Added: 1 year ago
From: AronRa
Views: 48,974
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (1,298)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I thought the scientific name for house cats was felis catus?

  • The Siberian Tiger has always been my favorite since I first discovered them back in grade school.

  • Very cool information!

  • Very interesting.

  • Can someone tell me what that clip was at 10:58 ?

    What movie was that from, looks familier haha! :p

  • Thanks for sharing this, your taxonomy videos are always very informative. :)

  • I love how scientists--ahem, REAL scientists--use religious contexts as the basis for sarcastic, or just humorous, jokes. It a monument to how far we've left fairy tales in the ground.

  • @TheOkami1113

    There are quite a few religious scientists though.

  • @narutofan9999 And I won't discredit them. But I find their religious compulsions ironically misaligned with their field of inquiry and their religious tenants unhelpful in any real form of accomplishment. You can thank God all you want for finding the cure to cancer, but He put it here in the first place and isn't paying for your school bills, is He?

  • The REAL Truth About Cats and Dogs!

  • Though, I suppose if the evolutionary process is true, my lineage will not be around to know of such scientific truths as they will no longer be homo-sapiens and will have unknowingly evolved into homo-.....

  • No. I would not have realized it as a macro evolutionary event. Just as I do not recognize it as a macro evolutionary event now. Perhaps with modern science studies and the next few centuries my lineage will be privy to proof of such information. I unfortunately will not. I will spend the rest of my life mired between an expanding unproven science realm and a diminishing unproven spiritual realm. Woe is me.

  • @Mauhadeeb28 even your lineage will experience "an expanding unproven science realm" as will their lingeage. however, i doubt that even a few centuries of expanding science will thwart the unproven spiritual realm :(

  • Bearcats smell like popcorn. No, really.

  • @squizill "how did kangaroos get to australia?"

    The same way they got from Australia to the ark, silly!

  • i enjoyed this vid

  • *claps* Tho I have been a fan for some months now, this is the first time that I have seen this particular video. Since watching your videos, I have become fascinated with the science of Phylogeny. Thank you very much for posting this. :)

  • 2:31 Isn't it the other way around? Felis silvestris = feral cat?

  • In don't even care about the creationists anymore. I just want to hear about the cool animals.

  • I don't often add video's to my favorites list, but I have several of AronRa's now

  • really informative and interesting

  • Is it bad that all i can think of when watching this video, and fully understand it, is 'awww cats' (keeping in mind i'm not just a cat person, im a zoology student)?:P

  • so according to young earth creationist, god sent a flood about 4400 years ago. noah packs an ark with 2 of each kind of animal. the ark settled somewhere in europe, noah and his people along with the animals repopulate the earth. most creationist dont believe in pangea. so this raises a simple yet important question to anyone who believes the ark/flood story, how did kangaroos get to australia?

  • @squizill Or blind salamanders get to dark caves in the U.S.

  • @squizill said: "how did kangaroos get to australia?"

    Are you even aware that most continents used to be joined together and that they then subsequently drifted apart, and thus the species on each continent became unique through genetic drift?

    Surely you doin't think that continents are static? Have you ever heard of continental drift?

    Where did you go to school and why didn't they teach you the basics of science??

  • @OrthodoxDarwinist perhaps u should read my comment again, it was directed to anyone who subscribes to the noahs arc story as being an actual event ;)

  • @OrthodoxDarwinist ahh i just realized u didnt read my comment at all u read terncote's comment re: my comment .. its on the next page ;)

  • @squizill

    Oh k, I see.

    It's good to know it wasn't real, gives me more faith in humanity.

  • Excellent work!

  • interesting video and very informative

  • Compare a ringtail to a genet. It's amazing how similar they are.

  • kitty

    

  • there is no question that there are many cats, dogs, bats, etc. (both living and in the fossil record) the problem is that evolution is supposeto show animals that link all this families

  • @Answerquestions1 As I have already shown -in this and other videos- evolution DOES show how all animal families are linked.

