I wonder if the human race in the developed world really still evolves. Its obvious that evolution took place on past humans, and on all other creatures in the world. The main driving force of evolution, selection, doesnt exist in the developed world. No person is going to die of starvation, because of their physical stength, speed, agility, strength, etc. So does evolution really even happen anymore?
@galamonkey Good points and something to think about...Plus now different foods never eaten by certain peoples are readily available everywhere...Will the introduction of these food types interfere in some way? Do microwaves and cell phones interfere on some microbial level unknown at this time? Will antibiotics and other medications hinder our natural abilities to ward off illness? Time will tell but its a good bet they will.
It's more accurate to say that all life on the planet began in the sea. When the first creatures to crawl from the water did so, they were indeed small animals that would probably be something like a mudskipper or an amphibious slug. In *today's* ecosystem they would get picked off by land animals and birds, but as we are talking about the very first land animals, there's nothing to pick them off. :-)
Sorry to say we cannot point and show something changing in the way I believe you imagined. However, we all are in a transactional stage from one species to another. We may even be stucked and not changing anymore since we do not adapt to our environment much, but instead create an environment that suits us. Other animals, however, are adapting, therefore changing.
Funny is that here in The Netherlands evolution is generally accepted by everyone, that includes Muslims and Christians. I had never heard of 'Creationism' until I started to follow religious debate on youtube, generally brought by Americans.
I find it incredible how much hate there is in America, not just towards 'Atheists' but also towards anything that is remotely different then the average person.
I have one request for all: stop watching Fox 'news' and start reading a decent paper.
same here in UK i thought that the majority of america would be simmalar in america than the UK tbh i think the only religous person i know is one of my nans haa. if a runing candidate for primeminister told everyone he beleived in god he wouldnt get voted in while in the US its the reverse.
having watched many of your older videos, i am delighted at your new found curiousity. given further research, i'm confident you will be inspired by the sheer grace and simplicity of the theory of evolution, big bang, etc., and in turn maybe strengthen your faith. if i may quote the user LordOmberus, "you're definitely on the right track". happy learning and all the best!
I liked the video. Interesting questions and the best part: Trying to apply the theory to real world problems.
Okay, quite a lot of kinks to iron out yet because the jest of the evolutionary theory is not yet fully grasped in this vid (if I may be so rude to point it out).
I'd like to salute you on your inquiring mind and the food for thought you dished out here.
thanks and hopefully ive learned a thing or two over the last year...we all have the right to question our very existence and development...if man never inquired we never would have advanced.
Stonedcommander, I would suggest a grounding in evolutionary principals. DonExodus2 has a great video on "how evolution works" and you can follow it up with the proof of evolution.
Then when you have a grounding of evolution and specifically behavioural evolution, your mind will open up and you'll say things like...
"I wonder why male lions kill the cubs when they enter a new pride."
Or...
"I wonder by what process ants learned to be social."
Downs syndrome would be one possible avenue of human evolution, stupid as it sounds i know but i read an article that said physically we are pretty much at and end in new scientist. Mild downs syndrome people could go on to have down syndrome kids together, they wouldnt be health but providing they bred young they could keep going. Few generations you would get more pronounced traits, they would appear very different and also genetically different to the standard humans which bore them.
"not new information" so the extra chromosome has to be brand spanking new? do you want new schziz on molecular level too?
Srs bznz now; sickle cell is harmful, certain people carry that trait and it will kill you by the time you are forty.Thats harmful right? you might think it was neutral if you read into but its still killing you.
Downs syndrome was a crude example of how after even a few generations you would end up with something different to a standard human if the environment was right
One atheist told me that if we found a computer on Mars long before humans invented the computer we would conclude that the computer formed by natural causes.
That's because we haven't witnessed the creation of the computer before.
no, that would not be what we wouldve concluded. Kinda silly statement, as we kinda need computers to get to mars, but thats besides the point, extratrerrestial origin would be the conclusion...or the russians ofcourse...
Im glad to see youre asking questions out of genuine curiosity rather than defiant sarcasm. The study on how humans have been changing has already been done, and the results can be found in a book called The Journey of Man by Spencer Wells. I describe it in my video Human Ancestry Made Easy. Much of what you want to know is well researched and well documented in the textbooks already, so no need to invite speculation.
the term "defiant sarcasm",fits me well.ill admit...almost everything discussed on you-tube comes from documentation on the various subjects.i did not invent god,and you did not invent evolution.take it easy,potholer54.
I don't know if that =take it easy= means take care, or calm down. Either way, I'm glad you're keen to find out what scientists know about our origins, and you can fit your god around that. After all, the late Pope accepted evolution, as do millions of Christians. Here's the link for my video on Man's ancestry: watch?v=MCayG4IIOEQ
Sea creature to land, Look up lung fish, its more probable that lungs came about first and then limbs.
What is going to pick off the first creature to walk on land?
