@christo930 MOST RECENT matralinia ancestor. Obviously she was born more recently than her mother, just like your mother is a more recent ancestor to you than your grandmother.
@gmsimpson05 So does matralinia contain male DNA? I am thinking in terms of mitochondria DNA, which comes down through the female, so her mother should have the same mitochondria DNA as well. That is where I am confused.
@christo930 Her mother is not more recent than she is. Yes, Matrilineality [matrilineal ancestry] is determined through mitochondrial DNA. This has absolutely no impact on the fact that daughters are born more recently than their mothers. Thus she is the most [matrilineal] recent common ancestor, not her mother.
@gmsimpson05 Does this mean she is the most recent female ancestor that also shares her father's dna? IS there a good website that explains this? I always thought that mitochondria DNA only came down through the female.
@christo930 To rephrase what this video says at 2:35, her mother would be a common matrilineal ancestor (as would her grandmother), but not the most recent one. Our most recent common matrilineal ancestor is a more recent ancestor than her mother. She was born more recently than her mother.
Let's assume you have siblings. Your mother will be your most common matrilineal ancestor with them. Your grandmother is also a matrilineal ancestor, but you have to go further back to reach her.
Poor Atticana sure comes across as desperately slow and dimwitted. Can you imagine sitting across the table from him trying to explain something with the dawning realization that he may never get it.
Did the idiot/pasient say "The very first female ancestor" or something to that effect? You know...I thought his room looked a bit like a hospital room..maybe he's in a home for the severely mentally disabled or something? This should be fun, if he has more gold like that one..where's my popcorn?: )
When are you going to do "Abiogenesis made easy". Oh I guess if you claimed agiogenisis was easy someone might actually call you on it. And you can't hide behind "over a long period of time". Evo is psuedoscience.
@ian9toes Oh, it will be much easier the day we found out the most likely process in which it happened. We are getting there really fast now, ribonucleotides self assembling in petri dishes, and synthetic, self-multiplying life-forms being made by J.Craig Venter's team and other teams all over the leading science faculties and institutions world-wide.."God" sure has a very small job description now that we seem to be doing all his work soon. And trust me, we will make him completely obsolete! :)
@shiariryu he needs one more. He's been informed several times that ring species are capable of mating. Instead of addressing this concern he took the Ensatina and Larus out of his vid to cover up his error, but remained with the same premise as it suits his arguement against kinds
More importantly I have clearly pointed out that creationists, including Hovind, accept speciation i.e. animals diverging to the extent they are not capable of mating. His video is very dishonest
@utubedetective72 I can't see any errors. Potholer has said that ring species are capable of mating, it's the 'end' one(s) that usually aren't, or only capable with difficulty and with sterile offspring.
Hovind and other other creationists only 'accept' speciation to the point that you can breed a new kind of dog from other dogs, but not that cats and dogs evolved from a common ancestor. So only speciation in 'their own kind' or what they like to call 'microevolution.'
@LordRunty the sterility the the offspring has nothing to do with why RS don't mate. I'm astonished so many people assume this after watching his video. The reason they don't mate is behavioural I've made a video on the topic.
Even if they could not mate due to infertile offspring like with the cattle/ox relationship, present day speciation is not denied by creationists, certainly not Hovind. I've seen countless deabtes and lectures where he 'admits' speciation occurs
@utubedetective72 I'm astonished that you managed to get what I said wrong. Actually, no I'm not.
You're right, the sterility of the offspring doesn't have anything to do with why they don't mate. But then I never said that it did. Just that in the cases where they are capable of mating, that the offspring are often infertile. Behaviour only makes them less likely to mate, not incapable. Incapability of mating comes from structural and genetic differences.
@utubedetective72 There are ring species where the two ends are completely incapable of producing any offspring, artificially aided or not. Likewise there are others where they would be perfectly capable as not every ring species will have drifted to the same degree. Only a fool would think that finding one of the second means that none of the first exist, same with the inverse.
@utubedetective72 But the first proves that such genetic changes will eventually produce two different but related species incapable of mating. The second just proves that there are some ring species where the ends can still mate.
If you bothered reading, you'll note that I agreed that they 'admit' that speciation occurs, but they only do so on the nonexistent 'microevolution' level.
@LordRunty so you are saying that there is proof certain ring species could not produce fertile offspring even with IVF? If there is a study which shows this then I stand corrected, but do you really know this or are you just bsing?
I couldn't care less about your 'microevolution'. The term is stupid. Creationists believe that animals are the same kind if they are related, even if the hybrids are normally sterile. Make of that what you will
@utubedetective72 They refuse to accept that the changes can still continue to stack to eventually produce a completely different species (ie, cat and dog), as this would be 'macroevolution' and would go against the book of Genesis. They only accept 'microevolution' because any breeder could show such changes occur, and because they can then use it to try and explain how Noah managed to fit all the animals in a boat way too small to even fit a fraction of the species within traveling distance.
The point you so deftly miss is about reproduction, not mating: Mating occurs everywhere around the ring; reproduction is successful everywhere EXCEPT across the discontinuity. This demonstrates the two key parts of speciation - genetic divergence (along each arm of the ring) and genetic isolation (at the discontinuity.)
Here's a thought experiment for you: What would happen if we introduced a second break in the ring, e.g. with a physical barrier?
@CluebotUK your comment is exactly why potholer needs to correct his video. As far as I know mating does not not happen all around the ring, this is exactly the reason reproduction does not occur (this is definately the case with the Larus). Do you have any reason to say what you said or did you just make that up?
What reason? The same reason we can identify it as a ring species: Hybridisation everywhere around the ring except the discontinuity.
Also, nice U-turn there. What correction is required here? Is it that "ring species are capable of mating" as you originally stated, or is it that "mating does not happen all around the ring" as you are now stating? Such inconsistency! You're the one making it up as you go.
@CluebotUK that is because those sub-species at the tail ends are so distant they are not attracted to each other, that is why they do not produce hybrids.
