The fact that you had to put a disclaimer is sad, but I understand it is needed. I've seen people get flamed by thick folks that couldn't catch the most obvious of sarcastic videos on youtube.
This is called "God of the Gaps". It's rather bad theology, because someday, that singularity will be explained well enough that no god will remain a satisfactory answer, and you'll be forced to choose between rejecting your belief and accepting the science. It's happened countless times before.
It's better that you just accept that we don't know the answers yet. Beyond that, it's up to you what to believe.
I got it when he said "Everybody learned evolution in school". I mean many people DID learn it but didn't pay attention. Even I, as a Christian, know it.
And also...what I want to know is why there are Korean characters on that sign, can't read it, too obstructed.
The best reason not to celebrate "Darwin Day" is because when you do that, you treat Darwin like some sort of god. Seriously, we don't celebrate Hubble Day, or Newton Day. Who cares. That's why I won't be doing it.
The BEST reason to not celebrate Darwin day, is, well, let's face it, all that evolution stuff is hard work and requires all kinds of crazy sounding names. Why do all that hard work when I just state, as fact, that I already know everything there is to know about life because Jesus told me so. We came from Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, and that my friends, is much less work.
Nice video. IOne of the things that I have learned about evolution and natural selection is that it does not just apply to biology, but to any system which reproduces and mutates. It is ironic that one of these systems is religious belief itself. It is in the nature of belief to propagate itself through cultural replication, and those replications are not always perfect. Reading Bart Ehrman it is possible to see how the bible evolved and mutated through repeated reproduction.
@Soulfree2008 So make a video outlining your theories with references and link us to it. I'll watch it. I'm not intimately aware of the inner geometry of the pyramids, but I think you underestimate humans.
Also how do you explain that the pyramids used different construction techniques, implying an evolution of knowledge of construction?
@Soulfree2008 Really? Your proof is the crazy rantings of some religious nuts? You know nearly all cultures talk about their gods giving them stuff, and nearly all also have their gods sleeping with their women. I don't believe any of them.
Every historian I've spoken to laughs when anyone mentions the pyramids being a mystery and are quite sure the levers and ropes theory is sound. So do the engineers I've spoken to about this.
@MartianSanta You're right, because you're an atheist you shouldn't celebrate anything. Man, damn birthdays are just the theistic man trying to keep us all down. What's wrong with you?
@Soulfree2008 I hate to tell you this but I come across people who have the same arguments you do all the time. You are actually a fairly popular shaped peg.
@Soulfree2008 It's pretty awesome, but I wouldn't call it supernatural or extra terrestrial. The idea that the Egyptians couldn't have built the Pyramids has been debunked quite soundly. You can do quite a lot with levers and their mathematical skill wasn't zero.
If Aliens HAD done it, don't you think it'd be a little more complex than a big pile of stone? Surely they would have been built used some kind of polymer or AT LEAST an alloy of some sort?
For a moment I thought you were serious. Your third sentence tipped me off though, and the fourth and fifth made it clear you were joking. Well played sir.
I listened to the first reason and for a moment thought you were serious. I was about to rage comment. Glad I watched the whole video. I would have felt pretty stupid.
@Soulfree2008 There was no sudden biological leap in our species at all. The only adversary of mine is ignorance. The truth matters to me so I'm not about to let you spout bullshit unchallenged. I actually care about people, it's important to me they aren't fed misinformation. I formally apologize to you for believing such rubbish.
@Soulfree2008 or they built a whole bunch that didn't work out so well, they collapsed, or they carved them in place to make them match.
This stuff REALLY isn't that incredible. With enough people and leverage you can move just about anything. With nothing to do at night all people look at the stars and think the mean something.
In the end though you're still resorting to arguments from ignorance, you are assuming it's aliens/gods because you don't know how it was done.
@Soulfree2008 People have studied how to build these structures and it's remarkable simple, it's mostly digging holes and cutting down trees for leverage. Cutting the stone is mostly just patience. The lining up with the moon or sun isn't done with calculation but with direct measurement. You stand in the same place and mark the highest point on a tree until it doesn't go any higher, then build your stone that high... done easy...
@Soulfree2008 Considering humans are extremely similar genetically (and thus intelligence) all cultures with sufficient population and resources could have built megaliths, considering they only had stone to work with that explains the similar materials. Considering only stable structures (of which there are very few with stone) would survive to the present that explains the similar structure (like pyramids). Planning could be over generations since the stone wasn't going anywere.
@Soulfree2008 that''s your evidence? Assumptions about the causes of megalithic structures and arguments from ignorance? Note that's not an insult it's a type of logical fallacy which is "because I don't know 'X," "Y" must be true." Do you see the fallacy? Just because you (and I emphasize the YOU) don't know the megalithic structures were built means aliens/gods are real and they helped build them?!?
Megalithic structures aren't that mysterious or complex.
@Soulfree2008 Ohh my type, what type exactly is that? I've done nothing but address your glaring errors. If there was divine intervention creating humans whether by aliens or otherwise we would see a sudden leap forward in our species, that didn't happen. If there was divine intervention it was at the point of the very first life not billions of years later. You talked about the missing link like the last time you sat in a classroom was 30 years ago, I corrected you again. Go cry about it.
@Soulfree2008 The idea of a missing link is based on believing that mankind's evolution went in a straight line which is certainly did not. I realize you've see the cartoon with the apes on the left and all the transitions in the middle ending with man on the right side. Yeah.... it didn't happen that way, not even close.
@Soulfree2008 Yes the "missing link" was originally thought to be a single animal that bridged the gap between all of the apes and humans. That is silly and is wrong, we've found lots of transitions between ancient apes (which are also ancestors of modern apes) and us, and we've found lots of ancient apes which have no modern descendants.
@Soulfree2008 And the "missing link" is a silly notion that people from the 19th century expected to find. In fact we've found LOTs of hominids, so many that it's difficult to know which ones are our ancestors and simply share an ancestor with us.
google, talkorigins, they have lots of good evolution resources.