  • @AronRa

    atleast in this video, you never showed how cats are linked with other families

  • @Answerquestions1 It's almost like you didn't watch the video at all. Hmmm...

  • @Answerquestions1 Really? Did you not watch the video?

  • @Answerquestions1 Dude, what videos have you been watching? He practically goes through the entire detailed history of life in these videos. He lays it out in easy-to-understand way. This crap is fascinating. It's like a free college class. Physicists often joke about how biologists are scientists that suck at math, but credit where it's due. This guy knows his crap, and he's plucky enough to try to explain it to the intransigently religious.

  • @Answerquestions1 13:05 explains exactly what you are talking about.

  • barbourofelis. is probablynot a nimravid

  • SCIENCE RULES!!!!

  • @EminamaDron  The video at 06:45 is one of the segments from 'Walking with Prehistoric Beasts'.

  • cat 2:13 is a clouded leopard not ocelot...just sayin

  • @dtaco9 No, that is an ocelot.

  • @AronRa I apologize, just took a second look and i was incorrect, that is an ocelot. Sorry

  • @AronRa

    True, the previous one was an ocelot, but 3:52 really is a clouded leopard, the mainland species Neofelis nebulosa. Nice video btw

  • @dtaco9 at 1:20 there is a picture of a clouded leopard

  • @psychomantiskiller Yes, i am aware. I have already apologized for my stupidity.

  • Way to completely misrepresent creationist arguments right off the top - You doublenigger.

  • @1x90 troll harder

  • @1x90 You mad, bro? Tu fou, mon frere? Du verärgert, mir Bruder?

  • @AronRa At 7:09 the last cat what did you say it was called i keep typing it out on Google but keep spelling it wrong.

  • @bio0link The pseudo-cat at 7:09 is barbourofelis.

  • mmm... Catties! <3

  • This is bloody interesting stuff (and with so many cute pictures! D'AWWWWWW!) I think I might need to subscribe.

  • 03:54

    AWWWWWW!!

  • youve just earned a subscribe

  • Wrong. There are only 10 kinds of cats.

  • Very informative video. Though, domestic cat RACES were maybe not a good example, since they were obtained through ARTIFICIAL selection.

  • I would have said those bases were "Weird tailed cats"

  • my brain hurts

  • blood and mayhem,priceless,lol

  • Im looking for the video with Aronra thats 53:00 minutes long, he talks about his friend thinking he is superman, can any one provide me with a link, it would be much appreciated thanks.

  • @maidenjapan66 i think it's this one: /watch?v=pqc0roZTZSA

  • After reading horrid op eds from creationists; you know the ones (local papers) I come back to watch this video, and I laugh. A lot. This is simply one of the best evolution videos available. Well done and thank you.

  • @SelfPromoting Evolutionary relationships can be used to determine an unknown pathogen. Bacteria can be induced to synthesis or breakdown compounds or react in other ways by introducing new plasmids, which is an important part of the evolutionary process of bacteria.

    Cosmology is basically just math, so unless we have some fundamental misunderstanding of things like geometry, the age of the cosmos can be determined, so what is the point in opposing this study?

  • @SelfPromoting Yes, and I agree that the religious people, or non-religious people, who oppose stem cell research, for example, are, for the most part, not intentionally trying to stifle progress. They are just doing what they think is right. I would like to make the distinction between issues like that and purely scientific ones that have no moral implications, as I see it, like evolution, geology, and cosmology, which some people seem to be in a strong resistance against, for no good reasons.

  • @SelfPromoting I think I understand what you are saying, but abortion is tangled in morality, not something purely objective.

    If there was no religion, I do not think that the world would be more or any less violent because people would use nationalism etc. to form dividing lines that could be fought over. I mean to say that any ideology - based on religion, ethnicity etc. - which are unwilling to change their world views when presented with new information are dangerous. Does this make sense?

