I feel that most every one on here is very closed minded.... and not willing to hear or see any other theory beyond what they want to believe. intelligent design while from this point of view hard to accept for people that believe only in science and what they can handle or touch. why do so many people especially scientists are not willing to consider something more then what they see or touch. ask with true intent to know if god is real and he will answer.
That 380M yr. old fish on the table is none other than the coelacanth. Remember it was the intermediatary darling of evolution said to walk across the shallow sea floor with it's bony fins & possesed primative lungs - they found it alive in 1938-it's a fish / swim bladder & all. It can live in deep water, & it doesn't crawl it swimms. Wow, this guy has some nerve to use it in his example w/ their latest intermediary darling Tiktaalik which means "shallow water FISH", not amphibian. lol!
@TheBereangirl I'm going to guess you got that notion from various religiously backed intelligent design/creationism websites. Please check your assertion against peer-reviewed scientific papers on the specimen in question, and compare that to any papers on the coelacanth, and seen if there is any supported conclusion that they are one and the same.
@GermanChocolateCake I think I'll look for books @ the library before the coelocanth was actually found & studied to see what evolutionists claims were re: the fishes soft tissue anatomy & behavior only using fossils.
Ahhh!.."ID"..such schemers! I'm glad they lost, that will learn 'em for trying to pull a fast one...creationist is fine w/ me. Peer reviewed to me means "cronies", not real objective these days, its hard to find scientists who are. Mmm..Ger.Choc.Cake, I think I'll make one!=)
@TheBereangirl "Peer reviewed to me means "cronies", not real objective these days, its hard to find scientists who are. "
That's unfortunate. I have to wonder what experience motivated you to such a cynical conclusion. that kind of thinking walks dangerously close to "judging a book by its cover", i.e. making baseless conclusions because it just "seems right."
I'd HIGHLY recommend you take some college science courses, and learn how science actually functions before assuming you're correct.
@GermanChocolateCake yes it's unfortunate that modern day scientist only parrot eachothers "scientific findings". I don't need to take a college course to see that modern science black balls anyone w/ a different scientific view that conflicts w/ the charished status quo, this has always been the case, just ask Galileo, Newton & any other scientific boat rocker from history's pages. I found a book about Louis Agassiz and Charles Lyell, I'm reading them now, creation was in vouge in their day=)
@TheBereangirl I think if you read the Galileo affair a little closer you'll see that his opposition largely came from the church and organizations with political and philosophical positions tied to it like the Jesuits. Newton hid his religious beliefs out of fear of persecution for having beliefs that were controversial, even heretical in the church's eyes (particularly regarding the trinity).
But all that aside, any evidence for your claim that modern science black lists opposing views?
@GermanChocolateCake exactly my point. The evil Catholic church exerted great power over science re:Galileo & Newton, now ironically it's the reverse. Wow, I thought this video's spin WAS the proof creation scientists are inept & junk scientists. In order for them to become scientists, they earned degrees from major secular evolution teaching universities. This means they've learned/studied the theory of evolution, took tests, passed, & as professors teach it, so why are their theories mocked?
@TheBereangirl "In order for them to become scientists, they earned degrees from major secular evolution teaching universities. This means they've learned/studied the theory of evolution, took tests, passed, & as professors teach it, so why are their theories mocked?"
Are you referring to the supposed creation scientists? If so, I highly recommend that you review some of the "leading" creation "scientists" credentials before sticking to that conclusion. Ken Ham for example.
I wonder what the human species will give rise to in a million years? If we aren't dead by then or completely destroyed the planet, I hope we have evolved into a less stupid species.
Anyone know about the hoatzin? It has claws, too. Archaeopteryx was entirely bird. Plus, fully formed birds are found in the fossil record earlier than the dinosaurs that supposedly evolved into them, so you've got a big problem.
Did you know that flying lemurs are closely related to primates? Bats are closely related to primates as well. Bats and flying lemurs are pretty close to actually being flying monkeys. Animals in trees tend to evolve uses of the forelimbs, not associated with walking on the ground. We all think of bats as flying rats, but why would rats fly? Instead, a near-primate animal in the trees could easily evolve extra skin to glide and/or actually fly as they leap from limb to limb.