The comments on taking the measurements of babies is actually quite smart.
Nice to see you up for an open argument though.
Its been said lots of times but just Google observed speciation and follow the link to talk origins. Its the best place to pick up information without diving into science papers and boring yourself to tears.
so if man was the first out of the sea,we must assume that they still got sustenance from the sea then eventually ate land vegetation then insects perhaps.
Yep, they would still have had to eat what was in or around the sea (algae and the like, or smaller creatures) as well as breeding. Going onto the land must have somehow been beneficial. Either lower water levels caused by land uplift, or simply as a defense mechanism (hunter can't catch what it can't chase, If it can't enter shallow water it can't kill it and you don't get much shallower than land). The downside is you need to be able to support your weight.
your correct. But studies have hown that linbs developed before the transition onto land, decreasing the stress of weight bearing. What I think really drove animals to land is the abundancy of food!! The first creatures to colonize land would have a completely new world with untouched vegetation at their exposal: plants conquered land first. This meant an immensive change in evolution and increase of possibilities for natural selection to shape animals further..the predator thing is also good...
The reason why this "slug like thing" didn't get picked off right away is very simple if you think about it. If you're the first animal on land what's going to pick you off? Nothing you've got all the land to yourself. Anything that wanted to eat you is still living in the sea.
Fish first began to come out of the sea around 400 million years ago according to the fossil record. These were not just man's ancestors they were the ancestors of everything from Giraffes to Geckos to Gerbils.
Our ancestors weren't really the first land organisms. The first organisms were plants, and the first animals were insects.
you can wonder and talk for hours... we still haven't had real proof of an event of speciation. When we do then and only then will I ever believe in macro-evolution.
dooVoob, type "observed speciation" into your search engine, you'll find plenty of sites with the proof you're looking for, plus, macro-evolution is a creationist term, and it's definition changes when the evidence is layed before them, first it was the transition of species, then the transition of "kinds", whatever that means
"we still haven't had real proof of an event of speciation. When we do then and only then will I ever believe in macro-evolution. "
So basically, you lied, you asked for proof of one thing and said it would convince you, then when it was presented, you require more proof, so you have baised yourself against the evidence and nothing that is presented will sway you, it's the typical "that's not enough" arguement, and to some, nothing will ever be enough
3- an event of speciation is done instantly, show me any actual existant creature which had an offspring with enough increased genome that will show directly in their appearance. JUST ONE EXAMPLE, PICTURE, VIDEO, ANYTHING!
Youre not quite getting the picture of evolution, nor did you look up your questions that well before asking.
1-mutations, ranging from small insertions to complete genome duplication. Especially plants are well documented for being diploidy (double chromosome count) or even hexaploidy (6 times normal chromosome count!) and more !
2- what? member? as in ****? ill get back to you
3 this is hopefully not the 'cats dont give birth to dogs' argument, cause thats phail, it would DISPROVE evolution !
It's good to see that you're developing an awareness and understanding of evolution, it shows true growth of character to question one's beliefs and disbeliefs, as for living transitional forms, take a look at the mud skipper, and there are others less obvious or taken for granted, like penguines and seals, all three move between land and water as a way of life, I hope that provides a bit of insight, take care :)
ok, maybe not for us because we ain't scientists and get no access to laboratories but we can see and read about the results. for example the influenza bacterias. they reproduce themself every 20 minutes and evolve so fast that they can gain resistance against vaccine in just one year. It makes it necessary to develope new vaccine every year.
absolutely true, thats why insects and bacteria are such great research specimens concerning studying evolution; you can actually see it happening during your lifetime, which is pretty damn fast in terms of evolution!! Also, look up the nylon digesting bacteria, another great example of evolution through duplication/mutation. It works baby!!!! :)
Good to see your letting comments again. Yet, I find it hard to believe that things evolved over a million or a billion of years and come out as organized as like is.
actually close studies will reveal we are not that well build for the way we live, showing the trademark like what one can suspect from a process like evolution. Natural selection selects against bad design/adaptations, so what is left is a system/organism better adapted to its way of living and environment after every generation!
Think of it as throwing 10 dices, aiming for sixes. Every time you rolled, you keep the sixes aside and reroll the other ones, untill all of them are sixes.
Now, were you to roll all dices everytime until you got all 10 sixes, the chances would be near zero. However, by taking into account a system to eliminate the bad rolls or SELECT the good ones, chances of rolling 10 sixes increase enormously!! In nature, we refer to that process as Natural Selection.....tadaaa :)
Natural selection can be used to decrease the quantity of information existing in the genome. You select from the ones you have the ones that are more suitable.
Mutations increase the value of information, but we haven't seen a good mutation ever.(don't give me the example with the nylon bacteria because I spent 5 days of endless discussions with an evolutionist on this topic and I don't want to repeat that).
natural selection doesnt decrease the amount of information...period. At most, it decreases variation in certain allleles, which doesnt say thats the case for the entire species...period..