Yes they are 'capable of mating' but this 'does not happen all around the ring'. There's no contradiction, you are just a difficult betty.
You said that the tail ends do mate in nature but the reproduction is not successful. How do you know this? You were talking out of your ass wern't you?
For the second time: This is about REPRODUCTION, NOT MATING. We can say for certain that the hybrids found around the ring are the result of mating - or can you think of any other way the genetic information was being exchanged?
Whether there is mating across the discontinuity or not is irrelevant. The point is that genetic information is not being exchanged across it - no hybrids. This demonstrates both divergence and isolation, as needed for speciation.
'Mating occurs everywhere around the ring; reproduction is successful everywhere EXCEPT across the discontinuity' - I will be using this comment to show potholer he needs to correct his video because it is confusing the profane, cheers
For the third time: This is about REPRODUCTION, NOT MATING.
For the second time: Whether there is mating across the discontinuity or not is IRRELEVANT. Isolation is being demonstrated, regardless of whether it is behavioural or genetic. The fact that this isolation occurs also demonstrates divergence.
Profane? Correcting your misapprehensions is profane? I guess it might seem that way to a petulant little narcissist.
@CluebotUK I understood you the first time. And I agree that ultimately the issue is irrelevant because creationists accept speciation.
Profane is the correct word to use if you have not been formally educated in animal behaviour. Another word I could have used is ignorant. Of course we are all ignorant to an extent as real science (as opposed to silly anti-religion factiods) is the pursuit of knowing the very most about the very least, but I don't expect you to understand that.
That's an inventive redefinition of the word "profane" - or do you consider disagreeing with your own assertions to be an offense against God? That'd be some impressive projection.
The reality of isolation and divergence, as demonstrated in ring species, does indeed prove speciation is possible. Now, if creationists accepted the implications of this they would not be creationists, because speciation can account for ALL diversity of life.
@CluebotUK Damn I was sure it was a fancy word for uninitiated/uneducated. Oh well a day you don't learn something is a day wasted. At least I can admit when I am wrong
Speciation can theoretically account for all diversity of life, given enough time. It is this time aspect YEC's disagree with. As for speciation go see AIG or creation wiki. Or better yet watch a Hovind debate, he mentions it often as the denial of speciation is a common misconception about creationists.
I have watched Hovind's output and am NOT impressed. The guy is either stunningly ignorant or hopes his audience is. His screw-up are well documented here on YouTube.
If you think young earth creationism is even remotely credible today, you have NO IDEA how wrong you are. Multiple strands of evidence from both geology and cosmology point to the same consensus as biology: The Earth is BILLIONS of years old. That verdict is IN and is not going away.
@CluebotUK I'm sorry but I am not an expert in geology. Although I have an opinion on all these issues I can't argue with you precisely because I do not want to be spouting falsehoods.
It's a bit too late for you to be reticent about that.
Suffice to say that the allowance for error required to fit Hovind's version of the past with actual observations is roughly equivilent in magnitude to allowing the statement that the mainland USA measures a few feet across between coastlines.
This is why young earth creationism is utterly laughable.
Well the problem with the items you list that it is consistently inconsistent with the inconsistently consistent word of the living god, creator of you me and everything else. Thus you fail.
@CluebotUK Kent Hovind has NO education, has NEVER taught at any school, he BOUGHT his "ph.d" at the fake diploma mill "Patriot Bible University", and since he was sentenced to 10 years in prison for 58 felonies, he will not be seeing the light of day util in the summer of 2015. He seems like a quite typical member of the "creationist" preacher side, then..doesn't he.. Haha Along with the Ted Haggards, the Jimmy Swaggarts, the JIm Bakkers, Peter popoffs, Ken Hams..and the lot of lying weasels: )
The remaining creationist objection that change between "kinds" is impossible attacks a straw man: No such barrier need be breached to evolve by divergence from a common ancestor that was neither "kind".
4:16 Not quite. It's more that not as many prehistoric men had children, since every child one man had with a woman was one her other partners didn't, so they had the incentive to kill or, well, cockblock each other, whereas prehistoric women had no way of "losing" children to their partners' other partners, so they had no reason not to let each other give birth in peace.
Oh, man. How do you get critics of this calibre, Potholer? Issuing a rebuttal must feel like kicking a puppy.
I could almost believe this guy was a Poe, except that the quizzical look, uncomprehending stare and ponderous speech just seem too perfect to be faked. I guess Atticana was too busy projecting his own stupidity to follow the explanation in detail. It seemed perfectly clear to me.
what's that? Dialects? Language shifts? OH THE HORROR. I'm in california. I say roof, ah-LOO-mih-num, and dror. On the east coast, it's ruff, still ah-LOO-mih-num, and draw. How roof and drawer are pronounce in brittain/australia/new zealand/canada I don't know... but I do know of the british ah-loo-MIN-um.
One could hardly ask for a better example of why it is so important to fight the lies of the creationists. People like this are genuinely confused and desperately need help. Creationism and climate change denial are destroying education.
Hey, Potholer54, if you want to really dig into a video by Atticana, then put the following code into the YouTube search and have at it: tVKz6cXh8VY
Plus, if you ever need a good laugh, or just want to make your head spin around the room in pure exasperation, check out this guy who goes buy the name "sayNoToEvolution", and his video on Homosexuality, ramdom mutations and why you don't have to have to waste your time with stupid stuff...like thinking: O-n3Petxq9k
It's nitpicking, but if all humans have a common decidedly inhuman ancestor, then we are related to every human that's ever lived, however remote.
Of course, we're not related to everything that's ever lived because there's more than one multicellular eukaryote lineage, to say nothing of non-nucleaic (sp?) microbes.
I've seen a number of Atticana's videos, and he really is a disturbing fellow. As a Jew by birth, I was rather startled when he informed me that I was driven by the desire to keep my 'race' alive. Why did I have to wait until my mid-30's before anyone told me what it was that I wanted so desperately?
