Whale Evolution 5of5

[crazy77iii]

"the Fossil Rcord Shows" Absolutely NOTHING about Evolution other than a Bunch of Fossils put in morphological Order. That's like taking cars from a junkyard putting them into the same type of order and calling it the

Evolution of the Vehicle"...

[confettibrains]

Creation hypothesis fails to properly explain facts such as shared ERV insertions between distinct but related species, 100% accurate predictions made by molecular phylogenetics, biogeography (where species are found in strata and locations at predicted evolutionary origins), fusion of 2 ape chromosomes into 1 human chromosome, human embryonic stages that? show vestigial development as amphibians, or why ALL living species today can be traced back to an ancestor w/ NO completely novel organisms

[FalcnPWNCH]

awesome..... i actually understand what they were talking about, that was actually interesting

[TheKhremix]

the master mind of all this

[TheKhremix]

u know it all show u that the might of god can creat such a magnifsent creater (sorry for the bad spelling)

and to all that will say where is the evidence i say where is ur evidence about this evolution i mean wat did that wolf like whale came from and how did it existed in the 1st place that in short words is the might of god i mean if ur trying to deny the existens of god with such things ur more naive then i thought just think for a sec out of all the things on earth someone must be

[wellsbranchdude]

You are all going to Hell.

Repent before is too late.!

[ndrthrdr1]

@wellsbranchdude Going to Hell? What evidence do you have that there is such a place?

There is none.

[flyingscience2]

DNA is information.

It's coded information so complex that Bill Gates (founder of Microsoft) marveled at it.

DNA is made up of Amino acids which are basic building blocks (letters).

Evolutionists want you to believe that these letters spelled out 10,000 books worth of code to create life in a slime.

RNA caries the information from DNA to the factories in the cell that make proteins (Amino acids).

RNA needs proteins that only RNA makes.

Self assembly is imposable (not improbable).

[dudev]

@flyingscience2

DNA is not a blue print. Only an ignorant person would say it is. Genes are interactive, so DNA is more like a changing recipe. The human genome is filled with copying errors and most of the genome is useless non-coding junk DNA, which basically proves that life can and does change over time. Also, the amount of DNA in a genome has no relation to the complexity of a lifeform, which is the opposite of what you'd expect if life were designed, which it's not.

[flyingscience2]

@dudev "Genes are interactive, so DNA is more like a changing recipe"

Your completely wrong.

It's a blue print with areas turned off or on but it does not change except for that.

It's called Gene expression.

Also a common error is thinking we have junk DNA.

We turn off a gene to see what happens and if nothing happens it is thought that it did nothing.

Many of our genes are used once during development and never used again so it's an illogical assumption fueled by arrogance and stupidity.

[dudev]

@flyingscience2

So you can look at DNA like a "blue print" and tell what protein does what and goes where? Collect your Nobel Prize, professor.

Genes are hierarchical, which means some gene can turn on or off many other genes. Humans still have the gene to produce Vitamin C, but it's not turned on.

Some amoeba, plants, lizards, amphibians, have larger genomes--much more DNA-- than humans. Genome size has no relation to complexity. So junk DNA must exist.

You're talking out of your ass.

[flyingscience2]

@dudev "Genes are hierarchical, which means some gene can turn on or off many other genes."

That is absolutely true.

It's called Gene expression.

"Some amoeba, plants, lizards, amphibians, have larger genomes--much more DNA-- than humans. Genome size has no relation to complexity. So junk DNA must exist"

You do see that you just made an assumption with that?

Assumptions are opinion.

Your argument is "junk DNA must exist."??

Thank you for sharing LOL

[dudev]

@flyingscience2

DNA only codes for proteins, controls other DNA, or acts as "punctuation." If it doesn't do any of these things it's non-coding. Why would a plant or animal have multiple sets of the same gene, for example? Or multiple sets of chromosomes? Or an odd number of chromosomes that can't be divided, making sexual reproduction impossible? If you deny that genomes are filled with copying errors, then you haven't even studied basic genetics. And you're talking out of your ass.

