God, Darwin, and Design 4 - Ken Miller

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Think about it. You've been told over & over that fins turned into feet and scales turned into feathers. There are uncounted billioins of fossils in uncounted tons. Every last 1 is 100% feather, 100% scale, 100% fin or 100% foot. Yes, "Walking fish" can to a certain extent scoot on their fins in a foot like way, but they are no exception. They are 100% fish & their fins are 100% fins, just one of nature's many anomalies. Remember Miller said Tike is "as good as it gets." He's right!

[LoricaLady]

Cont. You can see this better if you Google Melbourne Museum Tiktaalik & find the replica there. The actual fossil has tiny frontal fins which show no musculature & has no back end. The replica has strong, muscular fins about 5X at least bigger than the fossil's. The back end magically appears with legs/fins such as have never been observed in nature. All the "creative" add ons are for Tik's magical" transition" from water to land. Folks, this ain't science, & evo never is. Cont.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Not only do they tell you that they predicted what kind of descendants it would have, with 0 evidenced to back that up, they even tell you that they know how ITS invisible descendants' invisible descendants' reproduced. (How do you tell a "missing link" from a never existed one?) And then they accuse creationists of "magical thinking." But it gets better, or worse, depending on your persepctive. Examine the replica and compare it closely to the actual fossil. Cont.

[LoricaLady]

2:28 This is one of my "fave" vids. Miller says that Tiktaalik is "as good as it gets" for a transitional form. I absolutely agree with him! Take a good look at the replica and compare it to the fossil. "So you have a fish..." Yes, you have a...FISH. 100% fish, 100% fish fins. They tell you. their humble opinion, that it has "characteristics" of a tetrapod. Do they have a shred of evidence that its descendants were ever significantly different? Of course not. Cont.

[Th0usandMaster]

lol your inner fish, this worth double-d favourites

[Hovercat636]

OMG! where DO breasts come from!?

[LoricaLady]

TO ANY INTERESTED: If you see me ignoring posters below, they know they're on ignore. I do not "debate" with people who follow me from vid series to vid serires, & use personal insults, name calling, gross obscenities, false accusations of lying, &, like Foxlake - sexual harrassment & felling someone who worte me a pure porno post, "Good job."  Such behaviors interfere with the true purposes of science. I am happy to debate with those who are civil & obejctive.

[LoricaLady]

Cont: Here is another great quote re the fossil record, from Richard Dawkins in The Blind Watchmaker. He is referring to the so called Cambiran Explosion where highly complex animals just "show up" fully formed. "And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolutoin, the first time they appear." That is a faith based statement. If only found in an admittedly advanced state, where's the scientific evidence that they have evolved? & we have many billions of those fossils. Cont

[MattleSystem]

@LoricaLady That' is called the truth of naturalistic science! I mean who on Earth is enough stupid to believe that we are able to gie pure evidence that an animal is linked to another one with just fossils?

Paleontology, geology and genetic are combined to give the maximum relationship between time and life form. But of course "we can't say the grand grand father of this amphibian charly is the fish albert for Ohio"?

Your quotes are just the reflect that they are real objective scientists!

[MattleSystem]

We don't have the ID card, we just have the DNA, the evidence of mutations, changes in phenotype, compared anatomy, time record, paleogeography, paleostratigraphy, fossil record, etc... and present speciations at short scale!

It is like asking your family tree without reference! How can you say it is your grand parents, you share only 25% of his DNA.... Yep you have a picture, but it does not mean it is your grand parent! if you can"t find the parent in between, it does not count!

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Continuing on with quotes by JohnHorner in his book, Dinosaur LIves, 1997, p.19, "These days it's easy to go through school for a good many years [I believe mostly all of them for mostly all people] without ever hearing that some sciences are historical or by nature inconclusvie." Ahem. Yet evo-ites constantly say Well, if you accept rocket science & medicine, etc., then you must accept eovlution as all of it is science. Only a very rare few like Horner explain that misconception. Cont

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Every time I have referred to Colin Patterson who said, in short, that claiming transitional forms is not science because "it can never be put to the test" - which of course it cannot - people accuse me of quote mining there too. Yet when I ask them to show me where Patterson ever retracted that, & even worse things said about evolution they just say "Read such & such book or link" or ignore me. They never show a quote that indicates his words are out of context, but act as if they can.