Whatever Mr Atticana. But I can sympathise because I recall becoming very confused with algebra, once. And I discovered there are 2 solutions. No, not to the algebraic formula. 2 solutions personally dealing with confusion. 1. Lean and understand it, suficiently. or, 2. Give up and simply agree that one hasn't the mental talent to pursue the science. But what is often lacking is a belief in other people. I believe Potholer54 is smarter than both of us!
@Kinjamaimai What, you think black people can just walk into any restaurant and get a table without having to call ahead?! At least Atticana is nice enough to want to do it for them, and not just let them get away without having to completely.
I have no problem with potholer54's news, or info about human origins, as in we humans of 2012 are all from descended from black ancestors. Hell, I wasn't living then, and even if I was, my black mother or father, or whatever, if they loved and cared for me and helped me take the right paths and wanted to teach me to help others, too, that is all that would matter, not the melanine in my parents skin.Why would anyone have a problem with our folks origins if it showed they were not the samecolor?
Having watched several of Atticana's videos, I recalled this Oliver Sacks quote ...
"If a man has lost a leg or an eye, he knows he has lost a leg or an eye; but if he has lost a self -- himself -- he cannot know it, because he is no longer there"
This dude looks like the melancholy and milquetoast lovechild of Austin Powers and Karl Pilkington. In fact, he seems to have Karl's unique reasoning skills.
Seen a couple of Atticana's videos and I can't help but feel his "confusion" stems from the fact that he's repulsed by the idea that he's related to Africans.
@jussts All humans have common ancestors, but we have evolved since then. I can't imagine that evolution has been standing still for africans since some populations migrated out from the continent. There are theories that early humans had lighter skin, but were covered with body hair. I don't know if that's true or not, but to insinuate that todays black africans are of an earlier form of humans isn't fair.
@jffryh hehehe. i think the reason is that men can have more children and in longer time spam. the difrence is more to do that men can, while women cant have as many children. afther 4 or 5 children women dont really have streight left in them. while males have practicaly no limits how many children they can have other the number of mates.
Older women have a mature, wise sexuality, sure- but 90000 years is a BIG f***ing generation gap mate. I mean, what would they have in common to talk about? Pretty far fetched, is what i'm saying ;)
I honestly found it confusing and took me a couple times thru to understand it but for some reasong I have to to keep going back and I cant just FULLY grasp THAT concept. But this video helps. I dont know why this part of ancestory is so confusing to me, it should be simple.
This shit fart is a total fuck tard. I love how potholer54 makes this total muckraker dung digger look like a complete moron. I also like how he makes the Jackson family look like fucktards as well. Awesome, Potholer54.
You're probably just pissing into the wind here, PH. While it would make for a less fucked up world if people actually absorbed more of the information they're exposed to, the reality is that we're mostly troops of very biased, knuckle-dragging apes. But hey, despite my pessimistic opinion of humanity, please keep the information coming. You're one of my YouTube favorites.
Nice video. However, I have a question. What about women who have children from different partners? I understand that men can produce more frequently than women, because all men have to do is plant the seed, while women have to develop the fetus and give birth. How much more difficult to trace their matrilineal descent?
I don't think there is a problem with any of the "Made Easy" series. It makes for a good primer as well as a good refresher.
Some people are just too THICK to get it (or they just don't want to for political reasons) Which would be fine if they wouldn't try to argue with people that do.
Too many people want to be right/correct without doing the work.
matrilineal because the mitochondial dna passed as the mitochrondia in the egg cytoplasm, not the nucleus of either parent where the Y or any other chromosomal DNA occurs.
I hate to say it, but Atticana asks a good question (at 2m28s) Or, if you don't believe it is a good question, at the very least, it is the same question *I* would ask, because even sometimes *I* get confused by graph theory.
Christians do what Atticana did all the time. It is through this intentional rescripting and quote-mining they do so they can create magical strawmen to tear down. Its sad, but I've seen this straight out of the pulpit.
Atticana thinks black men left Africa to get white women. This is, of course, why MULTI-MILLIONAIRE Jay-Z married Beyonce' - to get a white women. Atticana is... nuts.
This is the tragedy of declining basic science education. This guy has spun himself off into a no man's land of unfathomable and unanswerable questions based on an inability to wrap his head around the idea of "everyone has a mother and a father" (basically). So now he thinks that not only is this an unsolvable conundrum, he thinks anyone who thinks they can solve it is a fool and treading in god's great domain of unknowable knowledge.
He may *never* be able to grasp this concept after this.
Im catholic and think Potholder is awesome xD
PistenBoy 2 days ago
*for clarity, that should have read matrilineal most recent common ancestor.
gmsimpson05 2 weeks ago
2:56
"I say steady on" lmao!!
GtheMVP 2 weeks ago
I still can't understand why her mother wasn't the matralinia ancestor? I assume it has to do with her father, but how does that play in?
christo930 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from potholer54
@christo930 MOST RECENT matralinia ancestor. Obviously she was born more recently than her mother, just like your mother is a more recent ancestor to you than your grandmother.
gmsimpson05 2 weeks ago
@gmsimpson05 So does matralinia contain male DNA? I am thinking in terms of mitochondria DNA, which comes down through the female, so her mother should have the same mitochondria DNA as well. That is where I am confused.
christo930 2 weeks ago
@christo930 Her mother is not more recent than she is. Yes, Matrilineality [matrilineal ancestry] is determined through mitochondrial DNA. This has absolutely no impact on the fact that daughters are born more recently than their mothers. Thus she is the most [matrilineal] recent common ancestor, not her mother.
gmsimpson05 2 weeks ago
@gmsimpson05 Does this mean she is the most recent female ancestor that also shares her father's dna? IS there a good website that explains this? I always thought that mitochondria DNA only came down through the female.
christo930 2 weeks ago
@christo930 To rephrase what this video says at 2:35, her mother would be a common matrilineal ancestor (as would her grandmother), but not the most recent one. Our most recent common matrilineal ancestor is a more recent ancestor than her mother. She was born more recently than her mother.