  • @SelfPromoting Ok. I'll leave you alone then after I ask one thing (don't feel like you need to respond). Do you think there are any inherent dangers in religious positions, of any cultural background, that are unwilling to adjust to modern scientific/cultural developments?

  • @SelfPromoting Why do you feel that the previously mentioned scientific theories are in conflict with your faith?

  • @SelfPromoting I understand, I just want a dialogue, so I can understand where you are coming from and what arguments you put forward.

  • @SelfPromoting I am saying that it would be necessary to have diseased animals on the Ark so that we would have the parasitic worm species present today, or was god kind enough to make those for us after the flood? Also, where is the geological evidence for the flood? Plate tectonics is a well know geological fact, but Pangea existed hundreds of millions of years ago, not a few thousand, thus why there is such diversity on the continent -- it has been separated for millions of years.

  • @SelfPromoting How did Noah provide food and medical care for all of the animal species on the planet for a year when some of them would have needed to be the host of parasitic organisms?How did he get species from Australia which has isolated populations of unique species? How did he fit, and keep alive, all aquatic species? No aquatic species would have survived the depth and salinity changes from its natural habitat. Since his boat was at 29,000 feet, how did he get sufficient oxygen?

  • Thanks for this video. It was VERY informative!

  • Comment removed

  • what is the name of the species at 10:49?

  • @AraGuitar The species at 10:49 is a Chalicotherium.

  • 0:00 - 1:24 - Ah, another excellent Aronra video. Let the pwnage begi--

    1:25 - 13:39 - ZOMG KITTIES ARE SO CUTE I WILL TAKE THEM HOME AND FEED THEM TUNA.

    13:40 - what just happened?

  • Interesting that certain species such as genets, linsangs, etc. possess some cat-like traits such as retractable claws, meowing, purring, etc. that most people think are only unique to the cat family. It's as if these different lines carry a genetic toolbox of certain traits, although each species goes on its own tangent (with the cat family being more successful than their presumed predecessors.)

  • Did anyone else recognize Mr. Plinkett's cat at 1:48 ?

  • +1 This is what I like about your channel, Aron: concentrated information.

  • @SelfPromoting I trust by now you see that I had already answered your question before you said that I didn't.

  • @SelfPromoting I see that you ignored the point that, in addition to the fossils which we actually do have -despite your allegations- we also have the genetics, and that also points the same one-and-only conclusion as absolutely everything else does. So I must repeat my earlier question, how do you account for that?

  • @SelfPromoting The implication that any of the animals I showed here were only drawings unsupported by actual fossil evidence is of course an accusation of dishonesty. In this case, the fossil animal you asked about is Andrewsarchus, the largest of a group of extinct predators called mesonychids. You can see its skull on Google images. There are roughly four dozen other species known from that group. Those with preserved feet also show evidence of hooves.

  • @AronRa actually, he does have a point wrt Andrewsarchus. Apparently it's only known from a skull (although there are more complete skeletons of other mesonychids). So the producers of the animations probably should have used species that we have more complete remains of. ...Otherwise it's just fodder for the old creationist chestnut that scientists use a few bones and a lot of imagination. Just sayin'.

  • @SelfPromoting Obviously we have the bones and anatomy for anything here that you would wish to see. Just tell me what you think is "just a drawing', and I'll show you the fossils, and accept your apology for falsely accusing me. I think your Bible warns against that by the way. Most importantly, (as this video shows) we also have genetics, and that also points the same one-and-only conclusion as absolutely everything else does. How do you account for that?

  • is that real @ 3:05 ?

  • @jffryh It's a polydactyl cat. Yes, they're real.

  • @AronRa Misread that and thought you said "pterodactyl cat" for a second there.

  • @AronRa "polydactyl cat". I hadn't noticed the extra toe @3:00 - 3:04 . I think I actually intended to ask about the next cat @3:05 - 3:07 above caption, "cross breeding, for the love of god, stop it!" that one didn't look real.

  • @AronRa caption @ 3:06 says " breading" instead of "breeding". typo, right?