[foxlake02]

@LoricaLady Patterson did not say, in short or in any other way, that transitional forms is not science. He was saying it is not possible to say for certain whether a fossil is in the direct ancestral line of a species group. The fact that paleontology will always be inconclusive does not mean it's not science. It just means it's not dogma. The nested hierarchy that molecular biology shows is the best evidence for evolution. Along with evolution being observed. The fossil evidence supports that.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. "...a science based on circumstantial evidence, after the fact. We can never reach hard and fast conclusions...." How convenient. So then why are we being told over and over by evolutionists that this & that fossil IS a "transitional form", rather than WE THINK MAYBE it is one? What happened to scientific integrity? Google Colin Patterson That Quote to see more debunks of claiming transition, by a former head paleontologist at the Brit. Museum of Nat'l History. Some tell the truth.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Here is a post by John H. Horner, a paleontologist & evolutionist, who was portrayed as a paleontologist in Jurassic Park. Now before I get accused of doing a "quote mine", i.e. misquoting someone, I invite any such accusers to show me a quote, in context, that refutes what I have included. "Paleontolgy is a historical science [i.e. it is not an operational science like medicine, rocket science, computer science etc. which relies on what is observable, testable & repeatable]..." Cont.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Remember, Miller says in this vid that the fossil of Tiktaalik is "As good as it gets" for showing that there are transtional fossils. To be cont. on Vid. 5.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Compare the actual fossil fin at 1:24, the 3D replica fin behind the fossil at 1:33 & the drawing at 1:44. You can Google Your Inner Fish to get a more complete view of the cover art work of Tik. Lol! All 3 "fins" are different! So which one is correct? The fossil of course. And it does NOT match the drawings! ITS fins couldn't stand or walk! Most folk see all this going by quickly & are impresed by the "scientists" & their fancy words, so don't notice the sleight of hand.

Cont.

[foxlake02]

@LoricaLady Instead of looking at the picture on the cover of "Your Inner Fish" why don't you try reading the book? It's an interesting read and not "fancy words" at all. He uses layman's terms and makes it easy to understand. If you pay attention to what he was saying here, instead of trying to distort it, you would see he is showing the morphology from fish to amphibian. He is describing how, in his expert opinion, Tiktaalik fits the transition nicely. Others have been found too.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Here is an attempt to go lower than "You're just a modified ape" to "You're just a modified fish." Folks, people who lie to you, & present phoney art work to fool you, who use logical fallacies & call it science, aren't trying to help you! 4:23 Here is someone trying to get you to believe human anatomy shows an "inner fish." From the time there is a human zygote, all parts are unique to humans. There are not, as taught, gill slits, for ex. Embrace you inner dignity & use YOUR mind.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Here again is their continuous use of the logical fallacy of Correlation Does Not Imply Causation. Just because some fragment of a fish fin looks, to their desperate minds, like it has some similarities to an amphibian, we are to accept it as a "transition." Once again we are to fill in the blanks with our imaginations and faith in the "scientists" and just belieeeeve those fossilized fish popped out progeny that turned into amphibians - leaving about a gazillion "missing links." Cont.

[LoricaLady]

3:10 Having shown us a fossil of Tiktaalik which does not match its phony art replica or the phony cast, we are next being told they have found a fish with fingers.

What nonsense! Fish have bones inside their fins, some may look more like "fingers" than others because there is incredible diversity in nature, but none of them, of course, have "fingers"! Next we see these so called examples of "transitions."

They are just more bones inside of fins, some different from others. Cont.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. It is laughable. As usual the so called evidence for evolution, if you look at it analytically & critically, is showing the exact opposite of what they claim. As usual we are to fill in the blanks, i.e. between Tik & amphibians, with our imaginations, or rather faaaith. Though there is no evidence Tik ever had any descendants even slightly different from itself, and isn't even that much of an anomaly, we are told to accept it as scientific evidence for a transition. What a scam. Cont.

[LoricaLady]

1:30 Looking right at the phony, long, strong fins on the Tik replica I am shown another manmade replica, a cast. I'm to believe Tik has got somethining akin to a shoulder & arm & wrist! I see the one in the cast alright. But the fossil is showing no such thing. The fish fossil's fins looks pretty much like any ol' catfish or goldfish fins. If Tik has similarities to shouders, arms & wrists,,so do they! Actually the fins are light years away from looking anyting like those amphibian legs.