No beneficial mutations? Are we back at this ignorant Kent Hovind crapfest? Wrong wrong phail....im sorry, beneficial mutations arise alot, sorry to dissapoint you (hint: try using f***ing google, IDiot). This conversation is over until you give me some intelligent remarks. have a nice day ;) (period lolz)....
I actually use science(proven science) to treat sick people.I learn hard how to become a medic. I am 3rd year now and I know more that you when it comes to genetics, biology, anatomy, virology, bacteriology, biophysics,physiology etc.
I don't eat crap from anyone when it comes to this topics, so please refrain yourself.
dont start spamming nonsense, you have absolutely no background in genetics, biology, anatomy etc, or you wouldnt make the stupid comments you make all the time.
and even if you had 7 Phd's from all kind of educations, that doesnt make your comments look smarter or more correct.
and yet, unlike most people in the scientific community who are far more recognized than you you reject evolution. You don't have to take crap from me, but that won't make them go away.
YOUR arguemtn was that if our opinions regarding evolution are different your is correct and mine is "crap" because you are a biologist. MY "argument" is but a counterargument to yoursw since there are many more people with far more knowledge on the subject than you who disagree with you. Following the logic of your own argument, i am correct and your conclusion is crap.
My argument is inductive argument, with a true inferential claim and all true premises therefore it is strong and cogent.
You can't understand that what a person believes without seeing happen doesn't make that true.
And using fancy words trying to prove your intellectual superior status doesn't make your argument stronger.
You don't understand what I said.
The difference between me and you is that I can accept other people's opinions and respect them. My life is my own problem and I don't form my opinions on what others tell me it's true.
science isnt up for opinion mate, the truth is wat it is, although no man, either in the past or future, will obtain absolute truth. However, scientific evidence speaks for itself and does not need opinion to come to its conclusion, whatever you may wish.....
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA satanic religion, book of shadows, come on, this is too much, even for a troll like you....no beneficial mutations?!?! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Google mate, just google hahahaha idiot.....:):):)
every person undergoes around 175 mutations in a life time, theyre not that rare. For a person supposedly studying medics, you are shown a complete lack of intelligence....
Oh, I just remembered now: the "scientists" thought neanderthal men were different from us when they analyzed the DNA.The DNA was less than 10% different.
BUT they never thought that old people have 8% different DNA.
do you have some sort of source for that claim, because it sounds like complete crap to me. 8% equals 240 million single base pair substitutions, depending on what type of comparison you make. So.....wheres the source?
No, not the quantity of information in a genome, only the variability within that information pool.
and tell me, what is so hard about typing in 'benificial mutations' in for example google? Those are plentysome, but depend on the environment to determine if they are beneficial.
If you read AND understood my comment, you'd know I was not arguing FOR an increase in information (undefined), I was arguing for a decrease in VARIABILITY at most, something youve missed completely. As an MD student (right) who read more on genetics than I will ever do, you seem to lack any understanding of population dynamics, genetics, or even how alleles work. Mutation can change the information too. This is thoroughly documented and also available to you. MD....right..buddy...you've no clue
And if you want to make fun of me and my education that's fine. I am going to be a MD who thinks the earth is 6000 years old and that evolution is a stupid religion.
Actually, you're not going to be an MD. And I'll tell you why. The reason you are not is that as an individual with a medical degree, you would have to understand and accept the scientific method.
Furthermore, as an MD, you would understand that evolution occurs because you would learn about how viruses mutate from year to year and how new viruses can adapt from animals to humans.
To be blunt, you'd learn that evolution is reality.
Then they are scientifically illiterate. Or you're lying. One or the other.
I mean, it takes a special type of ignorance as a medical doctor to reject evolution while at the same time being forced to acknowledge things like the avian flu, which transferred from birds to humans.
It takes a special type of doctor to ignore the fact that babies are born with tails on occasion. Which directly refutes creation and supports evolution.
And that's just two of the examples they'd have to resolve.
First of all, I didn't say the majority of atheists are MD's. I said that MD's have to accept evolution because it's in fact true and demonstrated repeatedly through their education.
Second of all, atheism does not equate with evolution. As proof I submit Dr. Ken Miller who is a well known evolution proponent who also believes in Jesus Christ.
You have proven absolutely nothing except that you are ignorant on the subject of evolution. You keep proving my point over and over.
After my comments were shown to be utter nonsense, I no longer wish to argue. However, because whomever speaks last in an argument wins, I'll make my last claim and then run away.
"EVOLUTION IS ANTI-GOD and ANTI-BIBLE"
End translation.
So, because evolution basically proves that the creation story is non-sense it's anti-god? What if God isn't as defined by Christians.
Secondly, human rights prevents slavery. Therefore, this is ANTI-GOD because God permits slavery
Duplication of information followed by mutations in either the original or copied information results in additional information and/or traits in an organism.