  • tiger are cute.

  • Wow..... I can't say I'm entirely ignorant on evolutionary biology, but after seeing this video I get your reputation. Nice and edutational video ! ! !

  • Very cool and interesting videos! I like it a lot. I would like the ask one question: On this videos you have mentioned about tracing the ancestors and confirm them using genetics ( DNA I suposse? ). How is this possible if some of them disapeared hundreds or thousands of year ago? It would be interesting if you make a video about this procedures.

    Sorry if my english is not rigth, Im not a native speaker. I just hope I could made the question rigth so you can understand me :s

  • So if evolution is comparable to trunks and branches, that would mean the common ancestor would technically be extinct even if the "trunk" looks the same as it grows alongside the "branch" right?

  • @godofimagination There is no requirement that an ancestral species must become extinct. Sometimes that doesn't happen for a while. Sometimes the ancestral line outlives descendant branches.

  • I love this video. I watch it often. I want to show it to the Tennessee House but they don't like people with "a bunch of letters in front of their names". One of the best "kitteh" videos I have seen and I started looking more at the fossils of these animals you list and I'm enjoying the experience. Thank you.

  • @Shavarnarak hey...chill out, sit back and enjoy the science you are being given. Calling people "retards" does NOT help them understand your point of view and is just going to switch people off listening to you...ever...except the ones that already agree with you. Be more reasonable, especially on videos like this!

    @AronRa, wow, thanks for making this, a very interesting watch. Kittehs <3

  • Hi Aron! I've missed your science videos and for some reason, none of your newest videos turned up in my subscriptions box. If I hadn't stopped by to watch your Archaeological Moment in Time video for the 50th time, I would have never known. Do you have any plans on doing videos for other animals? Hoofed animals? Terror birds? The Jamaican flightless Ibis that evolved clubs out of its wings? What about recent extinctions like the Stellar Sea Cow and the Quagga? I love your vids. thanks

  • wow...ultra cool lynx clip!

  • Worth watching for every second ^_^.

  • What is the movie around 11:00, where there's this naturalist with the giant fossil, and the moron arguing about the flood?

  • @sirdelrio the naturalist is darwin and the moron is the captain. it is from the documentary "Darwins dangerous idea". it is pretty good. it tells about the proplems that darwin had to face when he made his theory public, the discrimination and the personal attacks.

  • Excelent vid. My only complain would be that, at least for me, you Aron referred to Noah one time too many.

    I mean, I know there are some creationists in the audience, but I think that you are paying a little too much attention to them, in a video that actually has little to nothing to do with Creationism. You're spoiling them with attention.

    Other than that, just cheers.

  • This has probably already been said, but it's not correct that Felis silvestris was named after Sylvester in Looney Tunes — it's the other way around.

  • This video would have more views if you'd titled it "Kitties!" ;)

  • @GoblinXXX

    **This video would have more views if you'd titled it "Kitties!"**

    I suspect this would also be true if he were to have titled it "Pussies"...

    probably neither audience was what he was aiming for ;-)

  • @TheHatefulDead I dunno, he would have gotten ME with any of those, just as he did with the one he used.

  • This is great! It like looking at an evolutionary arms race.

  • My favorite part is when he showed a fat cat and said , 'even embarrassing relatives such as this" lol cats !

  • i love this

  • what is your take on the convergence of such a strange trait? (the saberteeth stuff). And did they all occur more or less during the same period? I'm just curious.

  • My famous fatassed cats endorse this message.

  • I've said this before but it bears repeating. If one was to follow the "created within their kind" and then accept microevolution up to say the family level this basically endows evolution with enormous creative power, all geckos, tree frogs, songbirds, deer, etc having an original 7 or whatever.

