly develop gills and be complete water creatures due to the ammount of time they spend under water, whales still need oxygen to live but in a thousand or so years if the asshole japs havnt killed them all, will they no longer need oxygen to breath air, our native bird the kiwi (just an example and not so complexe) lost the abilitie to fly due to no natrual preditors, now that we have consumed its natrual habitat its wings are slowly growing back due to wild animals.
Apwrath13dMusic 1 year ago
Evolution i like to think its a simple step to what was but i understand its a very complexe and senstive topic, to observation and history knowledge i have come to learn that it is possible for a land based mammal to have slowly formed to a creature for water, but the question im stumped buy what was first, was it water to land land to water or can it progress both ways, i see aligaters and crocs spend most of there time in water but are still land based creatures. ^
Apwrath13dMusic 1 year ago
well to answer your question requires a complex answer because its a complex change.
Basically what you are saying is, I want a simple answer to this question. And it if it isnt, then I'm going to pretend there is no answer. So to answer your question how do you know its possible? Because physical evidence (fossils) SHOW that very same gradual change.
In otherwords....it happened.....so its possible. and you can check by reading said books that show said fossils.
boorens18 1 year ago
you don't need to read "big thick books"
...actually yes you do...
ps how big and thick is the bible?
mexhapati 1 year ago
I know what lets make up a bunch of fallacies to suit this pseudo intellectual bullcrap.
If you atcually knew what you were talking about and had ANY experience in this shit you wouldn't even need to have to think about this shit it'd be learned.
These questions come up because people are fucking ignorant.
Please use suicide booth 2.0 to your right
DarkKnightBob1o1 1 year ago
?FUCKING READ A BOOK GODDAMMIT! FUCK!
DarkKnightBob1o1 1 year ago
Would you seriously contest quantum theory without understanding the math behind it?
If you really want answers, READ A BOOK, that's the only good advice applicable in your case. Why should anybody take the time to educate you on the basic principles of evolution or give you shortcut explanations if you can't be bothered to pick up a textbook and find the answer for yourself?
You are trying to run before you've even learned how to crawl.
ChiaraBow 1 year ago 28
FAAAAAAAAAAAAAIL
Menla1 1 year ago 2
faith? i can see a water dwelling mammal that has a pentadactyl limb, how is that faith?
dolphins?
that does not even make fucking sense, please educate yourself before trying to make an argument.
Menla1 1 year ago
sorry "because thats the way it is" was not his response. that is a lie are u serious?
he did not even mention the greatest show on earth? where are you going with this? what direction of survivability are u even talking about?
Menla1 1 year ago
Is this serious? Logic fail. Oh and by the way, T.B. totally owned you.
spankthereasoner 1 year ago
There is no Evolutionary 'concept' called 'Direction of survivability'
Where did you get this idea? Did you come up with it as a Graduate Student? Since it isnt really valid within the context of natural selection or any realm of evolutionary theory I doubt that is the case but I am interested in your term.
ThieleM 1 year ago
NATURAL SELECTION.
Jermbot15 1 year ago
Wow, that is some interesting sentence structure. Let me see if I can sort this out...
You want to know WHY a 'change in the direction of survivability' promotes some traits to be passed on and leads to an incremental progressive change?
Okay well, as Darwin put it, limited resources plus animal populations not growing exponentially leads to the inevitable conclusion that not all members of a species reproduce. The members more likely to survive are more likely to reproduce.
In otherwords
Jermbot15 1 year ago
I thought the same thing with birds having ancestry with dinosaurs. I just couldn't see how a reptile could gradually change to the point where it was able to fly. Then I read a book about it, and looking at the fossils, it actually made a lot of sense.
Youlube32 1 year ago
Seriously dude read a book. Ignorance is not an excuse
A5Hellcat 2 years ago 3
The scientists don't disagree on whether evolution is a fact. There's a consensus. So arguing because of your religious/political agenta ignores that evolution is a fact. We don't have faith because we accept facts :)
JamesTR4 2 years ago 3
that's why creationists will never learn evolution. Because they ask "simple questions" which are actually quite complicated, we give a simple answer...and then they get confused and start debating with their logic. When u have scarce information about something, how do u apply logic? Theoretical bullshit told him to study a book exactly when he should have, cause the transition into a whale happens in accordance to many factors. I'm not a paleontologist so I too would point to a book...