[LoricaLady]

TO ANY INTERESTED; If you see I am not responding to posters below, they know they are on ignore. They track me from vid series to vid series, where I get called names, insulted, falsely accused of lying, had my posts hidden & even experienced some sexual harrassment. Such behaviors do not make "debate" possible for the true purposes of science. I am happy to debate with the very few evo-ites on YT who are civil, objective & truly science & logic based - or at least consistently civil!

[MattleSystem]

TO ANY INTERESTED; If you see I am responding to her , she knows she is on tracked. bcz she track miller's vid series to vid series, where she get called names, insulted, rightly accused of lying, hadher posts hidden. We experienced lot of intellectual harrassment. Such behaviors do not make "debate" possible for the true purposes of science. We are happy to tell her , she is OUT of DATE! She needs to read her posts and see that she is evolutionist for few things....and ignorant for the rest...

[MattleSystem]

Yep, little children! You see evolution at the small scale of human time, which started when man tried to understand the life diversity... Si only 200 years ago... And we have a lot of speciation and small phenotype adaptation, whic means genotype changes... This is only in 200 years.

So little children, Just imagine what can be the changes at bigger scale of time! Yes, the fossil records is the only hints of this evolution at larger scale! We don't lie, it is there, in the ground!

[MattleSystem]

Loricalady About your acceptation of Evolution in the same kind, lets say fish to another fish, apparently you accept that statement without problem if the fish keep the fins, the respiratory system and the scales... So bigger or smaller, hairy or not, it does not matter for you if they are another specie. You accept that!

So Ape and human are the same kind, they don't need new legs, or wings... so you can accept the same ancestor...;-), wolf to dog, cat and tiger, birds to birds...

[foxlake02]

@LoricaLady Yes we know there are flat headed fish. It's not a conspiracy. It is the COMBINATION of traits found at the right time in the strata that is interesting. Fish would have had to evolve such a combination of traits for them to have moved onto land. It shows what was predicted and was found in the layer predicted too. That's a lot of predictive power for a theory that has no evidence. If you was talking to me you would have to admit that. Lucky you!

[LoricaLady]

@foxlake02 "Fish would have had to evovle such a combination... This is a typical faith based evo statement. "It would have HAD to have happened! So therefore it DID happen! So, tho we show lying replicas & have 0 evidence that Tik's progeny became more amphibian like, we're gonna declare flatly, with Divine "knowledge" & authority that it is part of the process! We're don't say it MIGHT be a transitional form. We say IT IS. (Uh ignore the "creative" artists behind the curtain.") Cont.

[foxlake02]

@LoricaLady You misinterpret my meaning here. I am saying that if tetrapods evolved from fish, it would be necessary to see this type of combination of traits. That is what was predicted and that is what was found. Exactly in the strata predicted too. I know it does not prove evolution happened by itself. The best evidence for that is the nested hierarchy that molecular biology shows. It is just additional evidence that this is how the transition occurred. Stop playing word games sweetie.

[foxlake02]

@LoricaLady I told you before, it IS a transitional form. That does not mean they know it was a direct ancestor to any modern tetrapod. In fact, given that most species have eventually gone extinct, it is statistically probable that it was NOT a direct ancestor. It has the morphology required if this particular transition occurred. That qualifies it as a transitional species. Please look up the meaning of the word as used in paleontology. It's your side that claims "divine knowledge".

[MattleSystem]

@foxlake02 you need to provide the ID card of all fossil you find. Otherwise how can you hope that creationist will understand one day that amphibian are linked to fish... You need the ID card, with picture of grand parents and also the certificate of birth with all signature from authorities.... This is the only evidence they need...

What? aaaah, it is not possible! so creationist will never understand a piece of Evolution.... So sad....but so laughable! ;-)

[foxlake02]

@MattleSystem If I could provide pictures they would just say I used Photoshop to edit them. It really doesn't matter what evidence they are given. Their minds are made up. Dogma is what they will believe and the evidence must be twisted and distorted to match their storybook.