    I mean like damn, how can they say evolution of higher groups is so implausible when they accept all this diversity within groups?

    i mean damn there's 80,000 species of orchids

  • 2:25 One of my favourite WB cartoons. Spike and Chester v Sylvester (and rather large relative). Love it that the species is named Felis Sylvestris lol

  • 3:15 longcat is long

  • I think this is just AronRa's excuse to show a bunch of LOLcats.

  • I have a question.... if we were to clone an earlier form of an animal, would we be able to breed it with a later form of that animal?

  • kudos AronRa, exceptionally good video!

    btw, what "kind" of taxonomy SW are you using? (seen at 10:20)

  • great video aron, what got me the most was that

    (a) hyenas are feliformes

    (b) the sabre toothed cat is a pre 'modern cat' branch off and not part of panthers and felines.

    unfortunately, you talk FAST , even a ecology student like me whoes versed somewhat in taxonomy, finds it hard to keep up and wrap my head around some of the family linkages. as you say them at the speed you do.

  • lol at 1:48

    it's mister plinkett's cat!

  • 13:30 onwards........... Ba-singa! if that doesn't compute go sit at the kiddie table!

  • 12:52 that cat got bitch slapped by the other one

  • Lol, 9:46... pooch is playing with fire...

  • This is excellent, sir.

  • 01:22... lol

  • KITTEHS! ^__^

  • Thank you so much for this! I love cats, and was trying to find their origins. I wondered if they had some link with monkeys, because they like to climb, are intelligent and full of mischief at times! I am really enjoying this! Love you Aronra!

  • Actually another thing about the whole flood story... why even USE a flood? If you're an omnipotent God and you want to kill humans who are being annoying, why not just give all the annoying ones instant fatal strokes? The entire PREMISE is absurd even on it's most FUNDAMENTAL level.

    Anyone who believes in the flood story is simply a retard, there is no alternative.

  • @Shavarnarak Besides, there is no geological evidence of a 'world-wide' flood. There is plenty of geological evidence for localized flooding, of course. The Biblical account of Noah's flood is nothing more than primitive mythology.

  • @Shavarnarak I'll one up you there. Yaweh apparently isn't beyond tampering with free will, as exhibited by his mass murder and hardening of pharaoh's heart. Why not just release a firmware update? Some christians say it was to wipe out the angels that came to mess with humans. rather cheeky of yaweh that he can cuckold joseph, but his fallen angels can't get some. If evolution, a non guided process can isolate creatures so they cannot mate, why can't an infinitely powerful skydaddy?

  • @AronRa This is just to clarify my layman's understanding of evolution. Just a few questions.

    1. Would it be accurate to say that the environment, or habitat, that a living organism lives in is the main cause, or one of the main causes, for evolution, or a specific change in DNA?

    Oh and Happy Thanksgiving :)

  • @Zlibservacratican the environment, that is, everything an individual might encounter in a lifetime, will dictate whether or not a specific trait is useful or detrimental. A trait that gets in the way will get you killed, and you won't have any offspring. A trait helps you will keep you alive, and hopefully able to pass on the genes that produced that trait. A mutation (possibly caused by radiation in the environment) would possibly cause the change in the gene responsible for the trait.

  • @SirMildredPierce Ok, then it would be fair to say that any changes in the environment (as you have described) would bring about different changes in evolutionary progress. And proof of this would be the variety of felines from around the world in different environments shown in this video, right?

  • @Zlibservacratican changes in an environment don't guarantee "evolutionary progress" since they don't directly cause the evolution to happen. But any given trait might be more beneficial in a new environment over the old. The trait wouldn't even have to be new. But a change in an environment can likely cause extinction too. The fossil record shows many mass extinction events, likely due to changes in the environment. We are witnessing a mass extinction right now due to those changes.

  • @SirMildredPierce I think the words I may be looking for are "evolutionary development." Because the environment is constantly changing, does that not mean that living organisms are constantly evolving or developing? The environment has an indirect effect on what that development might create. Would extinction be an evolutionary development, where most traits if not all traits that a living organism owns fail to benifit that organism in its current environment?