Evolution = Adaptation
zxcvbnm8675309 2 months ago in playlist More videos from stonedcommander
Nice to see you're open-minded. But before I comment, this video is pretty old. Is it still up to date with your opinions?
Mithcoriel 8 months ago
I wonder if the human race in the developed world really still evolves. Its obvious that evolution took place on past humans, and on all other creatures in the world. The main driving force of evolution, selection, doesnt exist in the developed world. No person is going to die of starvation, because of their physical stength, speed, agility, strength, etc. So does evolution really even happen anymore?
galamonkey 8 months ago
@galamonkey Good points and something to think about...Plus now different foods never eaten by certain peoples are readily available everywhere...Will the introduction of these food types interfere in some way? Do microwaves and cell phones interfere on some microbial level unknown at this time? Will antibiotics and other medications hinder our natural abilities to ward off illness? Time will tell but its a good bet they will.
stonedcommander 8 months ago
It's more accurate to say that all life on the planet began in the sea. When the first creatures to crawl from the water did so, they were indeed small animals that would probably be something like a mudskipper or an amphibious slug. In *today's* ecosystem they would get picked off by land animals and birds, but as we are talking about the very first land animals, there's nothing to pick them off. :-)
PlasteredDragon 9 months ago
@PlasteredDragon Good point, yes, maybe there was no threat on the land so we advanced and developed more and more.
stonedcommander 9 months ago
lol i like this nicca hes kool lmfao
MrUnTouchAble103 1 year ago
dude what was the deal with the siren in the back ground?
17blakem 1 year ago
Sorry to say we cannot point and show something changing in the way I believe you imagined. However, we all are in a transactional stage from one species to another. We may even be stucked and not changing anymore since we do not adapt to our environment much, but instead create an environment that suits us. Other animals, however, are adapting, therefore changing.
ctelon 1 year ago
Technically, man didn't come from the water; primates didn't evolve until millions of years after life already sprang from the ocean onto the land.
asheradensein 2 years ago
Funny is that here in The Netherlands evolution is generally accepted by everyone, that includes Muslims and Christians. I had never heard of 'Creationism' until I started to follow religious debate on youtube, generally brought by Americans.
I find it incredible how much hate there is in America, not just towards 'Atheists' but also towards anything that is remotely different then the average person.
I have one request for all: stop watching Fox 'news' and start reading a decent paper.
GBXS 2 years ago
same here in UK i thought that the majority of america would be simmalar in america than the UK tbh i think the only religous person i know is one of my nans haa. if a runing candidate for primeminister told everyone he beleived in god he wouldnt get voted in while in the US its the reverse.
04carrolld 2 years ago
having watched many of your older videos, i am delighted at your new found curiousity. given further research, i'm confident you will be inspired by the sheer grace and simplicity of the theory of evolution, big bang, etc., and in turn maybe strengthen your faith. if i may quote the user LordOmberus, "you're definitely on the right track". happy learning and all the best!
pilotwave 2 years ago
You're definitely on the right track here, and it's good you're giving thought to that kind of thing.
Have you ever heard the old saying "Every dog is two meals away from being a wolf?"
LordOmberus 2 years ago
i never heard that but its awesome because its true.
stonedcommander 2 years ago
I liked the video. Interesting questions and the best part: Trying to apply the theory to real world problems.
Okay, quite a lot of kinks to iron out yet because the jest of the evolutionary theory is not yet fully grasped in this vid (if I may be so rude to point it out).
I'd like to salute you on your inquiring mind and the food for thought you dished out here.
Weltenweber 2 years ago
thanks and hopefully ive learned a thing or two over the last year...we all have the right to question our very existence and development...if man never inquired we never would have advanced.
stonedcommander 2 years ago
I agree, that is why we question to gain knowledge.
Everything should be questioned
questionsamson 2 years ago
Stonedcommander, I would suggest a grounding in evolutionary principals. DonExodus2 has a great video on "how evolution works" and you can follow it up with the proof of evolution.
Then when you have a grounding of evolution and specifically behavioural evolution, your mind will open up and you'll say things like...
"I wonder why male lions kill the cubs when they enter a new pride."
Or...
"I wonder by what process ants learned to be social."
Or...
"Why are individuals not genocidal?"
Rundvelt 2 years ago
Downs syndrome would be one possible avenue of human evolution, stupid as it sounds i know but i read an article that said physically we are pretty much at and end in new scientist. Mild downs syndrome people could go on to have down syndrome kids together, they wouldnt be health but providing they bred young they could keep going. Few generations you would get more pronounced traits, they would appear very different and also genetically different to the standard humans which bore them.
SothisAmon 2 years ago
You must be kidding me.
down syndrome is evolution...
wake up!
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
"not new information" so the extra chromosome has to be brand spanking new? do you want new schziz on molecular level too?