[foxlake02]

@LoricaLady According to Wikipedia, a transitional form is a human construct of a selected form that vividly represents a particular evolutionary stage, as recognized in hindsight. On a cladogram representing the historical divergences of life-forms, a "transitional fossil" will represent an organism near the point where individual lineages (clades) diverge. For our discussion (that we are not having) the key word here is NEAR. I have recommended a book to you that explains it better than I can.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. "Characteristics of..." & "similar homology" & "We found it in [by their ever changing & self serving standards] the right place for a transtiion" presented as evidence is not science, it is using hte logical fallacy of Correlation Does Not Imply Causation.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. With billions of trilobites around the world, and many examples of preserved soft tissues found - even preserved cells - it is a paltry excuse to say, :There is a lack of soft tissue, or by golly we surely would have the evidence for evolution." This is a tacit admission that there is no evidence. All the so called "transitions" are backed by nothing but speculaiton, just like Tiktaalik. They find a few extinct fossils no one can demonstrate led to each other & call it evidence.

[MattleSystem]

@LoricaLady "Transitions" What we call "transition" is the appearence of new function with the time. Of course it is like looking at your child everyday, you don't notice really that he is growing up until he can't enter in his pant! But with an old friend met when you were 10, and you see him now, 50, you see all the difference!.

In evolution it is the same, it is gradual! it does not pop from nowhere! like wings or legs or eyes! it is gradual!

in Time scale of Earth age, we have extracts!

[LoricaLady]

For those who try to paint creationists as a bunch of illiterate fanatics who think fossils in the rocks are fakes, they ought to get real & be honest. Creationists embrace fossil evidence. They love showing that things like dinosaurs, taught as examples of evolution, are actually the exact opposite, examples of extinction. They love showing that the only "evidence" for evo is not in fossils but in "lack of" this & that, tons of other excuses, & speculations presented as actual data. Cont.

[MattleSystem]

@LoricaLady Of course they like dinosaure, they like fossils, everybody does, but between a IDer claiming "there is no link between this bird and this dino" because of course he presents only the partial part of all database to support his thesis.

I mean the gap in the fossil record is like the gap in your genealogy! Can you go back into your family tree till Adam and Eve? Can you? No! So you are not from the garden of Eden! You are not even from Creation! Where are u from so?

[MattleSystem]

@MattleSystem Note that you never reply to this comment! You never understood that your comment is out of topic! Because all scientists on Earth are able to tell you in eyes that "we will never know everything about everything" and we will not be able to show you what the earth looked like everysecond from its birth...

And you, on your side, you are not able to show us your main conclusion god, will never be, not even in the past, not in the future....not even a small fossil record...

[LoricaLady]

The American Museum of Natural History, in the paleontology section at amnh (dot org) in Introduction To Trilobites: "Though their true origins remain shrouded (!) in Precambrian mystery, there can be little doubt that...the trilobite lineage stretches way back into that poorly (!) understood period of our planet's history." The usual evo double talk. The origins are "shrouded in mystery" in a "poorly understood period"...[but!] "there can be little doubt" about their origins! Lol!

[foxlake02]

@LoricaLady There can be little doubt about trilobite evolution given the fact that nested hierarchy is well understood with modern species and the evolution of more recent forms of life is well documented in the fossil record. That is, of course, unless you think evolution happens in well documented examples but God poofed all the rest with unknown details into existence. The fact is, your God of the gaps is getting smaller all the time.

[LoricaLady]

@foxlake02 For the 10th time, for the benefit of any others. I do not reply to people like FL who follow me around from 1 vid series to another with personal insults, name calling, gross obscenities, false accusations of lying, sexual harrassment & telling a poster who wrote me a porno post (appropos to 0 science) "Good job."

[foxlake02]

@LoricaLady For the 10th time, I really don't care if you reply. Just try to consider what people are trying to tell you and learn something. Nobody cares what you post on this topic. Your profound ignorance is obvious.

[brospec]

@LoricaLady "he trilobite lineage stretches way back into that poorly (!) understood period of our planet's history." "

.....poorly understood because of lack of calcite/chitin exoskeletons in earlier organisms.....but you would know that if you ever bother opening a paleontology textbook

Perhaps god hadnt yet worked out how to created CaCO3 in his animal laboratory

[brospec]

@brospec There is an excellent museum I visited at Chengjiang in Yunnan , China of early Cambrian fossils, including many uncalcified arthropods - obviously extremely rare fossils.