[flyingscience2]

@dudev There are two types of evolution that are real, scientifically testable and verifiable.

There is micro evolution or variation which man has utilized for thousands of years through breeding animals and plants.

Then there is macro de- evolution which is also observable, testable and scientifically sound.

It shows that we are mutating out of existence.

Mutation is 99% detrimental to life and 1% good.

The law of average says we are slowly dieing off.

Everything is dieing off.

Seek God.

[dudev]

@flyingscience2

Quit standing on other people's shoulders, little parrot. Cutting and pasting from creationist websites only makes you sound like a gullible fool.

Some scientists who accept evolution as fact:

Ken Miller, evolutionary biologist and Christian.

Bob Bakker, paleontologist and ordained minister.

Francis Collins, geneticist and Christian.

Theodosius Dobzhansky, geneticist and Christian.

etc, etc. etc.

[ndrthrdr1]

@flyingscience2 Google Project Steve

to see that virtually all scientists, especially in life sciences like Biology, know that evolution has happened, and still is happening.

Creationists trying to refute evolution just look pathetically foolish.

[flyingscience2]

@ndrthrdr1 "virtually all scientists, especially in life sciences like Biology, know that evolution has happened, and still is happening"

So.

I'm talking to you not them.

They are free to believe whatever they like and so are you.

I'm not trying to refute evolution.

There's nothing to refute about it except the evidence presented for it, which I do.

Macro evolution is a fairy tale and like all fairy tales, I can't disprove the non-existance of the tooth fairy.

[bernhard226]

These creationalists should find out more about the bible and who wrote it. MAN wrote the bible not God. and this was created over aperiod of not more than 5000 years. I believw that God created the heavans and the earth. But life on earth adapted to changing environments and evolved as time went on. All you bible punchers if you do a little research you will find that the bible is based on sun worship plain and simple.

[xeepk3]

wow :O

[aybeeplus]

So, "...they evolved typical mammal behaviour, like mating ..."

Sometimes, I think that whoever writes the scripts for these programs should have their eyes dug out with spoons! Mating is typical mammal. bird, reptile, amphibian, fish, insect, cephalopod, (did I miss any classes?) mating behaviour.

[megacoolin]

I believe in God while being completely obsessed with Evolution. In my eyes God has no gender or moral code. What God does is give order and chaos. While we are alive and self aware we can use order the order of nature to become more successful. Whales did so. It's nefarious to discuss 'failed' sub species because the genus is so complex that we don't know exactly how widespread its passage may be. Not all God believers are ignorant. Happy to say that 'Genesis' is wrong or mistranslated at best.

[24000RPM]

@megacoolin Thing is that all religions are based on "creationism" wich says that all living beings are the ones discribed in theses old books(coran,bible, whatever) and that they were "created" as they are and to stay as they are. So a whale ancestor as well as any other extinct living being is said to be an "heresy". Of course thoses that wrote theses old books were not aware that one day people would dig up the truth. But therefor religions and evolution won't go together.

[brandonashplant]

@megacoolin I am with you on that one!

[Spud13ify]

I didn't think I heard that right the first time. He said a Megladon was 60 meters? Obviously they meant him to say 60 ft. but they didn't change it? That's one of the biggest screwups I've seen in any documentary. Otherwise, good stuff.

[maroom1]

@Spud13ify

I think he said 16 meters

[Spud13ify]

@maroom1 That's why I listened to it a second time and he clearly said 60 meters. He just said it wrong and they didn't catch it.

[HyperSweety18]

lol "its like the Rosetta Stone for evolution" XD

[ahfoo1979]

i still dun understand how whales can lose their tooth and evolve to eat krills?

[111E982a]

@ahfoo1979 they didn't lose it? it became specialized for feeding on krills..