Srs bznz now; sickle cell is harmful, certain people carry that trait and it will kill you by the time you are forty.Thats harmful right? you might think it was neutral if you read into but its still killing you.
Downs syndrome was a crude example of how after even a few generations you would end up with something different to a standard human if the environment was right
SothisAmon 2 years ago
Keep dreaming brother.
I will stop this conversation here.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
fossil
mobby32 2 years ago
good video, its one of the first times i actually see a christian thinking for himself trying to understand the other point of view.
kavudiego 2 years ago
thanks,in fairness we should always ask questions,its the only way to get answers.
stonedcommander 2 years ago
agreed
kavudiego 2 years ago
One atheist told me that if we found a computer on Mars long before humans invented the computer we would conclude that the computer formed by natural causes.
That's because we haven't witnessed the creation of the computer before.
That's some of the logic behind their statements.
But I wouldn't generalize.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
no, that would not be what we wouldve concluded. Kinda silly statement, as we kinda need computers to get to mars, but thats besides the point, extratrerrestial origin would be the conclusion...or the russians ofcourse...
jzuidema 2 years ago
I assure you that that was exactly what the answer was.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
only the answer of the guy you talked to, not the answer of ANYONE with more than half a brain....
jzuidema 2 years ago
Chill out, don't take it personally.
I kind of sence a little anger in your tone.Why is that? Why do you defend this with such fanaticism? Are you payd for this?
Peace and love for you!!!
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
thats just a normal reaction to bulls**t :)
jzuidema 2 years ago
Im glad to see youre asking questions out of genuine curiosity rather than defiant sarcasm. The study on how humans have been changing has already been done, and the results can be found in a book called The Journey of Man by Spencer Wells. I describe it in my video Human Ancestry Made Easy. Much of what you want to know is well researched and well documented in the textbooks already, so no need to invite speculation.
potholer54 3 years ago
the term "defiant sarcasm",fits me well.ill admit...almost everything discussed on you-tube comes from documentation on the various subjects.i did not invent god,and you did not invent evolution.take it easy,potholer54.
stonedcommander 3 years ago
I don't know if that =take it easy= means take care, or calm down. Either way, I'm glad you're keen to find out what scientists know about our origins, and you can fit your god around that. After all, the late Pope accepted evolution, as do millions of Christians. Here's the link for my video on Man's ancestry: watch?v=MCayG4IIOEQ
potholer54 3 years ago
take it easy = take care
i saw a show with Leonard nimoy (Spock),and he said the original line was "take it easy",he hated it and said "live long and prosper".no joke.
will check it out.thanks
stonedcommander 3 years ago
LOL
You do not even know how evolution works!
I hope you now know why all planets are round!
Ridiculous!
Flipsen89 3 years ago
Stonedcomander: Private message me if you want to know my opinion, I am currently making possibly several videos on human anatomy.
RJL738 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Which version of Creation in the Bible do you like best?
Genesis Chapter ONE,
in which humans were created AFTER plants and animals?
Or chapter TWO, in which humans were created BEFORE plants and animals?
Chapter ONE,
in which man and woman were created at the same time?
Or chapter TWO,
in which man was created before the plants
and woman was created after all the animals?
Imaginefree69 3 years ago
Wait, you are the dude who was wondering what made planets round. I suggest you to go back to elementary school or maybe kindergarden, idiot.
viharsarok 3 years ago
Wiki "Aquatic Ape"
What Kind of proof of evolution are you looking for?
PatentPending3265 3 years ago
Comment removed
phoo67 3 years ago
i dont understand,what do you mean?
stonedcommander 3 years ago
Sea creature to land, Look up lung fish, its more probable that lungs came about first and then limbs.
What is going to pick off the first creature to walk on land?
The comments on taking the measurements of babies is actually quite smart.
Nice to see you up for an open argument though.
Its been said lots of times but just Google observed speciation and follow the link to talk origins. Its the best place to pick up information without diving into science papers and boring yourself to tears.
Cowinspace 3 years ago
so if man was the first out of the sea,we must assume that they still got sustenance from the sea then eventually ate land vegetation then insects perhaps.
stonedcommander 3 years ago
Yep, they would still have had to eat what was in or around the sea (algae and the like, or smaller creatures) as well as breeding. Going onto the land must have somehow been beneficial. Either lower water levels caused by land uplift, or simply as a defense mechanism (hunter can't catch what it can't chase, If it can't enter shallow water it can't kill it and you don't get much shallower than land). The downside is you need to be able to support your weight.