A common comment from creationists is that these are all fake fossils created by communists to mock god. I think creationists do this by themselves quite effectively - no need for any assistance from Chinese communists

[foxlake02]

@LoricaLady You forgot the conclusion at Wooster. edu: Paleontological studies of trilobite eyes may never be completed, and due to the lack of soft tissue preservation, the visual system will never be totally understood. Yet, using the trilobites’ preserved calcitic lenses, paleontologists have been able to uncover many of the evolutionary and ontogenic trends of the oldest visual system in history.

[brospec]

@LoricaLady "sciencenews (dotcom) can have the last word on that" ....alternatively , you could get the lazy interns at the Discovery Institute who write this nonsense to open a paleontology text rather than a mass market science-lite magazine.

"They may have (!) evolved as a whole." - or perhaps god ceated them millions of years ago , has his fun with them , then killed them all off. Or perhaps other creationists are correct that they were planted by satan to mock god

[brospec]

@LoricaLady "why isn't 1 trilobyte, whose eyes were more complex than ours, ever seen with "emerging" less complex eyes - or any kind of "emerging" parts?"

More bullshit from Phillip Johnsons parrot.

Many tilobites have no eyes, some have an eye that is a single calcite crystal with one sensor. None are more complex than ours you idiot.

Spend 5 minutes doing some basic research instead of just rergurgitating the nonsense you are given from the Discovery Institute

[brospec]

@LoricaLady "Uncounted milliions, maybe billions on the earth, yet like the nautiloid, found by the billions, they are all pretty much cookie cutter mates"

What a load of drivel - trilobite and ammonoid/nautiloid is well known - except to the lazy bigots at the Discovery Institute

[MattleSystem]

A geological column is a general combination of all strata from several regions which were dated and also compared by their contents... There is probably no complete column which ranges from the proterozoic to the holocene. But I don't even understand what she want to exprime with those comments...

I don't know what she tries to disprove when she has nothing to prove...

But I think she is under drugs or medication, she is acting as a parasite on Miller's Videos. she is viral.

[ThatOneQuestion]

I encourage everyone here to mark LoricaLady's comments as spam.

She will not discuss anything with anyone, and she ignores the contradictions and refutations that stand against her ignorant assumptions.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Of course there are all kinds of materials to be examined on the earth. But a geologic "record" is not a "Geologic Column" such as we have all been taught exists. The actual evidence is to the contrary. There are all kinds of excuses for why no one can match the earth's layers to the fossils. Or, better yet, they pretend that there is a match so they can claim things like that they found Tiktaalik in just the right "evolutionary" spot. More B.S. piled on B.S.

[ThatOneQuestion]

@LoricaLady I will continue to mark your comments as the spam that they are, seeing as you are just migrating from Ken Miller video to Ken Miller video posting meaningless posts that only expose your own ignorance.

It might seem harsh to others, but they dont realize just how many times you have repeated yourself over the last 6-8 months, nor how many refutations you blatantly ignore.

Silly disturbed little fool.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. "Cambrian" seashells dot every mountain top range in the world. Fossils from every "period" can be found at many different localities, no way matching the so called Geological Column, all over the world. Talk Origins claims that the Column exists intact in North Dakota. One tiny spot on this humongous planet - and even then, TO is wrong & deceiving as usual. All the so called periods are NOT found intact anywhere in N. Dakota.

Of course there are geological records. Cont.

[brospec]

@LoricaLady "Cambrian" seashells dot every mountain top range in the world."

An outright lie - as has been pointed out to you many time.

Do Canrian seashells do volcanic ranges? of course not. How about the Alps ?? Obviously no. Himalaya>? No

You are a pathetic little liar - Phillip Johnson's laziest parrot

[brospec]

@LoricaLady "Talk Origins claims that the Column exists intact in North Dakota. One tiny spot on this humongous planet - and even then,".....blah blah blah......more lies. It exists in over 20 localitlies around the world.

Stop telling these pathetic lies for your dishonest god

[LoricaLady]

Cont. For those who are confused by my comment that there is no Geologic Column by which to date Tiktaalik.. We've mostly all seen a nice chart of the so called geologic column showing "Cambrian"& "Ordovician" fossils at the bottom, then moving on up to the surface of the earth with Devonian...Jurassic...Cretaceo­us & Tertiary. How lovely if all the little "Cambrian" & "Jurassic" fossils were found so neatly organized in the ground. Lovely for evolutionists, that is. But, they ain't! Cont.