[puncheex]

@ahfoo1979: Krill was available, seal meat wasn't. You can eat krill with teeth, but its a weak soup. Random changes occurred, some headed towards the baleen strainer, and the krill soup got richer. Those with it survived, without didn't. Teeth weren't required, so mutations which turned them off were acceptable, and one eventually did so.

[dsac6007]

That guy likes it big and backwards.

[zhudson]

@EternalSeptic77 Evidence that we are right = proof that we are wrong? Great logic there...

[Cindy7582]

I love learning about whales and their history. This show was awesome!

[josephmanners]

i like it big and backwards too ;)

[SupaShang]

@EternalSeptic77 There is no sweeter sound than listening to a creationist laughing at his own ignorance.

[DoctorNociceptor]

@SupaShang Well said! I might use that phrase myself, since I am currently breaking down the ignorance of my creationist roommate. I might ask him to watch this vid, and others here.

He had me watch Expelled, but thanks to my input (and Expelled Exposed), he agrees that they lied a lot in it, that it was unfair -- maybe someday I'll ask him if he wants to watch "Flunked", here!

For now, I've asked him to watch 'Judgment Day' on PBS NOVA website, he said that sounds fun and he will. W00t!

[TheTyrantRaptor]

@EternalSeptic77 Aye creationist..... the only brain power worth of using on you....is....fuck off and die cunt

[PhantomSephiroth]

Thumbs up if teared up at the end.

It's so beautiful and amazing, what nature can do.

[CristinaFernandez]

Man, I can't get enough of this narrator. He sounds like Scar from the Lion King's creepier brother.

[spearintheeye]

You think it would be easier to learn about evolution, than to post about how it's a fairy tale 3 times on each video.

[mikekoz68]

Excellent video. Assuming that mammals are the most intelligent group of animals and if brain size a direct correlation (generally speaking) then why wouldn't whales have evolved into the most intelligent animal instead of humans?

[vegetta00]

@mikekoz68 Let`s say that brain size is a factor in intelligence. Evolution - the most useful characteristics that allow a species to survive in its environment are passed to the next generation. For the whale lineage, larger brains or greater intelligence was not a major factor in their survival. Therefore, their brain size/intelligence did not experience much of a change from when the species was a land animal.

[puncheex]

@vegetta00: You're getting a bit course grind here. Obviously parts of the brain are important to the adaptations that whales are going through - creating and hearing and interpreting the ultrasound, building up an abstract 3D representation of their surroundings. There's nothing to drive towards tool making, or eye-hand, or complex speech and abstract symbolic thought.

[vegetta00]

@puncheex Yes, you`re right. Well put.

[SevenSixTwoNato]

@mikekoz68 Well, they're still very intelligent, no doubt. Though a more reliable factor is the brain-to-body mass ratio, which I recall is higher in humans than in just about all whale species.

Nonetheless, we find whales (and other species, for that matter) to be more and more intelligent than we'd previously thought possible all the time.

[neobarockloki86]

Now we know the whale's past. But, what brings the future ? How is going to be the evolution of whales from now on ? This is the thing that we may not know. But the people of the future will.

[puncheex]

@neobarockloki86: Well, you know the past down to, say, about 30 million years ago. They don't talk much about the history after the whale shape is more-or-less perfected. But there are still surprises out there to be found, such as the huge killer whale that was just described.

The future? Evolution doesn't have a goal (as has been pointed out here ad infinitum), so you'll just have to let that be a surprise.

[turboguppy]

@puncheex I wouldn't say the "shape is more-or-less-perfected." "Reached it's current shape" would be better, don't you think? Even though whales are well adapted for their environment, if the environment changes that "perfect" shape may not be the best for survival anymore. Just saying.

[puncheex]

@turboguppy: Pardon, I should have said "perfected to its current environment", inasmuch as that is essentially the same environment as 30 mya. You are, of course, right. Perfection is not really a possibility.