Cowinspace 3 years ago
your correct. But studies have hown that linbs developed before the transition onto land, decreasing the stress of weight bearing. What I think really drove animals to land is the abundancy of food!! The first creatures to colonize land would have a completely new world with untouched vegetation at their exposal: plants conquered land first. This meant an immensive change in evolution and increase of possibilities for natural selection to shape animals further..the predator thing is also good...
jzuidema 2 years ago
The reason why this "slug like thing" didn't get picked off right away is very simple if you think about it. If you're the first animal on land what's going to pick you off? Nothing you've got all the land to yourself. Anything that wanted to eat you is still living in the sea.
kaloriblossom 3 years ago
i never heard that we were the first organism to emerge from the sea.
very interesting if true.
stonedcommander 3 years ago
Fish first began to come out of the sea around 400 million years ago according to the fossil record. These were not just man's ancestors they were the ancestors of everything from Giraffes to Geckos to Gerbils.
Our ancestors weren't really the first land organisms. The first organisms were plants, and the first animals were insects.
kaloriblossom 3 years ago
you can wonder and talk for hours... we still haven't had real proof of an event of speciation. When we do then and only then will I ever believe in macro-evolution.
dooVoob 3 years ago
dooVoob, type "observed speciation" into your search engine, you'll find plenty of sites with the proof you're looking for, plus, macro-evolution is a creationist term, and it's definition changes when the evidence is layed before them, first it was the transition of species, then the transition of "kinds", whatever that means
Psittacosaurus 3 years ago
please provide an increase of genome proof
dooVoob 3 years ago
"we still haven't had real proof of an event of speciation. When we do then and only then will I ever believe in macro-evolution. "
So basically, you lied, you asked for proof of one thing and said it would convince you, then when it was presented, you require more proof, so you have baised yourself against the evidence and nothing that is presented will sway you, it's the typical "that's not enough" arguement, and to some, nothing will ever be enough
Psittacosaurus 3 years ago
1- an increase of genome proof will be enough
2- a human growing a new member will be enough
3- an event of speciation is done instantly, show me any actual existant creature which had an offspring with enough increased genome that will show directly in their appearance. JUST ONE EXAMPLE, PICTURE, VIDEO, ANYTHING!
dooVoob 3 years ago
Just look up Italian Wall Lizard ,dooVoob.
Hockeygod98 3 years ago
1 - Gene duplication, observed and documented
2- By the time a new member came around that animal would no longer be human, it would be our decendant, but it would not be us.
3- Speciation does not happen instantly but it can happen relatively quickly, Evening Primrose (Oenothera gigas) look it up.
Cowinspace 3 years ago
Youre not quite getting the picture of evolution, nor did you look up your questions that well before asking.
1-mutations, ranging from small insertions to complete genome duplication. Especially plants are well documented for being diploidy (double chromosome count) or even hexaploidy (6 times normal chromosome count!) and more !
2- what? member? as in ****? ill get back to you
3 this is hopefully not the 'cats dont give birth to dogs' argument, cause thats phail, it would DISPROVE evolution !
jzuidema 2 years ago
It's good to see that you're developing an awareness and understanding of evolution, it shows true growth of character to question one's beliefs and disbeliefs, as for living transitional forms, take a look at the mud skipper, and there are others less obvious or taken for granted, like penguines and seals, all three move between land and water as a way of life, I hope that provides a bit of insight, take care :)
Psittacosaurus 3 years ago
hey douglas,
it is possible to observe evolution nowadays.
ok, maybe not for us because we ain't scientists and get no access to laboratories but we can see and read about the results. for example the influenza bacterias. they reproduce themself every 20 minutes and evolve so fast that they can gain resistance against vaccine in just one year. It makes it necessary to develope new vaccine every year.
joshguitarTube 3 years ago
ive heard of this...also many insects have such short lifespans that multi-generational research has shown some interesting data.
stonedcommander 3 years ago
absolutely true, thats why insects and bacteria are such great research specimens concerning studying evolution; you can actually see it happening during your lifetime, which is pretty damn fast in terms of evolution!! Also, look up the nylon digesting bacteria, another great example of evolution through duplication/mutation. It works baby!!!! :)
jzuidema 2 years ago
Good to see your letting comments again. Yet, I find it hard to believe that things evolved over a million or a billion of years and come out as organized as like is.
LordShadrach 3 years ago
actually close studies will reveal we are not that well build for the way we live, showing the trademark like what one can suspect from a process like evolution. Natural selection selects against bad design/adaptations, so what is left is a system/organism better adapted to its way of living and environment after every generation!
jzuidema 2 years ago
Think of it as throwing 10 dices, aiming for sixes. Every time you rolled, you keep the sixes aside and reroll the other ones, untill all of them are sixes.
Now, were you to roll all dices everytime until you got all 10 sixes, the chances would be near zero. However, by taking into account a system to eliminate the bad rolls or SELECT the good ones, chances of rolling 10 sixes increase enormously!! In nature, we refer to that process as Natural Selection.....tadaaa :)
jzuidema 2 years ago
Stopping the dices needs intelligence. They just don;t stop by random chance.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
well, if you wanna call natural selection 'intellegence', then sure...no problem
jzuidema 2 years ago
Natural selection can be used to decrease the quantity of information existing in the genome. You select from the ones you have the ones that are more suitable.