I wonder how many creationists argued that the Tiktaalik fossil was placed by the devil, so it could be found by those heathen scientists and deceive people of weak faith...
Such is the power of placing the validity of personal revelation before the validity of objective observation. There are some people who you will never convince.
@jaggo84 Tiktaalik was a fish, sorry to inform you. It's not a 'missing link' at all. The coelocanth has bony appendages but it's utterly a fish. It's never been observed using them for support, and Tiktaalik is no different, structurally.
@dougmoerhoffman Yes, it's classified as a fish, a sarcopterygian to be more exact. The appendages of Coelacanth are structurally similar to those of Tiktaalik, true. But you could say the same about the front limbs of a T-rex and those of an oviraptor. It doesn't mean they were used equally. The concept is called homology.
Besides, Tiktaalik is just one of the documented species showing the transitional adaptation of vertebrates from water to land.
@jaggo84 If a coelocanth stays coelocanth for 'millions of years' without giving rise to amphibians, what makes you think Tiktaalik did? You can't say it's a transitional form without using your imagination. As I've pointed out, it's not transitional at all--it's entirely fish.
@dougmoerhoffman You are implying a process that goes from species A to B, in a straight line. What the record suggests is that species A and B are like leaves found in a same branch in a tree. They might come from different stems, but still are part of the same branch.
You can find a few species well adapted to a particular environment that has remained relatively unchanged for millions of years, and where natural selection doesn't favor random mutations.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
it might be important to note that there are many IDers that are not Christians, that are antagonistic towards religion. Lots of the scientists doing research for the Discovery Institute don't believe in the Christian God, but a being of intelligence that is and agent. They say this being has the power to create matter and life, but they don't want to say that this is what we generally consider God to be. Some would say that the designer is a powerful agent that has little interest in humanity.
Discovery institute is nothing but a christian front supporting wedge-terrorism so your fantasy is wrong by default. its been proven that they do not have an actual theory yet, so calling their fictive thinking research is a damn travesty and mud thrown to the face of real science. ID not science, its just a bunch christians trying to use a lot of blanket-excuse to eject their mindrape to american kids head.form a testable theory, win an instant nobel and then we can return to the question.
Unbelievable! The fact that the school board was so shady about it...an anonymous donor!! After the teachers fairly voting against it...they wanted to have it their way no matter what the vote! If we didn't have it in our constitution...who's knows what would of happen! What's with the audio delay!
I feel that most every one on here is very closed minded.... and not willing to hear or see any other theory beyond what they want to believe. intelligent design while from this point of view hard to accept for people that believe only in science and what they can handle or touch. why do so many people especially scientists are not willing to consider something more then what they see or touch. ask with true intent to know if god is real and he will answer.
jfoxbuddy 2 months ago
Ken Miller is the only theist hero that i have at the moment! -Go ken!!
Lennon4ever1 6 months ago
I have a feeling the next part is gonna be good !
funkyleaf 7 months ago
"...it's clear the judge was interested in the science."
It's easy to be interested in the science when you have teachers like Miller and Padian.. I wish they were my teachers in grade 9.
influenza99 7 months ago 3
Man...it's weird to think that such a retarded thing was so big so few years ago...
macgeek2004 8 months ago
That 380M yr. old fish on the table is none other than the coelacanth. Remember it was the intermediatary darling of evolution said to walk across the shallow sea floor with it's bony fins & possesed primative lungs - they found it alive in 1938-it's a fish / swim bladder & all. It can live in deep water, & it doesn't crawl it swimms. Wow, this guy has some nerve to use it in his example w/ their latest intermediary darling Tiktaalik which means "shallow water FISH", not amphibian. lol!
TheBereangirl 9 months ago
@TheBereangirl Where is the scientific paper that supports your assertion?