@Soulfree2008 As an example I could say I know my friend drove to work today (again not with absolute certainty) because I know where he lives and I saw his car in the parking lot when I parked next to it. However I don't know if he stopped for a latte on the way, does my lack of knowledge of his coffee habits mean I don't know how he got to work today? Of course not. I don't even know which freeway he took, but I still know he drove his car from his house to work. Extrapolate to evolution
@Soulfree2008 First off what do you mean by "know" are you using it in the 100% absolute certainty way (which is patently useless IMO) or in the standard we know because we have plenty of evidence to convince us. If the former then we don't "know" anything which is why it's useless, if the latter then we ABSOLUTELY do know man's origin. We don't know every step but we know the path that was taken. Do you understand evolution? What do you think it says about man's origin?
@Soulfree2008 We know that man's origin is accurately described by evolution. The claim that some god was/is necessary is wholly unfounded. Just because it "might" be true is no reason to think it is true or deserves any special treatment. We may have been created by drunk aliens during a botched science experiment but we shouldn't assume we were or give special treatment to those who think that is true.
@trippinlikegod Ignore this guy, look at his channel, this guy is the attention kind of person, problem is he's spreading disinformation and prejudicing to other weak minds who might adopt it.
@carlosewm I did look at his channel and he's probably the worst vocalist I've ever heard. If he really wants to get attention he should go on American Idol, he could be the next William Hung. SHE BANGS SHE BANGS!
Great video! All this time I had been blindly following the teachings of Darwin like a sheep in his flock. You made me realize what a total hack he actually was!
It really does get tiresome when religion is satisified to put nothing back into scientific knowledge and then knock it at every turn. If you believe so much in you gods can you please stop coming to our hospitals when you get sick. We really need the land you've taken for hospitals and schools and shelters for the homeless. You have god to give you those things and we don't. Sorry c0nc0rdance for not matching your wonderfully acerbic wit , my agreement with you is plain enough to see :)
Celebrations or holidays of any kind are a waist of time. Just a momentary distraction from the fact that we are going to die like any other animal on this planet.
On a serious note, what do you mean when you say that Darwin's research made much medical research possible? You touched on it in this video, but is there a resource you would recommend where I could read more about it?
I made a series of videos called "The Light of Evolution: What Would Be Lost". A simple search on PubMed (google it) for "evolution" or "evolution medicine" will show you what I mean. The "modern evolutionary synthesis", presented in 1937 by Dobzhansky, is the founding principle of modern genetics in populations.
I'd recommend you read up on "selective sweeps" "linkage disequilibrium" "genetic association study" and "evo-devo" for some starting points.
@C0nc0rdance Darwinism offers many useful insights, but it's not very important in biomedical research. Medicine doesn't rest on Darwin's theory any more than it rests on any particular astrophysical theory of the creation of the chemical elements. When I was in molecular biology, I saw Origin of Species on the desk of exactly one scientist. I asked him how he used it in his research, and he said "I don't, it's just interesting."
You may not know that I'm a medical researcher myself, so I'm pretty sure on this topic. For support, let's pick the papers + articles from the latest "Nature", the highest impact journal:
"The evolutionary context of the first hominins"
"An early Ediacaran assemblage of macroscopic and morphologically differentiated eukaryotes"
"Evolutionary biology: When life got big"
"Consequences of climate change on the tree of life in Europe"
If you asked me if I use "Origin of Species" in my research; I don't. This is similar to asking if a physicist used the "Principia" in their research. Principles in a field are built on previous work. Origin of Species is simply a very important ancestor to modern biology. It has historical impact, and the ideas set events in motion that led to the Human Genome, cancer drugs, phylogenetics, and cures for genetic diseases.
@C0nc0rdance Glad to hear we're members of the same union. I did my undergrad work in evolutionary biology and my PhD in molecular biology, so we can talk the same language. What medical use, or line of medical research, do you see resulting from any of those papers in Nature?
@gupsphoo Uh, gupsphoo, I have degrees in evolutionary biology and molecular biology. I'm just a little more sophisticated in these things than the Wikipedia crowd, but I took a look. I didn't see any specific cures mentioned. I'm a biologist, I think evolutionary theory is very important for understanding why things are the way they are, but we really would have had biochemistry and cell biology and population genetics and molecular genetics without the concept of natural selection.
@C0nc0rdance At what point do we dismiss these people out of hand as opposed to giving topical responses? This always torments me. His statements show that he is not equipped to have the conversation, but to let his statements go uncountered seems wrong as well. I guess my question is how do we find that balance?
@C0nc0rdance I have a piece of paper from the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences at Harvard that says you're wrong. I'm sorry that you don't understand how gene clusters have been identified, but I can assure you, it's from biochemistry almost exclusively done with blood samples. You're obviously unable to untangle the strands in the intellectual development of biomedical research. That's a shame, because you post some awesome videos.
"Gene family clusters" refers to a family of genes clustered in one region of a chromosome. They were identified initially by quantitative trait loci, and then in the HGP Era, by sequencing data. Blood samples are not involved since the early work was done on plants.
An example is the odorant receptor in mice (muOR). There are 1000 genes on Chr 9, all derived from one ancestor that have since diverged. Each has a function defining the selective pressures at the time of parting.
@C0nc0rdance I know what gene clusters are. I didn't know that they were first found in plants, so I will bow to your superior knowledge there. What specific aspect of natural selection theory did the discoverers use to identify the phenomenon or make it useful for medical research?
I'm glad you asked. Gene clusters are the result of non-reciprocal cross-overs leading to copy number expansions. The genes have certain conserved domains, but the non-conserved domains reflect selection pressure at the time of divergence. This provided the all-important context needed for understanding genetics of immunology. The TNFR superfamily, for example, has 50+ members, but functions could only be identified in light of historical evolution.
My own current research includes XMRV and prostate cancer, which is still very controversial. It's a mouse endogenous retrovirus that pops up in 30% of prostate cancers. The modern synthesis explains how a MERV could show up in human prostate, and the comparison of genetic markers allowing for drift and selection lets us put a very specific point on where the genes are. This may produce a gene therapy against prostate cancer in the next decade.
@C0nc0rdance Physicists discuss Newton's ideas all of the time; try looking up "force." You're research sounds fascinating, but your argument here is always the same. For you, everything in genetics would be stuck at the level of Morgan's work had Dobzhanski (well, really, Fisher) not forged the synthesis, so you see all of genetics as evolutionary biology. Anyway, I'll let you have the last word, since we're talking in circles.