Mutations increase the value of information, but we haven't seen a good mutation ever.(don't give me the example with the nylon bacteria because I spent 5 days of endless discussions with an evolutionist on this topic and I don't want to repeat that).
Anyway, you are entitled to your opinion.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
natural selection doesnt decrease the amount of information...period. At most, it decreases variation in certain allleles, which doesnt say thats the case for the entire species...period..
No beneficial mutations? Are we back at this ignorant Kent Hovind crapfest? Wrong wrong phail....im sorry, beneficial mutations arise alot, sorry to dissapoint you (hint: try using f***ing google, IDiot). This conversation is over until you give me some intelligent remarks. have a nice day ;) (period lolz)....
jzuidema 2 years ago
SELECT= to choose from a variety.
I'm sure that all those deformed children loved evoluion. Mutations are great!!!
Oh..what whould this world do without evolution..........makes you think...
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
obviously it is not enough to make YOU think
kavudiego 2 years ago
I actually think a lot, thanks for the concern.
I actually use science(proven science) to treat sick people.I learn hard how to become a medic. I am 3rd year now and I know more that you when it comes to genetics, biology, anatomy, virology, bacteriology, biophysics,physiology etc.
I don't eat crap from anyone when it comes to this topics, so please refrain yourself.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
dont start spamming nonsense, you have absolutely no background in genetics, biology, anatomy etc, or you wouldnt make the stupid comments you make all the time.
and even if you had 7 Phd's from all kind of educations, that doesnt make your comments look smarter or more correct.
jzuidema 2 years ago
Blah, blah,blah, name calling, insults.
Phd means doctor in philosophy.
MD means doctor in medicine. You clearly don't know the difference.
And believe me, I read more genetics than you will ever do, so shut up!
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
and yet, unlike most people in the scientific community who are far more recognized than you you reject evolution. You don't have to take crap from me, but that won't make them go away.
kavudiego 2 years ago
The argument from majority opinion is not logically correct.
1+1= 2 no matter how much people dissagree.
I prefer to study the problem for myself, listen to ALL the sides and choose the one that I think is correct.
If somebody doesn't believe in evolution doesn't make that person less intelligent or less informed.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
YOUR arguemtn was that if our opinions regarding evolution are different your is correct and mine is "crap" because you are a biologist. MY "argument" is but a counterargument to yoursw since there are many more people with far more knowledge on the subject than you who disagree with you. Following the logic of your own argument, i am correct and your conclusion is crap.
My argument is inductive argument, with a true inferential claim and all true premises therefore it is strong and cogent.
kavudiego 2 years ago
You can't understand that what a person believes without seeing happen doesn't make that true.
And using fancy words trying to prove your intellectual superior status doesn't make your argument stronger.
You don't understand what I said.
The difference between me and you is that I can accept other people's opinions and respect them. My life is my own problem and I don't form my opinions on what others tell me it's true.
You should do the same thing.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
science isnt up for opinion mate, the truth is wat it is, although no man, either in the past or future, will obtain absolute truth. However, scientific evidence speaks for itself and does not need opinion to come to its conclusion, whatever you may wish.....
jzuidema 2 years ago
Chill out mate.
I know where you are coming from.
And I also know that no beneficial mutations have happened as evolution portrays them.
Mutations are not a thing you would want to have.
Give me examples of a mutation with the increase of genetic information and I will believe you.
Evolution is a satanic religion, nothing more.
The book of shadows and the necromonicon contain that same religion who is thought as "science" to you.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA satanic religion, book of shadows, come on, this is too much, even for a troll like you....no beneficial mutations?!?! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Google mate, just google hahahaha idiot.....:):):)
jzuidema 2 years ago
every person undergoes around 175 mutations in a life time, theyre not that rare. For a person supposedly studying medics, you are shown a complete lack of intelligence....
jzuidema 2 years ago
Yeah, and you forgot to mention that the person DIES in the end.
Our DNA is 8 % different when we get old than our original.
God created us to live without mutations.Mutations are bad for anyone.
How can you call mutations good when they lead to death?
And stop using insults. I never called you names.Behave!!!
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
Oh, I just remembered now: the "scientists" thought neanderthal men were different from us when they analyzed the DNA.The DNA was less than 10% different.
BUT they never thought that old people have 8% different DNA.
That's what I call PURE IGNORANCE.
The bible calls that "WILLINGLY IGNORANT".
Hmm...how could the bible know that?
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
do you have some sort of source for that claim, because it sounds like complete crap to me. 8% equals 240 million single base pair substitutions, depending on what type of comparison you make. So.....wheres the source?
jzuidema 2 years ago
No, not the quantity of information in a genome, only the variability within that information pool.
and tell me, what is so hard about typing in 'benificial mutations' in for example google? Those are plentysome, but depend on the environment to determine if they are beneficial.
jzuidema 2 years ago
you make me laugh.