Let's assume you have siblings. Your mother will be your most common matrilineal ancestor with them. Your grandmother is also a matrilineal ancestor, but you have to go further back to reach her.
gmsimpson05 2 weeks ago
@gmsimpson05 AH, I was thinking she was farthest back we could trace, not the most recent. I get it now, DUH.
christo930 2 weeks ago
Poor Atticana sure comes across as desperately slow and dimwitted. Can you imagine sitting across the table from him trying to explain something with the dawning realization that he may never get it.
faircompetition1 3 weeks ago
@potholer54 wo bam! u answered that guy well :)
cruelbusiness1984 3 weeks ago
". . .our ancerstors had yin and yang coming out the ying yang" LOL
bobbytookalook 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from potholer54 6
I think there should be a Crocuduck moron edition for the nominees how do not quite qualify for such prestigious award.
JerezJulio 3 weeks ago
ewwww, so that's how the love child of rick moranis and a random hooker looks like...
GameDocumentaries 3 weeks ago
@GameDocumentaries LOL I think a long line of incest and drug abuse. I sure hope the poor guy is not really as dimwitted as he comes across.
faircompetition1 3 weeks ago
Hilarious
TheBoopski 3 weeks ago
@CluebotUK.. great smackdowns mate! Anyone who refers to Hovind as an authority on anything instantly defaults the debate. :-)
psycho3968 3 weeks ago
Atticana looks like Ronnie Corbett and sounds like Gary Oldman's take on George Smiley in Tinker Taylor Soldier Spy.
spekonaspek 3 weeks ago
Uhm, first I was thinking you had slowed down Atticana's Clips to emphasize his slowmindedness, but then I saw the original...
Radonatos 3 weeks ago
Did the idiot/pasient say "The very first female ancestor" or something to that effect? You know...I thought his room looked a bit like a hospital room..maybe he's in a home for the severely mentally disabled or something? This should be fun, if he has more gold like that one..where's my popcorn?: )
winterstellar 3 weeks ago
When are you going to do "Abiogenesis made easy". Oh I guess if you claimed agiogenisis was easy someone might actually call you on it. And you can't hide behind "over a long period of time". Evo is psuedoscience.
ian9toes 4 weeks ago
@ian9toes Oh, it will be much easier the day we found out the most likely process in which it happened. We are getting there really fast now, ribonucleotides self assembling in petri dishes, and synthetic, self-multiplying life-forms being made by J.Craig Venter's team and other teams all over the leading science faculties and institutions world-wide.."God" sure has a very small job description now that we seem to be doing all his work soon. And trust me, we will make him completely obsolete! :)
winterstellar 3 weeks ago
@winterstellar As James Watson might say, on molecular biologists being accused of 'playing god' -- "Well, SOMEONE has to do it!
bobbytookalook 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from potholer54
Atticana could be a troll; look in the sidebar at his video " We are NOT all descendants of African Negroes."
LOLOLOLOL, people on the internet crack me up. Potholer is a return to sanity, so I'm glad not everybody on the internet is batshit insane.
klesks8686 4 weeks ago
Was Rick Moranis involved in a horrible accident?
dondude69 1 month ago
@dondude69 hahaha i thought the same
momopup01 4 weeks ago
Lol hell will freeze over before potholer answers back to valid criticism or corrects a mistake
utubedetective72 1 month ago
@utubedetective72 Guess it's frozen over a great deal then... as he has several videos correcting errors already.
Have your sled handy?
shiariryu 1 month ago
@shiariryu he needs one more. He's been informed several times that ring species are capable of mating. Instead of addressing this concern he took the Ensatina and Larus out of his vid to cover up his error, but remained with the same premise as it suits his arguement against kinds
More importantly I have clearly pointed out that creationists, including Hovind, accept speciation i.e. animals diverging to the extent they are not capable of mating. His video is very dishonest
utubedetective72 1 month ago
@utubedetective72 I can't see any errors. Potholer has said that ring species are capable of mating, it's the 'end' one(s) that usually aren't, or only capable with difficulty and with sterile offspring.
Hovind and other other creationists only 'accept' speciation to the point that you can breed a new kind of dog from other dogs, but not that cats and dogs evolved from a common ancestor. So only speciation in 'their own kind' or what they like to call 'microevolution.'
LordRunty 1 month ago
@LordRunty the sterility the the offspring has nothing to do with why RS don't mate. I'm astonished so many people assume this after watching his video. The reason they don't mate is behavioural I've made a video on the topic.
Even if they could not mate due to infertile offspring like with the cattle/ox relationship, present day speciation is not denied by creationists, certainly not Hovind. I've seen countless deabtes and lectures where he 'admits' speciation occurs
utubedetective72 1 month ago
@utubedetective72 I'm astonished that you managed to get what I said wrong. Actually, no I'm not.
You're right, the sterility of the offspring doesn't have anything to do with why they don't mate. But then I never said that it did. Just that in the cases where they are capable of mating, that the offspring are often infertile. Behaviour only makes them less likely to mate, not incapable. Incapability of mating comes from structural and genetic differences.
LordRunty 4 weeks ago
@utubedetective72 There are ring species where the two ends are completely incapable of producing any offspring, artificially aided or not. Likewise there are others where they would be perfectly capable as not every ring species will have drifted to the same degree. Only a fool would think that finding one of the second means that none of the first exist, same with the inverse.
LordRunty 4 weeks ago
@utubedetective72 But the first proves that such genetic changes will eventually produce two different but related species incapable of mating. The second just proves that there are some ring species where the ends can still mate.
If you bothered reading, you'll note that I agreed that they 'admit' that speciation occurs, but they only do so on the nonexistent 'microevolution' level.
LordRunty 4 weeks ago
@LordRunty so you are saying that there is proof certain ring species could not produce fertile offspring even with IVF? If there is a study which shows this then I stand corrected, but do you really know this or are you just bsing?
I couldn't care less about your 'microevolution'. The term is stupid. Creationists believe that animals are the same kind if they are related, even if the hybrids are normally sterile. Make of that what you will
utubedetective72 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@utubedetective72
You've already been destroyed on the Ring Species thing.