And I did enjoy this video a lot. You post great stuf.
Queries of these Medline database for these terms:
Evolution: 283739 hits
evolution AND disease: 35200 hits
evolution AND medicine: 27640 hits
evolution AND cancer: 19242 hits
Now I could dismiss these and say: "The modern evolutionary synthesis (MES) plays a very minor role in modern research" but would that be honest? Certainly, you can do research without specific reference to Darwin or evolution, but you'd still rely on sources that do. Thus, the MES is a foundational work.
@C0nc0rdance Since Medline indexes evolution, it's no surprise evolution gets a lot of hits.
disease and not evolution 2,520,728
medicine and not evolution 2,772,332
cancer and not evolution 2,454,880
Of course, a lot of those articles discuss things such as "The particularity of the case is represented by the perirenal and intrarenal evolution of fibrosis with left renal artery stenosis with moderate impairment of renal function reversible under treatment with Tamoxifen."
Yes, and a search through the physics literature will not find many direct references to Newtonian physics. A search through the chemistry literature will not find many references to atomic theory. These are foundational works.
Yes, some surgery or physiology research doesn't need evolution. However, if you take a look at papers cited in those papers, you'll find evolution in the keywords.
@C0nc0rdance I don't for a second think that you believe that who my youtube subscribers are is a reflection of who I am or what I believe. You are right, I am a troll, but I'm not trolling here. I'm trying to keep our side of the creation/evolution debate honest. Doesn't it make you cringe when someone defending evolution says that radiocarbon dating proves the Earth is billions of years old? That kind of error just gives ammunition to the enemy. I see the same kind of error here.
@acr08807 You can claim whatever you want (PhD or whatever), but the fact is that you nothing more than an anonymous commenter on YouTube. You're no more of an expert than anyone here.
Dumped drugs lead to resistant microbes? Gene family clusters in chromosomal rearrangement? Origin of ancestral hominin lineage markers? Evolution of development, including genes directly controlling velocardiofacial HOX genes? Understanding environmental selective pressures on important disease vectors?
Would you say that germ theory of disease or cell theory are used in medical research? What about atomic theory? Electromagnetic theory?
@C0nc0rdance Resistant microbes--that's biochemistry, not natural selection. Gene family clusters are detected with blood samples, not evolutionary theory. What disease have we cured using ancestral hominin lineage markers? Developmental biology does not require evolutionary theory. Molecular genetics is biochemistry, not natural selection. You've got me on disease vectors, natural selection theory is useful there.
If you don't know what a gene family cluster is, you don't have a PhD in molecular biology. No, they don't come from blood samples, and yes, they are understood in light of evolution. You may have taken biology as a freshman (if you went to college), but you're not a molecular biologist, or you would have taken entire classes on the topic. Also, you would know about the evolutionary developmental biology, or evo-devo.
I note that ShockofGod is subscribed to you. Troll.
@C0nc0rdance The germ theory of disease is used in medical research. Look at Pasteur's original papers and you'll see he didn't discuss evolution. Cell theory is at the core of medical research; it predates Darwin by two centuries. A lot of physics is used in medical research, including atomic theory and electromagnetic theory. Last time I checked, Bohr and Maxwell didn't discuss natural selection, either.
@ExploringReal Even if this wasn't a sarcastic video(which it clearly is) , he still wouldn't be saying ANYTHING about whether or not you should celebrate it yourself. Are you that bothered by people who don't agree with you?
an analogy for this video:Scientist walks up to a creationist and kicks him in the nuts. the creationist says "WHY!!!" to wich the scientist responds "you know why!!"
lol i came here because thunderf00t favorited this video but funny thing is that i dreamed that i was meeting with darwin and that he gave me his autograph and for some reason i was incredibly happy
@MikaelDryden Yeah, don't celebrate Christmas; not celebrating it that makes you feel like you're a person since you don't need a lie to give presents to the people that you love, give money to the people who need it, or spread the joy that human culture brings to so many.
This video is lame, even by atheist standards. Who the fuck celebrates dead people? Darwin Day? Are you serious? lol Atheists need a fuckin life big time. Oh yeah, gotta combat religion, such a big deal, going to war! lol Losers.
Says the guy who claims to be suffering from narcissistic schizophrenia and has bloody and violent dreams.
"when I dream I dream about blood and guts and horrible things... such as... such as surgery and being crippled and dying and abattoirs. I watch a lot of horror films, but they don't scare me, it's what I dream about that scares me."
I think you really should see a psychiatrist about this stuff and stop waisting your time commenting about atheism.
@karadan100 Dude, atheists believe in nothing, that everything is meaningless and worthless. We're just matter in motion, so don't get offended if a call you less than dogshit because that's your worldview.
@Weedleweeb Then you do not understand the meaning of atheism. That isn't my problem, it is yours.
Anyway, it seems you're the one with a fucked up worldview, seeing as you keep having dreams about blood and dismemberment. I do not have that issue because i'm comfortable with what i believe in. Your inner turmoil is leading to deep-rooted psychological issues, obviously.
@Weedleweeb Who told you that? I mean, you must have heard it, I refuse to believe you took that conclusion yourself.
Atheists believe there is no God, that's all, now, some fool must have told you some nice, deep, poisonous, prejudiced bullshit, and you actually believed it, incredible, congrats for that.
@Weedleweeb Let me give you an overview of who atheists actually, scientifically are:
They are a a vast minority in the western population, have statistically higher grades, statistically commit much less crimes, and statistically are victims of prejudiced, discriminating people.
@Weedleweeb I'm meaningless crap? Why can you accept basic English? I assume you meant "Your crap" but that's between you and your imaginary friend. How do you know what religion I am or am not? By the way your voice is terrible and you couldn't sing your way out of a paper bag.
@trippinlikegod Never said I was a theist. I'm just anti-atheist. You think somehow atheism has value when you consider everything about life to be meaningless. Which is it, brother? Value or no value.
@Weedleweeb Nihilism is the philosophy that nothing has any value, not atheism. Unless you are implying that a deity needs to exist in order for things to have value. But then here you are claiming you aren't a theist. So which is it, brother? Are you just ignorant, or a liar?