[MattleSystem]

TO ANYONE INTERESTED: You will probably see my posts being stupid and irrelevant! But I don't care I will continue to pollute youtube with my dumb ID theory. I will post other comments like "oh it is just pseudo science" or " I don't like the way he is saying this" or " look the picture, and they show only one bone"... Yeah this kind of smart comment ( smart for a creationist point of view of course)

Shallom and loukoum, I will pray for all of you! See you in Hell!

[MattleSystem]

Yeah Yeah Loricalady, we all understand that you need help from above, because apparently no one on earth is able to take you back in the real world...

But you are so funny Nephilady!

[MattleSystem]

@LoricaLady your comment about the shape of the fins is really funny! "Is that designed for walking?? for sure not!! Ah Ah Ah!"

And the Walrus, is he designed for walking??? No yes, maybe??? Ah ah ah! You have to keep in mind all form of life, actual or from the past to post comment with a minimum of logic!!!

Because Walrus for your info, is a tetrapod!!! Stupido!

Art creation from artist painter! No just a real animal! Is that caht you call the perfect creation!!! IDiota

[wildcrazygoats]

@LoricaLady "As mentioned already, there ain't any geologic column anywhere to be found on the planet"

What a load of utter drivel. You have been corrected so many times on these pathetic lies.

Dont you dare to preetend to be a Christian - you are a dishonest sleazy conartrist

[MattleSystem]

@LoricaLady That's a really well counter argument! Wow you amaze me with so smart comment....

No geological column??? As a geotechnician and geologist, i can tell you that if there was no geological record, for sure your car would drive with wind only!!!

The sediment, stratigraphy, geophysic etc... all these database is for the entire world, this allow us to understand the change of landscape and formation of energy resource!

Your comment is just meaningless....

[NUTCASE71733]

"We have the fossils. We win" EPIC

[papafox]

Wonderful series of videos. Thanks!

[phalsebob]

Procommenter has nothing to say except a preponderance of fifty cent words.

[Albukhshi]

"your inner fish"

sounds very zen. I can just imagine shubin saying : "you must find you inner fish for you to be on the path of true enlightenement" :P

I've got to buy this book!

[procommenter]

The swastika {see: svastika; swastica, Hakenkreuz; Hakenkreuze gammatia; gammadia; gammadion; gamma cross; crux gammata; gammate cross} adorns the tombstones of thousands of people in Vietnam.

[ketsuban]

It's a long-standing symbol the world over, and has particular importance to Eastern and Dharmic religions. Its use by Nazi Germany is an anthropological footnote.

[procommenter]

That's true. The swastika is illegal in Germany now.

[sgtbigs22]

actually the swastica is pointing in the opposite direction. Peace and serenity is the symbol for the Eastern Dharmic religions and it is a reverse swastica.

[rambergsvandraren]

@sgtbigs22 That is not true, you can find swasticas pointing in both directions in eastern religions.

[procommenter]

With evolutionary conjecture the burden of proof is incumbent upon those who make the claim. After a preponderance of hoaxed human ancestral relics one wonders how this religion survives involvement. The rivers and the streams flow unperturbed.

[ketsuban]

Of course the burden of proof is on the claimer. Claims require evidence to be considered valid. Why should it be otherwise?

"A preponderance"? I can think of... two. Both were summarily dismissed as fakes by the scientific community.

The number of genuine human ancestral fossils is staggering; human evolution from the common ancestor of all hominins is incredibly well-understood.

[lovetoeatallthefood]

I just love the way that creationists/ID advocates can preach religious dogma as fact, and then turn around and use the term "religion" as a term of derision when describing the theory of evolution.

Do creationists and ID advocates completely lack the portion of the brain responsible for recognizing irony?

[procommenter]

As indicated by your user-name: you are full of love.

[lovetoeatallthefood]

I can't find any fault with that conclusion.

[gamesbok]

@lovetoeatallthefood But the Bible is a wonderful book.

(Most talking-snake books are pretty good.)

[DonExodus2]

You should see how bad the gravitationalists are!

[procommenter]

This religion of yours demeans children.

[DonExodus2]

I suggest you look up the meaning of religion....

You know, in one of those book things you burn.

[procommenter]

Does your pastor know what you're up to?