[marinebiobry]

They get echolocation before or after they diverge into mysticetes and odontocetes? This is an extremely complex development that is just kind of glossed over in this video. Bats have something similar. Hey, there's convergent evolution again! Either that or bats and odontocetes share a common ancestor that could echolocate. But two species can't possibly have small brain cases and not be related!

[themooddisorders]

how did noah get these animals on his boat? Let alone feed them....

You know I am kidding, this is a great documentary

[swiffstep]

wow finally.. this documentary kept repeating the same questions again and again. a bit of a drag on. explanations and interviews from more scientists would have been better

[puncheex]

At this point in time there appear to be about 28 known ancient whale species (Archaeocetus, whales more than about 32 million years old). Three of these were known back in the 19th century but weren't identified as whales, including Basilosaurus (thought to be a sea dragon or sea lizard), with fossils in the American south.

[Kargoneth]

Woo! Megalodon!

[springboy9]

Ahh. It doesn't get any better than this. Like it.

[lolauraxpx3]

Thank you Thank you!!!!! Thanx for posting these five videos. Im doin my science exit project on the evolution of whales and it really helped me!!!!! Continue posting videos! Thanxs again!

[desasterz]

I like it because it's backwards?

[XxCanineBlackRosesxX]

This is my way of thinking about what he said at the ending of the show. @ 9:32 I believe

he said this because evolution was first known for species adapting to land FROM water. The whale ancestor repeated history just in an opposite way.

[puncheex]

@XxCanineBlackRosesxX: But that is not totally unknown. The sea reptiles from the age of dinosaurs did the same thing, and the air has been invaded at least three times: birds, pterosaurs and bats.

[manky22]

thnx for uploading

[calanmoss]

cool video

[heyanto]

Fascinating to us non scientists. An amazing program.

[garrettducat]

Seriously awesome. Best 48 minutes I've spent in a long long time.

[reed0the0red]

" I like it because it's big and I like it because it's backwards."

Hilarious:)

[goodluckpeace44]

what are you thinking about?

[aldraw]

[cont.]  I initially applied the term warm-blooded to the great whites' endothermy because it is the better of the two colloquial terms to describe the GW's homeostatic strategy.

[aldraw]

If you want to get technical great whites are endothermic poikilotherms. This means they maintain a higher than ambient body temperature that is not constant but changes with changes in surrounding temperatures. They achieve this through an arterial-venous heat exchange system that minimizes loss of heat produced my their muscles to the environment. Some tuna, marlin and other high performance pelagic fishes share this characteristic as well.

[IbeeejayI]

There is a wealth more evidence than "a few bones" for example, vestigial and atavistic limbs, genes and modern whales to name a few.

[1Weemaryanne]

This is a good show, djarm, and for those of us who don't watch much television more, your posting it is a great service - thank you.

[garrettducat]

Agreed.

[0x8x0]

I actually feel dumber after watching this. It makes evolution sound like Lamarckism. Has anyone counted the use of "mystery"?

[heloizyjhenifer]

The commentary is hopelesly inept. Basically this documentary teaches you 3 or 4 ancient animal names and that's it.

[ThePipersNicks]

I'm pretty sure it means basilisaurus (the huge eel whale) was a dead end, when they say at 1:53 Deurodon(the dolphin sized whale) was left to "inherit the earth".

[aldraw]

Sharks are cold blooded??? Carcharodon carcharias aka the great white shark and closest living relative to Megalodon is a WARM BLOODED SHARK!!

[tsrox20]

Modern sharks like the Great White and the Mako have an ability to warm their blood slightly above the temperature around their bodies...the vast majority of sharks are still cold blooded.

[Evilenlil]

No animal is cold blooded, they are ectotherms. As there blood is not cold when the temp is 25 ect.

[AllenQuatermain2de]

where did you get that from?

[nauta51]

from making science research , and look for evevidence.

[AllenQuatermain2de]

well and what evidence did you find then? and what research did you do?

[Evilenlil]

No they are ectotherms, not endotherms.