You forget his discoveries in plant biology ;)
unassumption 3 months ago
Heh...beaut, sarcasm ftw! XD <3
mdlittle5466 5 months ago
What about having a 'Mendel Day'? His work was equally important.
LoquaciousApe 5 months ago
I believe in both God and evolution
gogolplex74 6 months ago
I could hug your sarcasm. Though besides being and odd and completely metaphysical notion, you most would object to my hugging of your mind.
FattyMcFox 6 months ago
The fact that you had to put a disclaimer is sad, but I understand it is needed. I've seen people get flamed by thick folks that couldn't catch the most obvious of sarcastic videos on youtube.
brendanmcwilliams 7 months ago
@bullfrog11758
This is called "God of the Gaps". It's rather bad theology, because someday, that singularity will be explained well enough that no god will remain a satisfactory answer, and you'll be forced to choose between rejecting your belief and accepting the science. It's happened countless times before.
It's better that you just accept that we don't know the answers yet. Beyond that, it's up to you what to believe.
C0nc0rdance 8 months ago 5
deadpan humour is clearly above many *COUGH* creationalists* peoples heads
7Ghos 10 months ago
eh not so funny
hyperhypo 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Charles Darwin, the father of modern biology and the man who killed god.
darwinkilledgod dot blogspot dot com
bobx2x2 10 months ago
I celebrate pi day! 3.14
bunchofdaisies 11 months ago
I love how the argument is presented in this clip. :)
MsSquarebearz 11 months ago
If you can't tell it is sarcasm just from reading the title, then . . .
mdiem 11 months ago
A great example of sarcasm. If people didn't get that by the time "mother's day" came up, then fail.
PetiteViolist 11 months ago
sarcasm over load.
Bicthslave 1 year ago
One thing you may want to look at is the history of Mother's day. :) It actually was an offshoot of Mothering Day, which was a religious holiday.
However, I'm guessing secretary's day did not have a religious start. :)
gamotter 1 year ago
I knew it was sarcasm. :)
rangergxi 1 year ago
1:05
On the upper left, what is that? It's most likely from Korea.
DarkZerkerX 1 year ago
@DarkZerkerX
China. You can tell by the flag.
Unrelated, but I got it when he said St. Valentine was a great scientist.
every116 11 months ago
@every116
I got it when he said "Everybody learned evolution in school". I mean many people DID learn it but didn't pay attention. Even I, as a Christian, know it.
And also...what I want to know is why there are Korean characters on that sign, can't read it, too obstructed.
DarkZerkerX 11 months ago
I understood it was sarcasm by the time he said mothers day. lol I shud read the descriptions more often.
NessVlogMusic 1 year ago
The best reason not to celebrate "Darwin Day" is because when you do that, you treat Darwin like some sort of god. Seriously, we don't celebrate Hubble Day, or Newton Day. Who cares. That's why I won't be doing it.
CosmicQuandary 1 year ago 2
I'm crushing so hard on you, C0nc0rdance, Cerebrally, I mean.
teqwc 1 year ago
What an idiot.
bloodanddirt 1 year ago
The BEST reason to not celebrate Darwin day, is, well, let's face it, all that evolution stuff is hard work and requires all kinds of crazy sounding names. Why do all that hard work when I just state, as fact, that I already know everything there is to know about life because Jesus told me so. We came from Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, and that my friends, is much less work.
christo930 1 year ago
@christo930 I agree, ignorance is bliss.
mar504 1 year ago
@mar504 And a LOT less work!
christo930 1 year ago
Whos darwin?
iXecFTW 1 year ago
i thought this was real, what a relief.
momosteur 1 year ago
That chart made me ashamed of my country.
ivanlagrossemoule 1 year ago
Nice video. IOne of the things that I have learned about evolution and natural selection is that it does not just apply to biology, but to any system which reproduces and mutates. It is ironic that one of these systems is religious belief itself. It is in the nature of belief to propagate itself through cultural replication, and those replications are not always perfect. Reading Bart Ehrman it is possible to see how the bible evolved and mutated through repeated reproduction.
snoberts 1 year ago
You would absolutely love EdwardCurrent.
OnionTrollsAlliance 1 year ago
Lets celebrate AmunRa Day!!
wowamonn 1 year ago
@wowamonn No, no... Min Day. Even the atheists wouldn't be able to ignore his hot beef injection.
jeveuxlesoleil 1 year ago
Fuck yeah. Darwin deserves his day, if it wasn't so caught up in religious bullshit (obviously) it wouldn't even be an issue.
slugger1983 1 year ago
We have one Edward Current already....we don't need another :P
Just kidding lol
mickeypopa 1 year ago
You a very funny man :D
intermender 1 year ago
Comment removed
EarlFaulk 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 So make a video outlining your theories with references and link us to it. I'll watch it. I'm not intimately aware of the inner geometry of the pyramids, but I think you underestimate humans.
Also how do you explain that the pyramids used different construction techniques, implying an evolution of knowledge of construction?
shraka 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 Really? Your proof is the crazy rantings of some religious nuts? You know nearly all cultures talk about their gods giving them stuff, and nearly all also have their gods sleeping with their women. I don't believe any of them.
Every historian I've spoken to laughs when anyone mentions the pyramids being a mystery and are quite sure the levers and ropes theory is sound. So do the engineers I've spoken to about this.
shraka 1 year ago
I'm an atheist
i don't celebrate any day
i used to celebrate the 1th of may
but i don't celebrate it any more
celebrations and holidays are theists tools
atheism or seance are not religions
there is no need to celebrate Darwin's day
or what ever
MartianSanta 1 year ago
@MartianSanta sorry misspell
i wrote seance meant science
MartianSanta 1 year ago
@MartianSanta You're right, because you're an atheist you shouldn't celebrate anything. Man, damn birthdays are just the theistic man trying to keep us all down. What's wrong with you?
whatthellman 1 year ago
@whatthellman
why is it important i was born in one day or another?
MartianSanta 1 year ago
@MartianSanta You know who else doesn't celebrate any holidays? Jahovas Witnesses.
