Change Player Size
Watch this video in a new window

Ken Miller talks about the evolution of blood clotting

Another pillar of intelligent design, the blood clotting system, is discussed by Dr. Ken Miller.  
 
Customize

More From: Kurpalac

Loading...

QuickList(0)

85 ratings
Sign in to rate
6,247 views
Want to add to Favorites? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to add to Playlists? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to flag a video? Sign In or Sign Up now!

Statistics & Data

Loading...

Video Responses (0)

This video has no Responses. Be the first to Post a Video Response.
Sign in to post a Comment

Text Comments (54)   Options

Loading...
EasingDifficulties (2 weeks ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
We are who we are. Hating ourselves is not productive. Plastic surgery has its practical side, especially for people who have gone through windshields.
puncheex (2 weeks ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Yup, it is exactly as you say - he does say that the simpler clotting mechanism doesn't work for humans. But it doesn't have to - it works for an ancestor of humans, from which humans eventually descended, and along the way the additional step was evolved, probably because it made the whole clotting system more comprehensive, or more stable - it did something which made humans better adapted.
puncheex (2 weeks ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
...

But all that is beside the point. Irreducible complexity attempts to show the human clotting mechanism was not useful unless it is whole, thereby making the system impossible to bring together as a working unit except against tremendous coincidental odds. However, Miller shows that it was built up, one stage at a time, by being useful to our ancestors. In them it worked well enough, and today still works in their direct descendents. QED.
puncheex (2 weeks ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Irreducibe complexity requires:

- that a multi-part mechanism be so compicated that it cannot be reasonably assembled from its components by chance; AND
- that there exist no incremental pathway to create that mechanism which is useful to organism it is in.

So far, no such mechanism has been identified. Behe, originator of the irreducible complexity theory, used blood clotting at the Dover trial, and when faced with the proof that he ignored the published evidence, had no reasonable response.
puncheex (2 weeks ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Sticks and stones, boy, sticks and stones.
FirriTriah (1 month ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Humans didn't evolve blood clotting from scratch. Blood clotting was inherited from the "lower animals" that are ancestral to mammals and ultimately to humans. What he is saying is perfectly logical and no evolution is not "I came from nothing", all life came from common ancestors.
emmaus9 (1 month ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
"..evolution is not 'I came from nothing', all life came from common ancestors."

Really? Can you, or any other scientists prove this, or is it really just supposition?

Without a higher intelligence who designed even the simplest of organisms, what you call our "common ancestors", you are forced to believe our supposed common ancestors came from nothing. Surely you will concede this point, and so ultimately, you came from nothing.

I don't have enough faith to be an evolutionist!
FirriTriah (3 weeks ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Science is not about "100% proof" science is about testable explanations. Evolution gives us many things to test, and every piece of data we find supports common ancestry for all life.

From nothing, nothing comes. Even abiogenesis does not have life coming from "nothing". But even if God created the first life, evolution would still function and BTW . . .I am a Christian.

If you want to find out more look for the book, "I Love Jesus and I Accept Evolution".
puncheex (2 weeks ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
The proof of this is in biological papers that describe the creation of a new species of bacteria that can metabolize citrates, where none before could (See Lenski). The proof is in the 40 or so actual speciation events that have been reported in the biological literature. More proof is in the examination of fossil remains. More proof is in studying the ways in which genetic information is replicated, destroyed, repaired and passed along by every species studied so far.

Shove faith.
DeadFishFactory (1 month ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Is it because I ruined your shit? You didn't seem to mind my cursing until after I ruined your fucking shit.

Dumbass.

Would you like to comment?

Join YouTube for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.