[tsrox20]

I understand that they are ectotherms, but the laymen's term is cold-blooded...most people don't know what an ectotherm is (and ectotherm derives the heat needed to survive as an organism from an outside source...like the sun or warm water...hence ecto=outside, therm=temperature). You have to dumb it down for a lot of people.

[puncheex]

@tsrox20: It's worse than that. Each of these types is not monolithic; there are perhaps dozens of adaptations making up endothermy, and different species have different mixes. There's the fact that endoderms have given up the ability to remain alive, if torpid, in lower temperatures. It is not made plain in the film that an ectotherm, when it gets cold, cannot function and must go into a torpid state until the heat returns.

[puncheex]

@aldraw: "Cold-" and "warm-blooded" are such blunt instruments for discussing animal's adaptations to their environments. There are many adaptations which all lend themselves to warm-bloodedness, and its common for parallel evolution to reinvent when pressures arise. In fact, mankind's sweat glands (shared only with the horse, afaik), are another adaptation in maintaining even internal temperatures. They're saying the megalodon was relatively cold blooded; for example it doesn't store blubber.

[aldraw]

@puncheex you obviously did not read my second post clarifying my opinion. As I stated, the sharks of the genus Carcharodon have an above ambient body temperature giving them an edge over true poikilotherms. I was simply using the colloquial terms because I was speaking to laypeople. In this instance the term warm-blooded is apt because the internal temperature of the organism is indeed above that of the surrounding environment.

[puncheex]

@aldraw: OK. Do you agree that compared to whales they were relatively cold-blooded, and that they can't work as efficiently in high latitude waters? If so then your expostulation above was unnecessary. I agree the narration was clumsy, but it was so in order to speak to laypeople, as you say.

I also blame this fool way that YT formats messages. It's a mess trying to keep threads together and determining who answered whom. But we are in agreement, in any case. Regards.

[puncheex]

@puncheex: Oops, I meant sharks above, not whales. Gees.

[DeathSparrow]

thanks so much for this. one of the most fascinating evolution chains i've ever seen.

[Opsomaniac]

Thanks for posting this.

[dannypantsgm]

An awesome concept. Digging up ancient sea monsters in the desert. I love this stuff.

[karausu]

Ray Comfort is not convinced, lol.

[Mycernius]

Ray Comfort wouldn't be convinced if god himself appeared before him and smacked him repeatedly around the head with Origin of the Species whilst saying "They are right you brainless moron. How much more evidence do you need?"

[Kattarina98]

ROFL ... you owe me a clean keyboard, I spit tea all over it.

[MrSantaClaws1001]

@Mycernius

Dude, shut up about all this arguing and enjoy the program. You and all the other arguers are unsightly.

[Mycernius]

@MrSantaClaws1001 Way to be up to date. This comment I made was a year ago, and it was a comment on the stupidity of Ray Comfort, not an argument. Learn the difference between an argument and an opinion.

[SuperFlyNB]

Pretty good. Thanks Djarm.

[GuppyPal]

Thank you djarm

[Eddiethepizzaboy]

I really enjoyed that, good choice.

[waltermh111]

I dont like the wording of these documentaries though.

Its simply rare to get a good preservation, fossilisation of fossils, therefore you may get a good sampling every few 10k or 100k years when the right events occur.

A species doesnt die out, it simply evolves and we only get to see a picture of different points in time.

I just feel like it adds to confusion that laymen have, helping them to think that a species disappeared, and the evolution appeared 1mil years later.

[ThePipersNicks]

I'm not sure I undrstand the last part of your comment. I'm a "layman"

As I understood the show, the walking whale branched into the huge eel whale and the smaller dolphin whale. The huge eel whale apparently was a dead end, while the dolphin sized whale gave rise to what we have today.

I imagine looking at the skeletons or evidence, there is reason to conclude the huge eel whales are not ancestors of todays cetaceans, but extinct cousins.