That's why you had to remove all the comments from your video--remember?
You've been shut down, loser.
Speciation IS macroevolution--and macroevolution IS denied by YEC fundy idiots--especially the jailbird Kent Hovind.
odinata 4 weeks ago
@utubedetective72 They refuse to accept that the changes can still continue to stack to eventually produce a completely different species (ie, cat and dog), as this would be 'macroevolution' and would go against the book of Genesis. They only accept 'microevolution' because any breeder could show such changes occur, and because they can then use it to try and explain how Noah managed to fit all the animals in a boat way too small to even fit a fraction of the species within traveling distance.
LordRunty 1 month ago
@utubedetective72
The point you so deftly miss is about reproduction, not mating: Mating occurs everywhere around the ring; reproduction is successful everywhere EXCEPT across the discontinuity. This demonstrates the two key parts of speciation - genetic divergence (along each arm of the ring) and genetic isolation (at the discontinuity.)
Here's a thought experiment for you: What would happen if we introduced a second break in the ring, e.g. with a physical barrier?
CluebotUK 4 weeks ago
@CluebotUK your comment is exactly why potholer needs to correct his video. As far as I know mating does not not happen all around the ring, this is exactly the reason reproduction does not occur (this is definately the case with the Larus). Do you have any reason to say what you said or did you just make that up?
utubedetective72 4 weeks ago
@utubedetective72
What reason? The same reason we can identify it as a ring species: Hybridisation everywhere around the ring except the discontinuity.
Also, nice U-turn there. What correction is required here? Is it that "ring species are capable of mating" as you originally stated, or is it that "mating does not happen all around the ring" as you are now stating? Such inconsistency! You're the one making it up as you go.
CluebotUK 4 weeks ago
@CluebotUK that is because those sub-species at the tail ends are so distant they are not attracted to each other, that is why they do not produce hybrids.
Yes they are 'capable of mating' but this 'does not happen all around the ring'. There's no contradiction, you are just a difficult betty.
You said that the tail ends do mate in nature but the reproduction is not successful. How do you know this? You were talking out of your ass wern't you?
utubedetective72 4 weeks ago
@utubedetective72
For the second time: This is about REPRODUCTION, NOT MATING. We can say for certain that the hybrids found around the ring are the result of mating - or can you think of any other way the genetic information was being exchanged?
Whether there is mating across the discontinuity or not is irrelevant. The point is that genetic information is not being exchanged across it - no hybrids. This demonstrates both divergence and isolation, as needed for speciation.
CluebotUK 4 weeks ago
@CluebotUK whatever man
'Mating occurs everywhere around the ring; reproduction is successful everywhere EXCEPT across the discontinuity' - I will be using this comment to show potholer he needs to correct his video because it is confusing the profane, cheers
utubedetective72 4 weeks ago
@utubedetective72
For the third time: This is about REPRODUCTION, NOT MATING.
For the second time: Whether there is mating across the discontinuity or not is IRRELEVANT. Isolation is being demonstrated, regardless of whether it is behavioural or genetic. The fact that this isolation occurs also demonstrates divergence.
Profane? Correcting your misapprehensions is profane? I guess it might seem that way to a petulant little narcissist.
CluebotUK 4 weeks ago
@CluebotUK I understood you the first time. And I agree that ultimately the issue is irrelevant because creationists accept speciation.
Profane is the correct word to use if you have not been formally educated in animal behaviour. Another word I could have used is ignorant. Of course we are all ignorant to an extent as real science (as opposed to silly anti-religion factiods) is the pursuit of knowing the very most about the very least, but I don't expect you to understand that.
utubedetective72 4 weeks ago
@utubedetective72
That's an inventive redefinition of the word "profane" - or do you consider disagreeing with your own assertions to be an offense against God? That'd be some impressive projection.
The reality of isolation and divergence, as demonstrated in ring species, does indeed prove speciation is possible. Now, if creationists accepted the implications of this they would not be creationists, because speciation can account for ALL diversity of life.
CluebotUK 4 weeks ago
@CluebotUK Damn I was sure it was a fancy word for uninitiated/uneducated. Oh well a day you don't learn something is a day wasted. At least I can admit when I am wrong
Speciation can theoretically account for all diversity of life, given enough time. It is this time aspect YEC's disagree with. As for speciation go see AIG or creation wiki. Or better yet watch a Hovind debate, he mentions it often as the denial of speciation is a common misconception about creationists.
utubedetective72 4 weeks ago
@utubedetective72
I have watched Hovind's output and am NOT impressed. The guy is either stunningly ignorant or hopes his audience is. His screw-up are well documented here on YouTube.
If you think young earth creationism is even remotely credible today, you have NO IDEA how wrong you are. Multiple strands of evidence from both geology and cosmology point to the same consensus as biology: The Earth is BILLIONS of years old. That verdict is IN and is not going away.
CluebotUK 4 weeks ago
@CluebotUK so long as you know he, and other YEC's accept speciation I really don't mind what your opinion of him is.
Btw using caps to emphasise your point makes you look like you're 14, peace
utubedetective72 4 weeks ago
@utubedetective72
If your argument against speciation being the origin of ALL species is the Earth isn't old enough, perhaps you could explain these for starters:
* The existence of metamorphic rock
* Direct measurement of continental drift
* Correlation of drift with other geological data
* Direct imaging of subducted plates
* Overlapping correlation of radioisotope dating
... and no, you will not have peace here while you proclaim known falsehoods.
CluebotUK 4 weeks ago 13
@CluebotUK I'm sorry but I am not an expert in geology. Although I have an opinion on all these issues I can't argue with you precisely because I do not want to be spouting falsehoods.
utubedetective72 4 weeks ago
@utubedetective72
It's a bit too late for you to be reticent about that.
Suffice to say that the allowance for error required to fit Hovind's version of the past with actual observations is roughly equivilent in magnitude to allowing the statement that the mainland USA measures a few feet across between coastlines.