GermanChocolateCake 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake I found this information on the internet from many different sources - sorry to say, I didn't keep a record of the websites.
TheBereangirl 9 months ago
@TheBereangirl I'm going to guess you got that notion from various religiously backed intelligent design/creationism websites. Please check your assertion against peer-reviewed scientific papers on the specimen in question, and compare that to any papers on the coelacanth, and seen if there is any supported conclusion that they are one and the same.
We await your findings.
GermanChocolateCake 9 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake I think I'll look for books @ the library before the coelocanth was actually found & studied to see what evolutionists claims were re: the fishes soft tissue anatomy & behavior only using fossils.
Ahhh!.."ID"..such schemers! I'm glad they lost, that will learn 'em for trying to pull a fast one...creationist is fine w/ me. Peer reviewed to me means "cronies", not real objective these days, its hard to find scientists who are. Mmm..Ger.Choc.Cake, I think I'll make one!=)
TheBereangirl 9 months ago
@TheBereangirl "Peer reviewed to me means "cronies", not real objective these days, its hard to find scientists who are. "
That's unfortunate. I have to wonder what experience motivated you to such a cynical conclusion. that kind of thinking walks dangerously close to "judging a book by its cover", i.e. making baseless conclusions because it just "seems right."
I'd HIGHLY recommend you take some college science courses, and learn how science actually functions before assuming you're correct.
GermanChocolateCake 9 months ago 2
@GermanChocolateCake yes it's unfortunate that modern day scientist only parrot eachothers "scientific findings". I don't need to take a college course to see that modern science black balls anyone w/ a different scientific view that conflicts w/ the charished status quo, this has always been the case, just ask Galileo, Newton & any other scientific boat rocker from history's pages. I found a book about Louis Agassiz and Charles Lyell, I'm reading them now, creation was in vouge in their day=)
TheBereangirl 8 months ago
@TheBereangirl I think if you read the Galileo affair a little closer you'll see that his opposition largely came from the church and organizations with political and philosophical positions tied to it like the Jesuits. Newton hid his religious beliefs out of fear of persecution for having beliefs that were controversial, even heretical in the church's eyes (particularly regarding the trinity).
But all that aside, any evidence for your claim that modern science black lists opposing views?
GermanChocolateCake 8 months ago
@GermanChocolateCake exactly my point. The evil Catholic church exerted great power over science re:Galileo & Newton, now ironically it's the reverse. Wow, I thought this video's spin WAS the proof creation scientists are inept & junk scientists. In order for them to become scientists, they earned degrees from major secular evolution teaching universities. This means they've learned/studied the theory of evolution, took tests, passed, & as professors teach it, so why are their theories mocked?
TheBereangirl 8 months ago
@TheBereangirl "In order for them to become scientists, they earned degrees from major secular evolution teaching universities. This means they've learned/studied the theory of evolution, took tests, passed, & as professors teach it, so why are their theories mocked?"
Are you referring to the supposed creation scientists? If so, I highly recommend that you review some of the "leading" creation "scientists" credentials before sticking to that conclusion. Ken Ham for example.
GermanChocolateCake 8 months ago 2
I wonder what the human species will give rise to in a million years? If we aren't dead by then or completely destroyed the planet, I hope we have evolved into a less stupid species.
limbdarkening 11 months ago
The finding of the Tiktaalik at the same time as the trial wasn't luck. It was a miracle from God endorsing evolution. Take that, Creationists!
jessc1979 1 year ago 3
The finding of the Tiktaalik at the of the trial wasn't luck. It was a miracle from God endorsing evolution. Take that, Creationists!
jessc1979 1 year ago
Anyone know about the hoatzin? It has claws, too. Archaeopteryx was entirely bird. Plus, fully formed birds are found in the fossil record earlier than the dinosaurs that supposedly evolved into them, so you've got a big problem.
dougmoerhoffman 1 year ago
get this motherfucking religion, out my motherfucking classroom!
Raptors09999 1 year ago
I wonder how many evolutionists believe that the tiktaalik fossil invalidates the idea of intelligent design?
dragondoubt 1 year ago
Trying to sell the same book with a different cover!