OutlawGrrl 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 I hate to tell you this but I come across people who have the same arguments you do all the time. You are actually a fairly popular shaped peg.
shraka 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 It's pretty awesome, but I wouldn't call it supernatural or extra terrestrial. The idea that the Egyptians couldn't have built the Pyramids has been debunked quite soundly. You can do quite a lot with levers and their mathematical skill wasn't zero.
If Aliens HAD done it, don't you think it'd be a little more complex than a big pile of stone? Surely they would have been built used some kind of polymer or AT LEAST an alloy of some sort?
shraka 1 year ago
For a moment I thought you were serious. Your third sentence tipped me off though, and the fourth and fifth made it clear you were joking. Well played sir.
shraka 1 year ago
Reason 6 is boggling my mind a bit. It's an amusing coincidence but I have no clue what you're trying to say.
klutterkicker 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 Well gee at least you're open minded and making decisions logically... LOL (sarcasm alert)
dlandon2000 1 year ago
Excellent shit!
StopSpamming1 1 year ago
I listened to the first reason and for a moment thought you were serious. I was about to rage comment. Glad I watched the whole video. I would have felt pretty stupid.
Alphacranberries 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 There was no sudden biological leap in our species at all. The only adversary of mine is ignorance. The truth matters to me so I'm not about to let you spout bullshit unchallenged. I actually care about people, it's important to me they aren't fed misinformation. I formally apologize to you for believing such rubbish.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 Lining stuff up is just building in place, same way you line up the sun or moon. There is nothing magical about it.
Do you have any actual evidence or just speculation and logical fallacies?
dlandon2000 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 or they built a whole bunch that didn't work out so well, they collapsed, or they carved them in place to make them match.
This stuff REALLY isn't that incredible. With enough people and leverage you can move just about anything. With nothing to do at night all people look at the stars and think the mean something.
In the end though you're still resorting to arguments from ignorance, you are assuming it's aliens/gods because you don't know how it was done.
dlandon2000 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 People have studied how to build these structures and it's remarkable simple, it's mostly digging holes and cutting down trees for leverage. Cutting the stone is mostly just patience. The lining up with the moon or sun isn't done with calculation but with direct measurement. You stand in the same place and mark the highest point on a tree until it doesn't go any higher, then build your stone that high... done easy...
What's your next evidence for aliens or gods?
dlandon2000 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 Considering humans are extremely similar genetically (and thus intelligence) all cultures with sufficient population and resources could have built megaliths, considering they only had stone to work with that explains the similar materials. Considering only stable structures (of which there are very few with stone) would survive to the present that explains the similar structure (like pyramids). Planning could be over generations since the stone wasn't going anywere.
dlandon2000 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 that''s your evidence? Assumptions about the causes of megalithic structures and arguments from ignorance? Note that's not an insult it's a type of logical fallacy which is "because I don't know 'X," "Y" must be true." Do you see the fallacy? Just because you (and I emphasize the YOU) don't know the megalithic structures were built means aliens/gods are real and they helped build them?!?
Megalithic structures aren't that mysterious or complex.
dlandon2000 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 Ohh my type, what type exactly is that? I've done nothing but address your glaring errors. If there was divine intervention creating humans whether by aliens or otherwise we would see a sudden leap forward in our species, that didn't happen. If there was divine intervention it was at the point of the very first life not billions of years later. You talked about the missing link like the last time you sat in a classroom was 30 years ago, I corrected you again. Go cry about it.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 In order to skip over your points you would have needed to actually make one.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 The idea of a missing link is based on believing that mankind's evolution went in a straight line which is certainly did not. I realize you've see the cartoon with the apes on the left and all the transitions in the middle ending with man on the right side. Yeah.... it didn't happen that way, not even close.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 If there was divine intervention it happened looooooong before man arrived.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 Yes the "missing link" was originally thought to be a single animal that bridged the gap between all of the apes and humans. That is silly and is wrong, we've found lots of transitions between ancient apes (which are also ancestors of modern apes) and us, and we've found lots of ancient apes which have no modern descendants.
Off world entities? Like aliens? or gods?
What evidence do you think there is for that?
dlandon2000 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 And the "missing link" is a silly notion that people from the 19th century expected to find. In fact we've found LOTs of hominids, so many that it's difficult to know which ones are our ancestors and simply share an ancestor with us.
google, talkorigins, they have lots of good evolution resources.
dlandon2000 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 As an example I could say I know my friend drove to work today (again not with absolute certainty) because I know where he lives and I saw his car in the parking lot when I parked next to it. However I don't know if he stopped for a latte on the way, does my lack of knowledge of his coffee habits mean I don't know how he got to work today? Of course not. I don't even know which freeway he took, but I still know he drove his car from his house to work. Extrapolate to evolution
dlandon2000 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 First off what do you mean by "know" are you using it in the 100% absolute certainty way (which is patently useless IMO) or in the standard we know because we have plenty of evidence to convince us. If the former then we don't "know" anything which is why it's useless, if the latter then we ABSOLUTELY do know man's origin. We don't know every step but we know the path that was taken. Do you understand evolution? What do you think it says about man's origin?
dlandon2000 1 year ago
@Soulfree2008 We know that man's origin is accurately described by evolution. The claim that some god was/is necessary is wholly unfounded. Just because it "might" be true is no reason to think it is true or deserves any special treatment. We may have been created by drunk aliens during a botched science experiment but we shouldn't assume we were or give special treatment to those who think that is true.
dlandon2000 1 year ago
wow, i had no idea there were still people in denmark who think evolution is false (5%+).
Damn, sometimes i feel like i live in the dark ages.
selvmordspilot 1 year ago
I want a day for Leonardo DaVinci!
DarkShadowAlec 1 year ago
Comment removed
carlosewm 1 year ago
Fucking Darwin! :@
Lithiumz 1 year ago
Sir, put down the High Yield Sarcasm Device and back away slowly with your hands up.
LordSlag 1 year ago
who the fuck celebrates Darwin Day anyway? CELEBRATES? what the fuck do you do on Darwin day?
WKaliberr 1 year ago
@WKaliberr We dissect monkeys and meditate on the little piece of Galapagos rock we keep on a chain around our necks. Duh!