This is why young earth creationism is utterly laughable.
CluebotUK 4 weeks ago
@CluebotUK
Well the problem with the items you list that it is consistently inconsistent with the inconsistently consistent word of the living god, creator of you me and everything else. Thus you fail.
klesks8686 3 weeks ago
@CluebotUK Kent Hovind has NO education, has NEVER taught at any school, he BOUGHT his "ph.d" at the fake diploma mill "Patriot Bible University", and since he was sentenced to 10 years in prison for 58 felonies, he will not be seeing the light of day util in the summer of 2015. He seems like a quite typical member of the "creationist" preacher side, then..doesn't he.. Haha Along with the Ted Haggards, the Jimmy Swaggarts, the JIm Bakkers, Peter popoffs, Ken Hams..and the lot of lying weasels: )
winterstellar 3 weeks ago
@utubedetective72
The remaining creationist objection that change between "kinds" is impossible attacks a straw man: No such barrier need be breached to evolve by divergence from a common ancestor that was neither "kind".
CluebotUK 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Haha, I love to Ronnie Corbett moment. Very slick!
villainandfox 1 month ago
Comment removed
villainandfox 1 month ago
Atticana is a huge moron. I've seen one or two of his videos.. He's also very very very creepy. UGH.
TheJo4an 1 month ago
4:16 Not quite. It's more that not as many prehistoric men had children, since every child one man had with a woman was one her other partners didn't, so they had the incentive to kill or, well, cockblock each other, whereas prehistoric women had no way of "losing" children to their partners' other partners, so they had no reason not to let each other give birth in peace.
IoEstasCedonta 1 month ago
Oh, man. How do you get critics of this calibre, Potholer? Issuing a rebuttal must feel like kicking a puppy.
I could almost believe this guy was a Poe, except that the quizzical look, uncomprehending stare and ponderous speech just seem too perfect to be faked. I guess Atticana was too busy projecting his own stupidity to follow the explanation in detail. It seemed perfectly clear to me.
CluebotUK 1 month ago
@CluebotUK If you look at his other videos, for all his puppy-dog looks, he's a white separatist, apocalyptic radical Zionist lunatic.
IoEstasCedonta 1 month ago
@IoEstasCedonta
Sounds like a barrel of laughs. Yeah, actually I'll pass on that opportunity.
CluebotUK 1 month ago
If I had a dollar for every time Potholer54 was the bomb, I may only have $1, but it would prove my point: Potholer54 is the bomb!!!
MOPEDBRAD 1 month ago
Please don't ever stop making videos. Thanks ;)
xtro1969 1 month ago
I'm quite comfortable with all the science.
What I really take issue with is your pronunciation of "matrilineal" and "patrilineal".
Leeenial??? Like lenient?
It just sounds wrong. Really grates my ears.
How do you pronounce "linear"? Would you say "leany-ear"?
ROBwithaB 1 month ago
@ROBwithaB
what's that? Dialects? Language shifts? OH THE HORROR. I'm in california. I say roof, ah-LOO-mih-num, and dror. On the east coast, it's ruff, still ah-LOO-mih-num, and draw. How roof and drawer are pronounce in brittain/australia/new zealand/canada I don't know... but I do know of the british ah-loo-MIN-um.
shiariryu 1 month ago
@shiariryu To me, it's uh-LOO-mih-num. I thought in England, the metal is al-you-MIN-ium.
And my NH house has a roof, not a ruff, but I'm from MA.
And to be on topic: Atticana is boring.
rjdyou 1 month ago
One could hardly ask for a better example of why it is so important to fight the lies of the creationists. People like this are genuinely confused and desperately need help. Creationism and climate change denial are destroying education.
BoneySkylord 1 month ago
LOOLOLOLOL another great video sir ;)
dogmiagy 1 month ago
potholer54: the most honest person on the internet.
potholer54 for president, 2012!
MoralRapist 1 month ago
@MoralRapist
There are a couple of problems with potholer54 becoming president. 1 he isn't an American citizen, and 2 he doesn't live in the USA.
Atriviality 1 month ago
@Atriviality
Why not make a constitutional amendment then? Its worth it.
omegavalerius 1 month ago
Hey, Potholer54, if you want to really dig into a video by Atticana, then put the following code into the YouTube search and have at it: tVKz6cXh8VY
Plus, if you ever need a good laugh, or just want to make your head spin around the room in pure exasperation, check out this guy who goes buy the name "sayNoToEvolution", and his video on Homosexuality, ramdom mutations and why you don't have to have to waste your time with stupid stuff...like thinking: O-n3Petxq9k
Pure Comic Gold!
mventure71 1 month ago
It's nitpicking, but if all humans have a common decidedly inhuman ancestor, then we are related to every human that's ever lived, however remote.
Of course, we're not related to everything that's ever lived because there's more than one multicellular eukaryote lineage, to say nothing of non-nucleaic (sp?) microbes.
asquii 1 month ago
How did I get here?.....
Teamklutchxz 1 month ago
I've seen a number of Atticana's videos, and he really is a disturbing fellow. As a Jew by birth, I was rather startled when he informed me that I was driven by the desire to keep my 'race' alive. Why did I have to wait until my mid-30's before anyone told me what it was that I wanted so desperately?
havstormer 1 month ago
Ah racism... probably the dumbest ism of them all.
MyOnlyFarph 1 month ago
Whatever Mr Atticana. But I can sympathise because I recall becoming very confused with algebra, once. And I discovered there are 2 solutions. No, not to the algebraic formula. 2 solutions personally dealing with confusion. 1. Lean and understand it, suficiently. or, 2. Give up and simply agree that one hasn't the mental talent to pursue the science. But what is often lacking is a belief in other people. I believe Potholer54 is smarter than both of us!
listen2meokidoki 1 month ago
Smug prick.
theselfdeception 1 month ago
I can't watch Atticana ever since he spoke of creating reservations for black people.I prefer to not taint my conciousness with him.