Is that about right?

[Eddiethepizzaboy]

Yeh man you got it bang on. However, it would be reasonable to assume, because of the way the documentary worded speciation as "it died out and this other one appeared", that the huge eel whales are not a dead end and they just haven't found the next skeleton. Perhaps the next skeleton is the dead end.

That may or may not be the case. The last point in waltermh111's comment is more about the really poor level of understanding evolution. Its not really a species dies and another just evolves....

[Eddiethepizzaboy]

....like a Pokemon. Every few generations is a transition, but only very slightly. Not every generation because the offspring's random mutations might be detrimental and not be selected for. And not only every few thousand generations will major change happen. Small changes happen all the time. So a species does not just simply die out and reappear more evolved later, the documentary should have explained it a little better.

[ThePipersNicks]

Yeah true, thanks. Good points. I apparrently wasn't paying too much attention to their wording. I didn't catch that.

If a species dies out, it won't reappear later, it's gone.

Also, most carcasses don't fossilize, so it's impossible to know all of the phases of transition between the walking whales and a modern whale. There were likely more species in between that we don't know about yet. Other branches that were dead ends too maybe.

[EvolvedAtheist]

// A species doesnt die out, it simply evolves //

I wonder if you really meant to say what you appear to mean.

Most species have died out. Some species continue, while isolated populations evolve.

[waltermh111]

yeah, i didnt mean it that way.

This documentary was not talking about the dead end species though, this one was showing all the different ones that were evolutions of past ones to show the connections.

So when they say, it disappeared, then its successor appeared 2 million years later, thats a confusing wording, as it didnt disappear, we just didnt find every single generational step through fossils.

Basically, the fossil record has a gap in generations, evolution doesnt.

[EvolvedAtheist]

// i didnt mean it that way //

I thought not. It's hard to be clear in 500 chars.

I agree that the wording, "Pakicetus disappeared from the fossil record ... 1 million years later, Ambulocetus is found" could definitely be misinterpreted.

Not that creationists would ever misinterpret facts ;^/

They also leave us with the impression that only 4 species lie between Pakicetus and modern cetaceans!

They obviously did it to heighten the drama, but the science is enough.

[garrettducat]

Yeah, I agree with you. Its obviously dumbed down A LOT--but it has to be watchable. If they tried to explain every evolutionary change that occured and all the transitional species that were found, ~6 people in the whole damn world would watch it--let alone fully comprehend it.

[EvolvedAtheist]

// ~6 people in the whole damn world would watch it //

So many?!

I'm joking. However, you are quite right that it must stimulate and hold interest without overwhelming the viewer with details. Still, they could have added more science (and less drama) without overwhelming all except ~ 6 viewers.

[Daruqe]

I'd watch it.

[garrettducat]

There have been plenty of species that have died out completely due to an extinction event or something of the sort. Granted, of course, we can trace any animal's alive today lineage to a prehistoric creature, but there are countless evolutionary dead ends.

[waltermh111]

But the video I am responding to isnt about those dead end species.

its about species that are connected to each other through generations of evolution.

Anyway, its been covered. Wording is poor but was dumbed down to make more viewable, understandable.

I just would have still worded it differently

[puncheex]

@waltermh111: It is possible for a species to die out or go extinct; it is also possible for a species to give rise to many more than just one or two other species over time.

[waltermh111]

@puncheex You probably are just commenting to me from the video page, but my post here is from a longer conversation.

We do get whaty your saying, but its not what we are talking about.

You can check full comments to see where we are coming from with our long conversation.

Go up to where you first see me talk and read down if your interested in what the contention is.

[puncheex]

@waltermh111: I did - it looks to me like I added to the bottom of it; but I suppose that is YT's dumb way of listing all these nested conversations. Point taken.

[MoveOrder]

Good

[04carrolld]

yeah deffo post another evolution vid from the same documanary

[AbdultheImpailler]

Excellent series, thanks for posting djarm!