Atheistbatman 1 year ago
@weedleweeb life is meaningless to an atheist?
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@trippinlikegod Ignore this guy, look at his channel, this guy is the attention kind of person, problem is he's spreading disinformation and prejudicing to other weak minds who might adopt it.
carlosewm 1 year ago
@carlosewm I did look at his channel and he's probably the worst vocalist I've ever heard. If he really wants to get attention he should go on American Idol, he could be the next William Hung. SHE BANGS SHE BANGS!
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@ColourMK7 NO excuse fr laziness, dead you say? your just not making the effort.
elgostine 1 year ago
@elgostine Being dead didn't stop Jesus from doing stuff! Though not science... if he had perhaps I'd be a Christian rather than an Atheist.
shraka 1 year ago
Atheists are rabid dogs.
Weedleweeb 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb At least we still have blood pumping through our veins.
karadan100 1 year ago
Great video! All this time I had been blindly following the teachings of Darwin like a sheep in his flock. You made me realize what a total hack he actually was!
SirReptitious 1 year ago
I heard he tried to kill the bubble boy!
RedLeprachaun 1 year ago
Lol no reason 5. I actually had to backtrack to see that.
AQGOAT24 1 year ago
I didn't know there was a Darwin day.
Pinage 1 year ago
I love the "dripping sarcasm."
Hereticbooks 1 year ago
Damn! I didn't watch this video until today! I'll make sure to celebrate darwin day next year lol
doug2bitemore 1 year ago
It really does get tiresome when religion is satisified to put nothing back into scientific knowledge and then knock it at every turn. If you believe so much in you gods can you please stop coming to our hospitals when you get sick. We really need the land you've taken for hospitals and schools and shelters for the homeless. You have god to give you those things and we don't. Sorry c0nc0rdance for not matching your wonderfully acerbic wit , my agreement with you is plain enough to see :)
Davidloch1 1 year ago
Wow, I didn't catch the sarcasm until about half way through. lol
Nerd042 1 year ago
Sometimes I am exceedingly proud of being Danish.
Excellent video C0nc0rdance, let us replace some of those holidays with science-days commemorating REAL achievements.
FoxvoxDK 1 year ago
Celebrations or holidays of any kind are a waist of time. Just a momentary distraction from the fact that we are going to die like any other animal on this planet.
truenotion 1 year ago
@truenotion I'm glad I'm not a nihilist.
shraka 1 year ago
Touche. I wish there was a Gregor Mendel day too though. Poor guy....
kotetsu131 1 year ago
HARDY HAR ... HAR ... and ... HAR
TheFallibleFiend 1 year ago
Wow, people need to read the video description...
On a serious note, what do you mean when you say that Darwin's research made much medical research possible? You touched on it in this video, but is there a resource you would recommend where I could read more about it?
DanThePropMan 1 year ago 2
@DanThePropMan
I suppose he means that medical research COUNTS on evolutionary processes in order to proceed with such things as immunisations (as a minor example).
Hereticbooks 1 year ago
@DanThePropMan
I made a series of videos called "The Light of Evolution: What Would Be Lost". A simple search on PubMed (google it) for "evolution" or "evolution medicine" will show you what I mean. The "modern evolutionary synthesis", presented in 1937 by Dobzhansky, is the founding principle of modern genetics in populations.
I'd recommend you read up on "selective sweeps" "linkage disequilibrium" "genetic association study" and "evo-devo" for some starting points.
C0nc0rdance 1 year ago 6
@C0nc0rdance Thanks!
DanThePropMan 1 year ago
@C0nc0rdance Darwinism offers many useful insights, but it's not very important in biomedical research. Medicine doesn't rest on Darwin's theory any more than it rests on any particular astrophysical theory of the creation of the chemical elements. When I was in molecular biology, I saw Origin of Species on the desk of exactly one scientist. I asked him how he used it in his research, and he said "I don't, it's just interesting."
acr08807 1 year ago
@acr08807
You may not know that I'm a medical researcher myself, so I'm pretty sure on this topic. For support, let's pick the papers + articles from the latest "Nature", the highest impact journal:
"The evolutionary context of the first hominins"
"An early Ediacaran assemblage of macroscopic and morphologically differentiated eukaryotes"
"Evolutionary biology: When life got big"
"Consequences of climate change on the tree of life in Europe"
"Dumped drugs lead to resistant microbes"
C0nc0rdance 1 year ago
If you asked me if I use "Origin of Species" in my research; I don't. This is similar to asking if a physicist used the "Principia" in their research. Principles in a field are built on previous work. Origin of Species is simply a very important ancestor to modern biology. It has historical impact, and the ideas set events in motion that led to the Human Genome, cancer drugs, phylogenetics, and cures for genetic diseases.
C0nc0rdance 1 year ago 23
@C0nc0rdance Glad to hear we're members of the same union. I did my undergrad work in evolutionary biology and my PhD in molecular biology, so we can talk the same language. What medical use, or line of medical research, do you see resulting from any of those papers in Nature?
acr08807 1 year ago
@acr08807 Look up "Evolutionary medicine" in Wikipedia.
gupsphoo 1 year ago
@gupsphoo Uh, gupsphoo, I have degrees in evolutionary biology and molecular biology. I'm just a little more sophisticated in these things than the Wikipedia crowd, but I took a look. I didn't see any specific cures mentioned. I'm a biologist, I think evolutionary theory is very important for understanding why things are the way they are, but we really would have had biochemistry and cell biology and population genetics and molecular genetics without the concept of natural selection.
acr08807 1 year ago
@acr08807
You have a degree in bupkis, my uneducated friend. You've made that abundantly clear.
C0nc0rdance 1 year ago
@C0nc0rdance At what point do we dismiss these people out of hand as opposed to giving topical responses? This always torments me. His statements show that he is not equipped to have the conversation, but to let his statements go uncountered seems wrong as well. I guess my question is how do we find that balance?
trueleroix 1 year ago
@C0nc0rdance I have a piece of paper from the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences at Harvard that says you're wrong. I'm sorry that you don't understand how gene clusters have been identified, but I can assure you, it's from biochemistry almost exclusively done with blood samples. You're obviously unable to untangle the strands in the intellectual development of biomedical research. That's a shame, because you post some awesome videos.
acr08807 1 year ago
@acr08807
"Gene family clusters" refers to a family of genes clustered in one region of a chromosome. They were identified initially by quantitative trait loci, and then in the HGP Era, by sequencing data. Blood samples are not involved since the early work was done on plants.