Kinjamaimai 1 month ago 10
@Kinjamaimai I lost whatever respect I had left for him, right after I saw that.
GargamelGold 3 weeks ago
@Kinjamaimai What, you think black people can just walk into any restaurant and get a table without having to call ahead?! At least Atticana is nice enough to want to do it for them, and not just let them get away without having to completely.
ctastrophe 3 weeks ago
It is DAMN good to hear from you again sir! You have cheered me up no end.
morelenmir 1 month ago
Im liking the Ronnie Corbett super imposition lol
squirrel7t7 1 month ago
I have no problem with potholer54's news, or info about human origins, as in we humans of 2012 are all from descended from black ancestors. Hell, I wasn't living then, and even if I was, my black mother or father, or whatever, if they loved and cared for me and helped me take the right paths and wanted to teach me to help others, too, that is all that would matter, not the melanine in my parents skin.Why would anyone have a problem with our folks origins if it showed they were not the samecolor?
nash984954 1 month ago
The cut from Ronnie Corbett to Atticana made me laugh, Att could be li'l Ronnie's secret lovechild XD
Tarynus 1 month ago
nice expanation potholer, however looking at atticana's face i doubt it will get through his thick skull and register.
Epostaxis 1 month ago
Atticana makes me sleepy when he talks.
jeans1515 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Having watched several of Atticana's videos, I recalled this Oliver Sacks quote ...
"If a man has lost a leg or an eye, he knows he has lost a leg or an eye; but if he has lost a self -- himself -- he cannot know it, because he is no longer there"
Diamonddavej 1 month ago
Comment removed
Diamonddavej 1 month ago
This video was very funny at times. I appreciate your work, potholer54!
madskillz1o1 1 month ago 7
This dude looks like the melancholy and milquetoast lovechild of Austin Powers and Karl Pilkington. In fact, he seems to have Karl's unique reasoning skills.
Archronis 1 month ago
@Archronis
That's a terrible slur on Karl Pilkington ;)
DeanMorrison 1 month ago
This guy is a boss.
Azza1070 1 month ago
@maslada I missed that ! Ronnie Corbett's lost love child :)
ArcaneAardvark 1 month ago
I'm guessing Atticana is a virgin. Just saying.
XPLAlN 1 month ago
Seen a couple of Atticana's videos and I can't help but feel his "confusion" stems from the fact that he's repulsed by the idea that he's related to Africans.
jussts 1 month ago 39
@jussts I'm sure nearly everyone that isn't Atticana, is repulsed by the fact that they share an ancestor with Atticana.
MinervaInTheBrain 1 month ago
@MinervaInTheBrain HAHA... zing!
jussts 1 month ago
@jussts Yes. Having just watched a couple of his reprehensible videos, it is clear that he is deeply racist.
FosterZygote 1 month ago
@jussts All humans have common ancestors, but we have evolved since then. I can't imagine that evolution has been standing still for africans since some populations migrated out from the continent. There are theories that early humans had lighter skin, but were covered with body hair. I don't know if that's true or not, but to insinuate that todays black africans are of an earlier form of humans isn't fair.
Gumbypotty 1 month ago
potholer, why are you so awesome?
treyCcatastrophe 1 month ago
I reject the suggestion that promiscuity is something that either men or women ought to be ashamed of.
jffryh 1 month ago 33
@jffryh I am with you guy/girl.
Molndannon 1 month ago
@jffryh Agreed.
mphello 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jffryh "I reject the suggestion that promiscuity is something that either men or women ought to be ashamed of"
Completely agree, though the benefits of a meaningful long-term relationships are not to be denied either.
Solution: Swinging. Its the future people!
thebrassdubliner 1 month ago
@jffryh hehehe. i think the reason is that men can have more children and in longer time spam. the difrence is more to do that men can, while women cant have as many children. afther 4 or 5 children women dont really have streight left in them. while males have practicaly no limits how many children they can have other the number of mates.
gethsoftware 4 weeks ago
Older women have a mature, wise sexuality, sure- but 90000 years is a BIG f***ing generation gap mate. I mean, what would they have in common to talk about? Pretty far fetched, is what i'm saying ;)
gshefer11 1 month ago
Are you the gatekeeper? I'm the keymaster.
FreindlyRanger 1 month ago
I like what you did at 6.29.
.
.
.
I find fading into another shot really artistic.
maslada 1 month ago
Atticana looks and sounds like Lt. Wiegel's serial killer boyfriend Craig Pullin (Kyle Dunnigan) from the tv show Reno 911.
Joosybum 1 month ago
I honestly found it confusing and took me a couple times thru to understand it but for some reasong I have to to keep going back and I cant just FULLY grasp THAT concept. But this video helps. I dont know why this part of ancestory is so confusing to me, it should be simple.
seanturpin01 1 month ago
Thank you. This actually makes things a lot clearer.
rushncap 1 month ago
No surprise he lives in an attack.
shawn199500 1 month ago
@shawn199500 its an ATTIC not attack :P
haliburtondrum 1 month ago
@haliburtondrum Your right, not attack. I swap your and you're too all the time if I don't pay attention.
shawn199500 1 month ago
That's what happens when you only believe in two ancestors.
jcgadfly 1 month ago
Inmates should not be allowed access to the internet.
holio84 1 month ago
I like how Atticana looks simultaneously confused and concerned.
craniumface 1 month ago
Good lord! This Atticana guy has about as much personality as my wiener in a bucket of ice!
FishHeadSalad 1 month ago
I second the idea that Neph and Atticana need to rent a flat together.
Nardypants 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nardypants
Nah. Atticana at least looks like he washes every day. The same cannot be said about Neph. The smell in his place must be incredible.
XGralgrathor 1 month ago
I bet he plays a mage in world of warcraft.
womans001scorn 1 month ago
ah ha ha ha ha ha ha............
womans001scorn 1 month ago
Atticana is either dumb as a rock, or just willfully ignorant.