[DonExodus2]

Why is it that people like you enjoy embarrassing Christianity so much?

You are the reason there is a war on religion.

[Euphobia1]

Excellent set of videos! Now I know! If only the Bible wasn't involved The Modern Scientific Theory of Evolution would be taught as freely as gravity and relativity. There would be no problem. But there is simply because Darwin proves just one tiny segment of the bible wrong that it is the crux of the religion is unfortunate and this is his misfortune. and ours. The believers have to believe that the bible is right and Darwin puts an end to it all. Want to know why watch Darwin v Adam & Eve !

[mhmmms]

You misunderstand what Miller is saying.

[procommenter]

With no moral absolutes: Is killing an "atheist" immoral? It's a question that belongs to the ages. There are no easy answers.

Ken Miller protects monkeys.

[TomPaineII]

I just bought "Your Inner Fish"! It rocks my socks!! :)

[chrishibbert20]

Even If a religious freak tripped over that fossil and dug it out of the ground they would say "god was testing us" Difficult to convince someone thats been told their whole life that there is a god, how could they believe their family and all around them was lying? But atleast we can stop them teaching creation and sky fairies in our schools! Am glad the Dover trial dec 2005 turned out the way it did. Those ID(creationist) got their asses kicked in a big way, embarrasing realy hehe.

[drunkasssteve]

"Your Inner Fish" was a whole ton of fun to read. I was wondering where Tiktaalik was in the last video. Now I have my answer.

[mevisface]

I feel both sides are full of shit. The bottom line is that neither views help the average man. Evolution does not talk about plants or species that do not evolve. While creationist can not prove god exists. What about singularity, can machines prove our existance or reality is not a program?

[WilltheAtheist]

"Evolution does not talk about plants or species that do not evolve"

Can you give an example of a plant or species that do not?

[adh05ga]

Actually mevisface, evolution helps humans in creating cures for disease. I recommend you watch other videos and see how the aids virus evolves and mutates making it impossible to remove. Evolution is also vital in many other sciences.

[Albinoceros]

Evolution so helps the average man. A significant portion of medical research and diagnosis is now based upon the evolutionary model, and the entirety of biology has also been enriched, which leads to a more complete societal knowledge bank. Whatever holes may exist in evolution, the theory still bears both validity and utility. Therefore I find it shameful that you claim it to be "full of shit".

[5erendipity]

There are no plants or species that do not evolve.

[manchester26m]

8 months too late, but I know of 2 just off the top of my head. Theres a fish in the Amazon that doesnt evolve and is very susceptible to disease and there is also a lizard that reproduces by creating a clone of itself. Ive seen these both in evo documentaries. Im sure there are more.

[Shadrach76]

"The bottom line is that neither views help the average man"

- mevisface

medicine uses the evolution of viruses to make new vaccines that the viruses are not immune to.

[danielyeh]

roflpwnd

[scarshapedstar]

Unless you see an organism that gives birth to an EXACT copy of itself, it's evolving. Definition of evolution is change in gene frequency of time. Gene frequency changes every time something is born. Your gene frequencies are different from your parents'. You represent a tiny step of evolution. Deal with it!

[bersaba]

I am so going to get that book. Just the name sells it to me.

[kirafan68]

# ISBN-10: 0375424474

# ISBN-13: 978-0375424472

Found it on amazon! Now I just have to save up some money to buy it. ;)

[kirafan68]

I´ll look for that book!

[GMLSX]

Please tell me it's ISBN-Number when you find it

[ExSaint1379]

oh shoot been forgetting to rate them. Well my journey back wards begins. 5 Stars to all. Ken Miller is a great teacher.

[fffanatic06]

"oh shoot been forgetting to rate them. Well my journey back wards begins. 5 Stars to all. Ken Miller is a great teacher."

don't forget to favorite them!

[CadicusTheDamned]

"Your Inner Fish."

*lulz*

[dancingnature]

great book ..theres truly some surprising things in there about teeth

[CadicusTheDamned]

I suppose I ought to pick it up. I hope there's something in there about how smoking coffee drinkers can whiten their teeth..

[Schmoikel]

Great video. I'm about 2/3rd through Shubin's book, "Your Inner Fish". Great read. Another great transitional fossil...oh wait they don't exist do they? So what the hell am I reading???

[Lacolith]

Ahhh Yeah, Tiktaalik FTW!