An example is the odorant receptor in mice (muOR). There are 1000 genes on Chr 9, all derived from one ancestor that have since diverged. Each has a function defining the selective pressures at the time of parting.
C0nc0rdance 1 year ago
@C0nc0rdance I know what gene clusters are. I didn't know that they were first found in plants, so I will bow to your superior knowledge there. What specific aspect of natural selection theory did the discoverers use to identify the phenomenon or make it useful for medical research?
acr08807 1 year ago
@acr08807 Sorry, a couple of posts ago I meant to say, "Since Medline indexes biology literature..."
acr08807 1 year ago
@acr08807
I'm glad you asked. Gene clusters are the result of non-reciprocal cross-overs leading to copy number expansions. The genes have certain conserved domains, but the non-conserved domains reflect selection pressure at the time of divergence. This provided the all-important context needed for understanding genetics of immunology. The TNFR superfamily, for example, has 50+ members, but functions could only be identified in light of historical evolution.
C0nc0rdance 1 year ago
@acr08807
My own current research includes XMRV and prostate cancer, which is still very controversial. It's a mouse endogenous retrovirus that pops up in 30% of prostate cancers. The modern synthesis explains how a MERV could show up in human prostate, and the comparison of genetic markers allowing for drift and selection lets us put a very specific point on where the genes are. This may produce a gene therapy against prostate cancer in the next decade.
C0nc0rdance 1 year ago
@C0nc0rdance Physicists discuss Newton's ideas all of the time; try looking up "force." You're research sounds fascinating, but your argument here is always the same. For you, everything in genetics would be stuck at the level of Morgan's work had Dobzhanski (well, really, Fisher) not forged the synthesis, so you see all of genetics as evolutionary biology. Anyway, I'll let you have the last word, since we're talking in circles.
And I did enjoy this video a lot. You post great stuf.
acr08807 1 year ago
@acr08807
Queries of these Medline database for these terms:
Evolution: 283739 hits
evolution AND disease: 35200 hits
evolution AND medicine: 27640 hits
evolution AND cancer: 19242 hits
Now I could dismiss these and say: "The modern evolutionary synthesis (MES) plays a very minor role in modern research" but would that be honest? Certainly, you can do research without specific reference to Darwin or evolution, but you'd still rely on sources that do. Thus, the MES is a foundational work.
C0nc0rdance 1 year ago
@C0nc0rdance Since Medline indexes evolution, it's no surprise evolution gets a lot of hits.
disease and not evolution 2,520,728
medicine and not evolution 2,772,332
cancer and not evolution 2,454,880
Of course, a lot of those articles discuss things such as "The particularity of the case is represented by the perirenal and intrarenal evolution of fibrosis with left renal artery stenosis with moderate impairment of renal function reversible under treatment with Tamoxifen."
acr08807 1 year ago
@acr08807
Yes, and a search through the physics literature will not find many direct references to Newtonian physics. A search through the chemistry literature will not find many references to atomic theory. These are foundational works.
Yes, some surgery or physiology research doesn't need evolution. However, if you take a look at papers cited in those papers, you'll find evolution in the keywords.
C0nc0rdance 1 year ago
@C0nc0rdance Let's try natural selection:
disease and natural selection 7,971
medicine and natural selection 6,061
cancer and natural selection 5,603
The synthesis did a lot more for evolutionary biology than it did for genetics, and it's the genetics that is most important in biomedical research.
acr08807 1 year ago
@C0nc0rdance I don't for a second think that you believe that who my youtube subscribers are is a reflection of who I am or what I believe. You are right, I am a troll, but I'm not trolling here. I'm trying to keep our side of the creation/evolution debate honest. Doesn't it make you cringe when someone defending evolution says that radiocarbon dating proves the Earth is billions of years old? That kind of error just gives ammunition to the enemy. I see the same kind of error here.
acr08807 1 year ago
@acr08807 You can claim whatever you want (PhD or whatever), but the fact is that you nothing more than an anonymous commenter on YouTube. You're no more of an expert than anyone here.
gupsphoo 1 year ago 21
@gupsphoo I'll certainly never be able to operate on your intellectual level, gupsphoo.
acr08807 1 year ago
@acr08807
I have to ask: "Are you are serious?"
Dumped drugs lead to resistant microbes? Gene family clusters in chromosomal rearrangement? Origin of ancestral hominin lineage markers? Evolution of development, including genes directly controlling velocardiofacial HOX genes? Understanding environmental selective pressures on important disease vectors?
Would you say that germ theory of disease or cell theory are used in medical research? What about atomic theory? Electromagnetic theory?
C0nc0rdance 1 year ago
@C0nc0rdance Resistant microbes--that's biochemistry, not natural selection. Gene family clusters are detected with blood samples, not evolutionary theory. What disease have we cured using ancestral hominin lineage markers? Developmental biology does not require evolutionary theory. Molecular genetics is biochemistry, not natural selection. You've got me on disease vectors, natural selection theory is useful there.
acr08807 1 year ago
@acr08807
If you don't know what a gene family cluster is, you don't have a PhD in molecular biology. No, they don't come from blood samples, and yes, they are understood in light of evolution. You may have taken biology as a freshman (if you went to college), but you're not a molecular biologist, or you would have taken entire classes on the topic. Also, you would know about the evolutionary developmental biology, or evo-devo.
I note that ShockofGod is subscribed to you. Troll.
C0nc0rdance 1 year ago
@C0nc0rdance The germ theory of disease is used in medical research. Look at Pasteur's original papers and you'll see he didn't discuss evolution. Cell theory is at the core of medical research; it predates Darwin by two centuries. A lot of physics is used in medical research, including atomic theory and electromagnetic theory. Last time I checked, Bohr and Maxwell didn't discuss natural selection, either.
acr08807 1 year ago
why are you hating? Let us celebtate Darwin's life if we want -__-
ExploringReal 1 year ago
@ExploringReal. are you so stupid that you dont realise he's being sarcastic
HowToKillABiscuit 1 year ago
@ExploringReal Even if this wasn't a sarcastic video(which it clearly is) , he still wouldn't be saying ANYTHING about whether or not you should celebrate it yourself. Are you that bothered by people who don't agree with you?