  • @TheTudiscoKid If I were dumb, I would respond to someone without knowing what they were saying, which is what you have done, smart one.

  • +1. But regarding the cheetah you say, "to become the fastest...it sacrificed the ability to retract its claws".

    I have often myself run into doubters confused by statements like that one because it suggests that being faster was a "goal" of evolution or of cats. When really the adaptation merely turned out to be useful and thus survived.

    Shouldn't it be more like, "non-retractable claws were an adaptation that proved beneficial by allowing those individuals with it to run faster"?

  • I wonder if anyone has ever done a study on why saber-like teeth was such a promonent trend in mammals at that time. btw, you sometimes show a program which allows you to scroll through and select species/gamilies and the like; what is that?

  • Dear AronRa,

    I would like to express my appreciation for your work here on YouTube.

    You make these detailed, businesslike videos that are entertaining and refreshing because they Are businesslike.

    Thank You.

    P.S: I love the illustrations you use.

  • AronRa: you are the best! I always look forward to your videos. Great stuff!!!

  • @AthosAmo As I described in this video, with sexually reproductive animals, the word, "species" has an objective definition no matter how much some people might want to deny that.

  • @AronRa You're saying that the criteria chosen for what constitutes a species is objectively determined? Ha.

  • @AthosAmo Yes, just look at their DNA, or their ability to breed.

  • @cbernier3 You're missing the point.

  • @AthosAmo The criteria for whether or not two organisms can reproduce with one another is not "chosen".

    And yes, it is objectively determined.

    You can wish has hard as you'd like that a goldfish and a dog can have babies together...but it's just not going to happen. ;)

  • @Gooberlicious54 Read what I said again, 'cause I didn't say that.

  • @AronRa WOW. At the time I type this, there are 9 thumbs up for a response that failed to reconcile the fact that the choosing of the criteria for what makes a species is subjective. You guys are Amazing Atheists. I know. I know. Not all of you are.

  • @AronRa I would agree with that. But what about the definition of species which uses fertility as a basis? An example: lions and tigers, which represent different species of the panthera, can cross breed to produce fertile females and infertile males. Do you think that this would be an acceptable criteria to use for the separation of species? A separation of two sister taxa which are genetically distant enough to cause infertile (usually male) offspring when they cross breed?

  • @AronRa "Species," do you use the unified species concept where combine all 3 and determine then? Or as a paleontologist, do you stick to the morphological species concept?

  • @AthosAmo

    Species may be hard to define but this fact does not make all definitions applicable nor does it take away from the standards that have been observed. I see nothing subjective about isolated gene pools. Scientists may argue whether they are isolated, but species is not an arbitrary term. We may struggle to define it, but nature has a way of doing that to us. Remember, nature wasn't made for us; we are simply part of it.

  • @sherlockmethod Yet another person confuses the objective criteria with the subjective choosing of that criteria, for what makes a species. You guys all think the same or something! Same assumption! And this is just one of them.

  • @AthosAmo A species is a group of related animals that can have viable offspring. IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

  • @Anonie324 Should I laugh or cry? Read carefully before assuming. I'm done here.

  • @AthosAmo spe·cies: A group of living organisms consisting of similar individuals capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding. The species is the principal natural taxonomic unit, ranking below a genus and denoted by a Latin binomial, e.g., Homo sapiens

    hey lookit that! an objective definition to species.

    source: google dictonary

  • I always thought the scientific name for the common house cat was Felix Domesticus

  • @nicknufsik That was a long time ago. Scientists are constantly renaming things.

  • love your videos but this video needs to be expanded into more parts.

    too much information here that is condensed by time constraints.

  • How did I miss this video? Well done.

  • 12:53 Bitch Slap!!!!

  • AronRa thnak you very very much for your falsifying phylogeny series. Those vids are so packed with useful informations that I'm thinking about translating them into German, just for my personal purpose and understanding of course. Well, just to get a full grasp of all the animal forms you're talking about.

    And again: thanks man!