JamesTR4 2 years ago
Lol, failed education system at work.
Khronofox 2 years ago 58
@Khronofox lol it is funny and sad at the same time
rivers424 2 years ago 2
Yeah, npage is pretty lulzy.
Khronofox 2 years ago 2
LOL
Acuraintegraman1 2 years ago
mammal starts swimming the better swimmers pass on there genes they get better then some more then u got a fucking whale not complicated the duck with bigger webs on there feet swim better less likely to be ate like the mammal to whale evolution we have the fossils the homolouge structures uhhh lungs like a creator says u live in water buuuutt im gonna give u lungs isnt that really stupid and mean
patrickledford420 2 years ago
Hi.. uhm you do realise that archeologists don't just find a skeletton pick it up and guess what it is and how it could have behaved, right?
they analise the timeperiod and the climatic envoirement found along with the fossil too... That means they look for fossilised plants, the type of stone aso... when they find 3-5 fossils in sedimented sand next to fish fossils and tropical plants (big leafes) they conclude that the species must have lived in lagunes.... par exemple
BalthazzarCH 2 years ago
A lot of people misunderstand the concept of natural selection. Imagine this: You take a bunch of darts and throw them at a target. Some hit the bull's eye, some hit around it and some miss completely. That is an example for how random mutations work (the throwing of the darts) and how natural selection only allows some of them to survive (hit the target and stick to it). The reason for the mutations can be anything and nothing, but they always happen. NS means that the best traits persist.
goal2004 2 years ago
Stay off YouTube dumbass, you are so ignorant.
holio84 2 years ago 2
@ 4:15
What do you mean YOU PEOPLE?!
Wingelite 2 years ago
Scott squashed you like a bug.
jihadpizza 2 years ago 3
actually i dont really find it worth it to tell you now that i think youre ill informed. but im feeling nice today so im just gonna tell you straight out: i think youre a dumbass.
i mean really i learned that in like 9th grade dude. and it was that exact example tht my teacher used to teach that DAYS criteria. thats right, what i suspect youve been pondering over for quite some time now, i learned in 1 fucking DAY. take theoreticalbullshits advice and read a book man.
YesImNotSerious 2 years ago
I can tell you the answer to your question. But not in as many characters as im given so im going to ask you something instead IE the following: Have you even read the origin of species?
YesImNotSerious 2 years ago
"I don't understand the subject, he didn't give me and answer, and I refuse to find one, therefore, there isn't an answer."
This guy isn't a very rational person despite his claims.
Survivability isn't a direction. It's not like there is goal all animals are striving for. An animal simply adapts to its environment.
MelowMurder 2 years ago
Random mutation isn't an adaptation, though the most useful mutations increase survivability and therefore persist. You could call survivability a direction, but as you said no one strives for it actively. Progressing towards that goal is a passive process that depends on random mutations, where only the random few have what it takes to survive.
goal2004 2 years ago
Watching this makes me realize that the level of ignorance of our species is so high I doubt there will ever be a day where religion is gone.
JodyT1590 2 years ago
This guy is not educated in the accepted form of biology otherwise, he would see how absurd his arguments are. Clearly he does not know about any of the evidence for evolution. Because he does not know about any of the evidence, in his mind evolution is false. How can an honest and rational person come to this type of conclusion.
willie661 2 years ago
"as a rational person" what is your alternative to evolution?
secchioo 2 years ago
thats the point, hes an agnostic. he likes proof before jumping on a bandwagon
tra12345iscool 2 years ago
Obviously!
StopSpamming1 2 years ago
Yes, there's a God that originally designed everything. Obviously.
V1RU5ex3 2 years ago
Comment removed
V1RU5ex3 2 years ago
Show us without paper, show us without Majority, show us without (eg. Charles Darwin said so) show us today with non doctored video, show us without manifesting the results in a lab.