There is no new information added to the genome, just copied information or deleting of present information.
It's just copy/paste, not modify. The question is the designer of that information which I know its God.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
If you read AND understood my comment, you'd know I was not arguing FOR an increase in information (undefined), I was arguing for a decrease in VARIABILITY at most, something youve missed completely. As an MD student (right) who read more on genetics than I will ever do, you seem to lack any understanding of population dynamics, genetics, or even how alleles work. Mutation can change the information too. This is thoroughly documented and also available to you. MD....right..buddy...you've no clue
jzuidema 2 years ago
And if you want to make fun of me and my education that's fine. I am going to be a MD who thinks the earth is 6000 years old and that evolution is a stupid religion.
If you have a problem with that I don't care.
I am happy that I gave you a laugh, that's all.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
Actually, you're not going to be an MD. And I'll tell you why. The reason you are not is that as an individual with a medical degree, you would have to understand and accept the scientific method.
Furthermore, as an MD, you would understand that evolution occurs because you would learn about how viruses mutate from year to year and how new viruses can adapt from animals to humans.
To be blunt, you'd learn that evolution is reality.
You're simply ignorant of the evidence out there.
Rundvelt 2 years ago
LOL.
The majority of the MD's i know odn't believe in evolution, so your theory fails completely.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
Then they are scientifically illiterate. Or you're lying. One or the other.
I mean, it takes a special type of ignorance as a medical doctor to reject evolution while at the same time being forced to acknowledge things like the avian flu, which transferred from birds to humans.
It takes a special type of doctor to ignore the fact that babies are born with tails on occasion. Which directly refutes creation and supports evolution.
And that's just two of the examples they'd have to resolve.
Rundvelt 2 years ago
The magic word in your comment is "adapt"
That's what you call "evolution"
It's only adaptation or variation, not evolution.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
From your statement here I can tell you have absolutely no understanding of evolution.
Which is not unexpected given your responses.
Rundvelt 2 years ago
Let me give you osme insight on this issue:
There are 40 000 MD in Romania.
There are 20 000 atheists in Romania.
How does that fit into your theory that the majority of MD's are atheist or believe in evolution?
Check the Romanian census if you don't believe me.
I brought you the facts and i do know what I'm talking about.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
First of all, I didn't say the majority of atheists are MD's. I said that MD's have to accept evolution because it's in fact true and demonstrated repeatedly through their education.
Second of all, atheism does not equate with evolution. As proof I submit Dr. Ken Miller who is a well known evolution proponent who also believes in Jesus Christ.
You have proven absolutely nothing except that you are ignorant on the subject of evolution. You keep proving my point over and over.
Rundvelt 2 years ago
You are wrong again, the statistics prove that.
And I do know what I'm talking about when it comes to evolution. The majority of the MD I know don't believe in evolution.
But I can't speak with you because you use name calling and I don't like that.
You are either respectful or shut up.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
Fine, explain to me how the statistic...
"There are 40,000 MD in Romania"
Proves the following:
A) Evolution is tied to atheism.
B) Evolution is something that doctors learn and have to accept because it's shown multiple times to them in their training.
And I don't remember calling you a name. I simply said you don't know what you're talking about. Which you show over and over.
Furthermore, I question your knowledge in statistics, because you compare two things that aren't related.
Rundvelt 2 years ago
I am not continuing this discussion.
I hate arguing.
And last comment: EVOLUTION IS ANTI-GOD and ANTI-BIBLE.
It has EVERYTHING to do with anti-Christian doctrine.
BYE FOREVER!
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
Allow me to translate.
After my comments were shown to be utter nonsense, I no longer wish to argue. However, because whomever speaks last in an argument wins, I'll make my last claim and then run away.
"EVOLUTION IS ANTI-GOD and ANTI-BIBLE"
End translation.
So, because evolution basically proves that the creation story is non-sense it's anti-god? What if God isn't as defined by Christians.
Secondly, human rights prevents slavery. Therefore, this is ANTI-GOD because God permits slavery
Rundvelt 2 years ago
Reply didn't work again. Sigh.
Rundvelt 2 years ago
haha you beleive in jesus
04carrolld 2 years ago
Duplication of information followed by mutations in either the original or copied information results in additional information and/or traits in an organism.
This has been demonstrated many times.
PandyFackler7 2 years ago
NOT
Duplication is not new information.
It is copying of existing information and it leads to harmful or neutral effects on the organism.
Ex: Down syndrome.
Mutations screw the organism.
GoodGuy4life199 2 years ago
Not all mutations screw the organism. Showing one case where it's a disadvantage isn't really a solid argument that all mutations are negative.
It's like saying "I had a bad burger at McDonalds, so all fast food has bad burgers."
It simply doesn't follow.
Rundvelt 2 years ago