Controversy In Evolution

Second episode of Fresh Brainz vlog.

Also check out these other excellent videos related to the topic.


About biological evolution:

The theory of evolution made easy (potholer54)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w57_P...

Evolution for ID-iots version 2 (Thunderf00t)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZwUV-...


Critiques of creationism/intelligent design:

Why do people laugh at creationists? (Thunderf00t)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid...

Debunking Harun Yahya (CapnOrdinary)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVvqbY...

Foundational falsehood of creationism (AronRa)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnJX68...

Why young earth creationists must deny gravity (cdk007)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bRvt0...

• Category

  Science & Technology

[TheCopaceticMan]

and here thought there was literally no significant debate in evolutionary theory, only in evolutionary history. Neutral evolution would (I suppose) support punctuated equilibrium do to the fact that most mutations seem to have no physiological effect on a species which would cause a stasis, as you put it.

Mutationism would more or less support Darwinian evolution since it implies that each mutation would have a measurable effect over time.

Great video, subbed!

[Xisla]

thanks! Mutationism acknowledges the role of selection pressure in evolution, but focuses on the creative power of new mutations, whereas neo-Darwinism focuses on the creative power of the environment. Molecular biologists tend to favour the former view whereas zoologists and population geneticists tend to favour the latter. This quibble of relative importance is academic and unlikely to interest creationists, unless they want to do some quote mining.

[slicingwater]

Excellent Video.

[PraktikoolSinik]

@entyrion

Apparently your sarcasm detector is broken ;-)

google 'Cdesign proponentsists'

[entyrion]

ID failed in COURT and it has not entered any sort of intellectual arena. ID is NOT a scientific theory. Theories are not simply interpretations of observations, they include predictive power. Investigating these predictions are how real theories are separated from bullshit like ID.

ID doesn't offer any testable predictions, or the silly ones it does are absurd and are flatly contrary to observation (i.e irreducible complexity, human fossils next to dinos, etc.)

[entyrion]

Great video! Nice to hear a calm voice of fact and reason amongst a sea of pro and anti-evolution videos that are often emotionally charged and, in the case of creationists, extremely ignorant.

[joelkness]

Controversy in Evolution? There isn't one.

The only controversy is that science discovers things that contradict ones literal interpretation of the Bible. ID is nothing more than creationism repackaged. The ID'ers just throw in some "bigger words" to impress the gullible, the scientifically illiterate and the ignorant at the fundamentalist churches they evangelize to. Other than that, I(creationism)D only says the G(designer)D did it.

[Paul Hsieh]

That was extremely enlightening! I was unaware of the neutral theory and that that is where the idea of genetic drift comes from.

[BlizBob]

"Fathead"?

Is that a weird way to say that you think I have a large brain?

Or is that supposed to be an insult?

[ninjascroll6789]

fathead