Kargush 1 month ago
Atticana's resemblance to Ronny Corbit is uncanny! he could be Ronny Corbit's secret son!
emancoy 1 month ago
@emancoy
A secret son spawned from one of those half-human hybrids!
bowlsallbroken 1 month ago
Wont Arnold Schwarzenegger be a better examploe thn Elvis ? We actually know the names of his wife, lover and children
Zygorhiza 1 month ago
I thought this guy was related to Ronnie Corbett too! haha what a comedian this guy is. Sneaky Potholer54 but oh so very funny :)
Dandaniels1978 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wouldn't it be nice to throttle the person who came up with the phrase "mitochondrial Eve"?
tctheunbeliever 1 month ago
Wouldn't it be nice to throttle the person who came up with the phrase "mitochondrial Eve"?
tctheunbeliever 1 month ago
This shit fart is a total fuck tard. I love how potholer54 makes this total muckraker dung digger look like a complete moron. I also like how he makes the Jackson family look like fucktards as well. Awesome, Potholer54.
craniumface 1 month ago
You're probably just pissing into the wind here, PH. While it would make for a less fucked up world if people actually absorbed more of the information they're exposed to, the reality is that we're mostly troops of very biased, knuckle-dragging apes. But hey, despite my pessimistic opinion of humanity, please keep the information coming. You're one of my YouTube favorites.
joe3eagles 1 month ago
Someone here compared Atticana to Louis Tully (Rick Moranis) from Ghostbusters.
NO WAY!! Tully was a LOT more intelligent & not damn bigoted as Atticana!
molloy451 1 month ago in playlist More videos from potholer54
@molloy451 ...and Tully got laid at some point.
tctheunbeliever 1 month ago
Why did you not go down the Michael Jackson path? It would have been fun!
BeondaPale 1 month ago
Nice video. However, I have a question. What about women who have children from different partners? I understand that men can produce more frequently than women, because all men have to do is plant the seed, while women have to develop the fetus and give birth. How much more difficult to trace their matrilineal descent?
chachee99 1 month ago
Whenever Atticana talks I start looking for a button to make it go at least twice as fast ._.
Elithrion 1 month ago
Don't worry Tubs, they won't get far!
Niccademus1978 1 month ago
@Niccademus1978 Dammit! I was gonna make a League of Gentlemen gag!!
richieblackhearted 1 month ago
I get the impression that Atticana is perpetually confused.
dookiecheez 1 month ago
I say steady on... lol
PH you are awesome.
thefusilier1000 1 month ago
I don't think there is a problem with any of the "Made Easy" series. It makes for a good primer as well as a good refresher.
Some people are just too THICK to get it (or they just don't want to for political reasons) Which would be fine if they wouldn't try to argue with people that do.
Too many people want to be right/correct without doing the work.
xdassinx 1 month ago
1:03 is that some Palladio?
Kingdemonpigfromhell 1 month ago
Why is it that every shit filled cult savage is a fucking insane loon who can't fucking read?
NotSoOldHippy 1 month ago
Ronnie Corbit example leading back to Atticana was priceless!!!
USMarineSgt 1 month ago
MINI JUNGLES. NUFF SAID.
StatelessLiberty 1 month ago 2
matrilineal because the mitochondial dna passed as the mitochrondia in the egg cytoplasm, not the nucleus of either parent where the Y or any other chromosomal DNA occurs.
AtheistCitizen 1 month ago
@potholer54 you should include a link to Atticana's original video. i know you usually do include links; must have slipped by this time.
nyyght7 1 month ago
Anyone else think Atticana, ironically, sounds eerily like Richard Dawkins? O.o
tweaker1bms 1 month ago
Dumb people are so stupid.
AshManXP 1 month ago
@AshManXP Because they're too stupid to understand just HOW stupid they are!
That, coupled with an overriding compulsion to be certain, with no concern WHATSOEVER as to whether or not they're right.
steveb0503 1 month ago
We need to find a way to get this guy and Nephy together as room mates
AnonaThetan 1 month ago
Cheers for throwing in the MJ joke and the twilight zone music. Had me in stiches.
TheUniversalAcid 1 month ago
I hate to say it, but Atticana asks a good question (at 2m28s) Or, if you don't believe it is a good question, at the very least, it is the same question *I* would ask, because even sometimes *I* get confused by graph theory.
mphello 1 month ago
shanedk's video about this topic was very well explained.
SomewhatCleverName 1 month ago
atticana should read dawkins book magic of reality i know its for kids but it explains this completely and easily.
intheelfcondom 1 month ago
Christians do what Atticana did all the time. It is through this intentional rescripting and quote-mining they do so they can create magical strawmen to tear down. Its sad, but I've seen this straight out of the pulpit.
xephyr1000 1 month ago
I like the chastity crib in the back of Atticana's room there.
hesaurus 1 month ago
Haha, great use of Ronnie Corbett and a fade out - I see what you did there, brilliant!
magrpe 1 month ago
Aaaaaaaaand another religious knob nuked...
In the name of reason (...able people), we salute you Patholer54.
ChainReaction666 1 month ago
Another gem Potholer. You've restored my faith in huma...er Youtube.
LEV1ATHYN 1 month ago
You just can't make this (Atticana) shit up!
lostburro 1 month ago
I wonder if I'm the only one who thinks that a future news article is going to mention Atticana with this preface: "Scotland Yard is looking for...".
PaulKJHarris 1 month ago
Atticana thinks black men left Africa to get white women. This is, of course, why MULTI-MILLIONAIRE Jay-Z married Beyonce' - to get a white women. Atticana is... nuts.
PaulKJHarris 1 month ago
You sir, are brilliant
Ultra4 1 month ago
This is the tragedy of declining basic science education. This guy has spun himself off into a no man's land of unfathomable and unanswerable questions based on an inability to wrap his head around the idea of "everyone has a mother and a father" (basically). So now he thinks that not only is this an unsolvable conundrum, he thinks anyone who thinks they can solve it is a fool and treading in god's great domain of unknowable knowledge.
He may *never* be able to grasp this concept after this.
zEropoint68 1 month ago