BTW saying we cant because it takes too long/MILLIONS OF YEARS is a copout. Scientifically you cant prove it. You can only demonstrate through we believe there for AGAIN Show us a living example of one living organism giving birth to a new species that can breed back. Variations dont count (eg. breeds)
remieres 2 years ago
You sir... are a retard! I take it you don't belive in the theory of electromagnetism either? Obviously, because you can't see it... electricity is not responsible for powering your computer... but it is infact a magical computer which powers itself? If you believe electricity is a real phenomena... prove so, by sticking to the same criteria which you say one must use to prove evolution to be a real phenomena! I bet you can't you fucking douche!
ndjm00 2 years ago
your lack of intelligence is shown by the insults you throw. so I'm not going to bother trying to teach you the error of your system due to the total dis-regard for the respect of others in your speech.
separate lesson for you is though, if you want to be taken seriously do it as an intellectual and don't use insults or profanity to claim your validity.
remieres 2 years ago
''your lack of intelligence is shown by the insults you throw''
Your lack of intelligence is shown by the general content of your comments!
''I'm not going to bother trying to teach you the error of your system''
Cop out! It is your system for evaluating evidence which is full of errors! You are a dou9che and your blatant disregard for any science which contradicts your holy book is pathetic considering it is science validated by the same criteria every science you accept is!
ndjm00 2 years ago
He does have a point though. Don't insult your adversary if you wish them to take you seriously. Don't give them a cop out. Just show a little decency and be respectful.
I agree with your point, just be more respectful when presenting it.
MelowMurder 2 years ago
''Don't insult your adversary if you wish them to take you seriously''
He threw the first insult by trying to insult every rational persons intelligence. I understand what you are saying though... but believe me... Ive tried the ''nice person with patience'' tactic for long enough with creationists and have come to the the conclusion that aggressive ridicule is the only way to deal with these blatant fucktards! Given an inch... they take a mile and you never get anywhere!
ndjm00 2 years ago
You don't have to call them good things, just refrain from bad things. For example retard, fucktard, moron, stupid, idiotic and so on. Ignorant and arrogant are much better if you feel they truly deserve an insult, but refrain from the more vulgar phrases.
By insulting them you are only causing them to be more close minded to your idea. Even if you completely destroy their argument, they still won't agree with you for the sole reason that you were/are an asshole.
MelowMurder 2 years ago
TBS totally owned you. Your lack of understanding is pathetic.
evolutionist101 2 years ago 59
I cannot believe that evolution is still unaccepted by such a large minority of people. There is such a large amount of data proving evolution and little or none to disprove evolution that it shouldn't even be a topic of discussion anymore. Creationists, use your head a little bit.
Wingelite 2 years ago 2
But you have to admit, some of their arguments are pretty creative, even if completely wrong. They may not be the brightest or most open minded bunch, but they certainly can be original.
MelowMurder 2 years ago
@evolutionist101
looking at your user name i would expect you to say that
boomtastic67 1 year ago
@boomtastic67 Of course the fact that I have knowledge of the subject...had nothing to do with my comment.
evolutionist101 1 year ago
@evolutionist101
exactly
boomtastic67 1 year ago
variety of species we witness. as for your analogy, it of course is proven that the wind CAN knock over the can.the procces of evolution is witnessed daily on bacteria. and viruses. there are now bacteria that feed exclusively on radioactive isotopes that did not exist on this planet 40 years ago(the isotopes),and the mutation that started the species was WITNESSED. is this not proof that the wind can knock over the can? if not please elaborate
Myrkul1029 2 years ago
i'm sorry i don't really understand your point. the point of the theory of evolution is to try to explain how such a variety of species came into being by trying to find an explanation using "forces" we witness around us. we know for certain that cells mutate, and that some mutations are badly suited for survival, and others better, so some species die and some live,imagining this process happening over time and the changes being cumulative you get a perfectly reasonable explanation for the
Myrkul1029 2 years ago