Project1542 1 year ago
Pro. Miller FTW!!
wowamonn 1 year ago
I love the background music in a lot of these Nova videos
COVDS 2 years ago 4
If I didn't know who kenneth miller is, Im sure I would be convinced that the actor is miller himself.
Nades129 2 years ago
"are not" ofc :P
sirika616 2 years ago
I want a flying monkey dammit.
nurdnel 3 years ago 3
Did you know that flying lemurs are closely related to primates? Bats are closely related to primates as well. Bats and flying lemurs are pretty close to actually being flying monkeys. Animals in trees tend to evolve uses of the forelimbs, not associated with walking on the ground. We all think of bats as flying rats, but why would rats fly? Instead, a near-primate animal in the trees could easily evolve extra skin to glide and/or actually fly as they leap from limb to limb.
kf1000 3 years ago
@nurdnel I want to be a flying monkey!
dammit that we are closer related to lemurs :<
sirika616 2 years ago
give it time an ID will make one appear for u or just pray for one
cjms08 2 years ago
just jump on a plane
cjms08 2 years ago
I wonder how many creationists argued that the Tiktaalik fossil was placed by the devil, so it could be found by those heathen scientists and deceive people of weak faith...
jaggo84 3 years ago 24
@jaggo84
Such is the power of placing the validity of personal revelation before the validity of objective observation. There are some people who you will never convince.
matt22mccarthy 1 year ago
@jaggo84 Tiktaalik was a fish, sorry to inform you. It's not a 'missing link' at all. The coelocanth has bony appendages but it's utterly a fish. It's never been observed using them for support, and Tiktaalik is no different, structurally.
dougmoerhoffman 1 year ago
@dougmoerhoffman Yes, it's classified as a fish, a sarcopterygian to be more exact. The appendages of Coelacanth are structurally similar to those of Tiktaalik, true. But you could say the same about the front limbs of a T-rex and those of an oviraptor. It doesn't mean they were used equally. The concept is called homology.
Besides, Tiktaalik is just one of the documented species showing the transitional adaptation of vertebrates from water to land.
jaggo84 1 year ago
@jaggo84 If a coelocanth stays coelocanth for 'millions of years' without giving rise to amphibians, what makes you think Tiktaalik did? You can't say it's a transitional form without using your imagination. As I've pointed out, it's not transitional at all--it's entirely fish.
dougmoerhoffman 1 year ago
@dougmoerhoffman You are implying a process that goes from species A to B, in a straight line. What the record suggests is that species A and B are like leaves found in a same branch in a tree. They might come from different stems, but still are part of the same branch.
You can find a few species well adapted to a particular environment that has remained relatively unchanged for millions of years, and where natural selection doesn't favor random mutations.
jaggo84 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
it might be important to note that there are many IDers that are not Christians, that are antagonistic towards religion. Lots of the scientists doing research for the Discovery Institute don't believe in the Christian God, but a being of intelligence that is and agent. They say this being has the power to create matter and life, but they don't want to say that this is what we generally consider God to be. Some would say that the designer is a powerful agent that has little interest in humanity.
jbrunofilm 3 years ago
Discovery institute is nothing but a christian front supporting wedge-terrorism so your fantasy is wrong by default. its been proven that they do not have an actual theory yet, so calling their fictive thinking research is a damn travesty and mud thrown to the face of real science. ID not science, its just a bunch christians trying to use a lot of blanket-excuse to eject their mindrape to american kids head.form a testable theory, win an instant nobel and then we can return to the question.
somberlight 2 years ago 28
That's the place with the cave men living harmoniously side-by-side with Dinosaurs right?
ARGH!
TomMSTie 2 years ago
Unbelievable! The fact that the school board was so shady about it...an anonymous donor!! After the teachers fairly voting against it...they wanted to have it their way no matter what the vote! If we didn't have it in our constitution...who's knows what would of happen! What's with the audio delay!
whole27 3 years ago 7