Xelief 1 year ago
@Xelief Wow, so I don't catch the sarcasm and now I'm being attacked. Next time I will be wary of the fanboys.
ExploringReal 1 year ago
@ExploringReal LOL, come on, it was pretty obvious he was joking.
shraka 1 year ago
I'm going to take it that this is a bunch of sarcasm.
McTaggStar 1 year ago
Yeah, you're right.
Fuck Darwin Day.
BigFuckOffRevolvers 1 year ago
an analogy for this video:Scientist walks up to a creationist and kicks him in the nuts. the creationist says "WHY!!!" to wich the scientist responds "you know why!!"
Heliosvector 1 year ago 10
Comment removed
TheIntolerantAtheist 1 year ago 2
i thought this was serious for over 20 seconds
hakesho 1 year ago
@hakesho
-
hehe me too!
TheSkepticalIdealist 1 year ago
Yeah! Who needs Darwin ?! :)
TheDarwinman 1 year ago
Comment removed
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
lol i came here because thunderf00t favorited this video but funny thing is that i dreamed that i was meeting with darwin and that he gave me his autograph and for some reason i was incredibly happy
cosmothechihuahuadog 1 year ago
obviously the atheists want a holiday celebrating their prophet too, and this is it. k thx
ApocalypseNow012 1 year ago
@ApocalypseNow012
Convert to science or buuuuurn!
laflugantabastardo 1 year ago
@ApocalypseNow012 Darwin walked on intelectual integrity, and multiplied skeptics. You heathen.
Murdulo 1 year ago
@ApocalypseNow012 Ha ha! Prophet. Overlaying religious terms onto secular beliefs doesn't always work that well. Just FYI.
shraka 1 year ago
sorry this is unrelated but,
why is the second (orange) ape looking the other way in the Darwin Day logo? What's the significance? =/
anadus7 1 year ago
By the logic of #5 we should not celebrate christmas....it was over-rated anyway
MikaelDryden 1 year ago
@MikaelDryden Yeah, don't celebrate Christmas; not celebrating it that makes you feel like you're a person since you don't need a lie to give presents to the people that you love, give money to the people who need it, or spread the joy that human culture brings to so many.
ldreiiyeiistk 1 year ago
What an excellent video! Just the right use of humor to show us uncomfortable things about our species.
StanEvolve 1 year ago
"St." isn't short for "scientist."
Ya know, you had me going until about number 4, although number 2 should have been a dead give away.
RexFordVII 1 year ago
This video is lame, even by atheist standards. Who the fuck celebrates dead people? Darwin Day? Are you serious? lol Atheists need a fuckin life big time. Oh yeah, gotta combat religion, such a big deal, going to war! lol Losers.
Weedleweeb 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb What
NazgrelsHordeLeader 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb "Who the fuck celebrates dead people?"
Christians.
TurismoCoyote 1 year ago 13
@Weedleweeb Yeah, there's no dates on the Christian calender that celebrates dead people...
What you up to for valentine's day?
genericmember1 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb Beat it and you can't sing for shit!
argo984 1 year ago
@argo984 Your atheist club reeks of dog shit.
Weedleweeb 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb Ah, the ad-hominem attack. The tool of the mindless religious peon when confronted with logic and reason.
karadan100 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb
Says the guy who claims to be suffering from narcissistic schizophrenia and has bloody and violent dreams.
"when I dream I dream about blood and guts and horrible things... such as... such as surgery and being crippled and dying and abattoirs. I watch a lot of horror films, but they don't scare me, it's what I dream about that scares me."
I think you really should see a psychiatrist about this stuff and stop waisting your time commenting about atheism.
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb Wow you really can't sing worth a shit, you sure you want that stuff up on your page man?
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@trippinlikegod Wow, an atheist. Why can't you accept you're meaningless crap?
Weedleweeb 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb Says the person who obviousy never went to English class and worships invisible people.
karadan100 1 year ago
@karadan100 Dude, atheists believe in nothing, that everything is meaningless and worthless. We're just matter in motion, so don't get offended if a call you less than dogshit because that's your worldview.
Weedleweeb 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb Then you do not understand the meaning of atheism. That isn't my problem, it is yours.
Anyway, it seems you're the one with a fucked up worldview, seeing as you keep having dreams about blood and dismemberment. I do not have that issue because i'm comfortable with what i believe in. Your inner turmoil is leading to deep-rooted psychological issues, obviously.
You need a psychiatrist asap.
karadan100 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb Who told you that? I mean, you must have heard it, I refuse to believe you took that conclusion yourself.
Atheists believe there is no God, that's all, now, some fool must have told you some nice, deep, poisonous, prejudiced bullshit, and you actually believed it, incredible, congrats for that.
carlosewm 1 year ago
Comment removed
carlosewm 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Weedleweeb Let me give you an overview of who atheists actually, scientifically are:
They are a a vast minority in the western population, have statistically higher grades, statistically commit much less crimes, and statistically are victims of prejudiced, discriminating people.
carlosewm 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb I'm meaningless crap? Why can you accept basic English? I assume you meant "Your crap" but that's between you and your imaginary friend. How do you know what religion I am or am not? By the way your voice is terrible and you couldn't sing your way out of a paper bag.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@trippinlikegod Never said I was a theist. I'm just anti-atheist. You think somehow atheism has value when you consider everything about life to be meaningless. Which is it, brother? Value or no value.
Weedleweeb 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb Nihilism is the philosophy that nothing has any value, not atheism. Unless you are implying that a deity needs to exist in order for things to have value. But then here you are claiming you aren't a theist. So which is it, brother? Are you just ignorant, or a liar?
AntiTheocracy 1 year ago
@Weedleweeb
" Who the fuck celebrates dead people?"
....was that an attempt at self-deprecating humor or are you just an idiot?
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 1 year ago
@sdrawkcabgnipytmi Idiot most likely.
wicNKWD37 1 year ago