I have the opposing view. Natural selection would by definition, ruthlessly deselect such an absurdly inefficient arrangement as that nerve setup. It would not care if the animal in question looked less hilarious as a result. It would be like: "Hey giraffe...screw you. Eat stuff closer to the ground, there's lots of it. I've seen it done, soooo...do that." A Creator Deity with a personality, a sense of humor, and let's face it a big ego, might arbitrarily decide that He wanted Him a funny lookin' critter with an absurdly long neck, because it would be *hilarious* . And that He's gonna have it, period. And that all else is a secondary concern at best. Natural Selection: "Bert muh luhringeel nurb!" God: "To hell with your 'nurb', this is about *comedy* , not efficiency. I. want. Me. My longnecked goofy goober. Now get girrafin'!" This makes a great deal more philosophical and cosmological sense than blind, insensate forces doing schtick at the cost of functionality.

Me sorprende que gente como Dawkins que supuestamente es muy inteligente, no considere que la jirafa es un ser vivo y como tal, cada uno de sus órganos, huesos, músculos y nervios surgieron de una sola célula y en el tiempo de gestación crecieron hasta quedar en esa posición. El nervio vago no se generó externamente y se instaló al final, una vez que el animal creció por completo, como él asume que debió “crearse”, sino que se formó a partir de una célula. “Ningún ingeniero cometería semejante error jamás”, dice él… Un ingeniero simplemente no podría diseñar algo así, jamás. Soy ingeniero, a propósito. Para poder saber por qué el nervio crece así, deberíamos grabar la gestación completa del animal con rayos X y entonces, posiblemente, entenderíamos como es que va creciendo y extendiéndose en esa ruta.

The intelligent design is the entire animal itself, Mr. Dorkins.

A boarder undestanding of the internal anatomy of an organism is that it is also constantly interacting with the environment, shaping the way genes, tissues, and structures evolve together. This example opens the door to discussions on how evolutionary constraints shape not just physical anatomy but also physiological processes. How about behaviour treats? Is it a conservative creativity of genetic alternations=mutations? Different alleles produce variation....thinking....resonating.....

“So as you can see in this incredibly complex organic being that gives birth standing up and looks like a dinosaur, this nerve here goes down the neck and back up, therefore invalidating the idea that there could possibly have been some intelligence behind its existence.” 💀

Professor should know the physiology of respiratory system and laryngeal functions, He should try to shorten his own recurrent laryngeal nerve and will find that he choked to death. He is amateur in biology.

Haha han började svettas såfort hon nämnde Benzo :D

Haha..kolatomte!

Jävla hycklare!!

You’ve got to laugh at these foolish people who state that the giraffe is not an example of intelligent design, when even our most brilliant scientists have not been able to create life or even a “simple” cell for that matter, let alone something as complex as a giraffe. You will be judged one day for not giving the glory to God.

These videos helped me SO MUCH in VFX/animation!!!!! ❤🎉

It is more "efficient" for fish and fish shaped creatures. A human fetus is fish shaped, so it is an "efficient" design and serves its purpose for the delicate fetus stage of the life cycle. Call it evolution or God's grace but don't be an arrogant know it all by calling it inefficient.

They disected the giraffe, expectng that they would find any free nerve remained unconnected with brain. Giraffe's long neck evolutionary journey will definitely have developed some necessary long and strong nerves, and there would be signs/ proofs/ remains of old short nerves that would have got unconnected with the brain due to their uselessness. On founding that there are no proofs of any such past nerves and that this long long nerve is not only a long but also perfectly protected with extra length, they performed the twists of words instead of accepting an intelligent designs.

Who came from Richard’s book?

Of course Evolution doesn’t have foresight as it would be hard-pressed to decide for the animals in an environment that is not only consistently changing, but also rapidly happening as life goes along. In an effort to make survival of the species more attainable. The next best thing is then, adaptation to the recurring difficult circumstances the animal seemed to always find itself in and evolve from there.

oh, what a "discovery", now based on this, this atheist thinks he can conclude that there's "No God"))

Wow, they go to great length using their designed voices abs designed brains to find a so called flaw they don't understand.

Två sidor av saken. Integritet är också viktigt.

I can’t believe they killed an actual giraffe for this.

Have you ever seen "The Emperor's New Clothes?" This is like watching 2 con men, trying to sell something intelligent to an unintelligent king and the unintelligent king was too afraid to speak his truth because he doesn't want to be called "UNINTELLIGENT" his advisors did the same. So they all pretended to be intelligent, until one day, a childish commentor speaks her truth and said, "The king has no intelligence, where is his intelligence? I don't see it." and poor unintelligent crowd all of the sudden find intelligence to say, "The commentor is right! the king has no intelligence" (The END OF IGNORANCE) Moral Lesson: It is best to stand up for your truth than to gain dishonest people.

The First time I saw this, I said to myself, why would a person have troubled himself to gathered up people, dissected an innocent animal's imperfection just to prove that there is no intelligent design? and if there is no such thing as intelligent design, then why put so much energy just to prove something that isn't there is actually "not there"? -You are contradicting your own logic with your own action. Why worry about "NOTHING" with "SOMETHING"? 2:46 What the F she knows about "What is intelligent?" and "What is not intelligent?" just because she knows how to dissect an animal? It is like saying, "I am intelligent, and you are not, Richard." What a condescending woman. This should be insulting to all of us.

I think I could of done it better therefore no one created it L-O-L

The giraffe proves two things: there was no "intelligent designer", and evolution is real. But there are actually Christian channels out there (apologetics channels, in general) that say the giraffe is proof of intelligent design. 😂

I hope no animals suffered during this video))

Velho metido e nada inteligente

Evolution vs Designer is dumb on either end, if anyone is very adamantly attached to one version or the other, as a model or explanation that there is no this, or that. Sure, this "proves" shitty design, elegantly explained with beautiful words and what not. A bug in a system, and since God is perfect, the design should be perfect too correct? Well, in "support" of the designer camp, why does a perfect entity only have to design perfect stuff? In "support" of the evolution camp, if the designer camp drops "everything is perfectly designed, as intended" bombs as a core idea, then yeah, its easy to find the bugs and randomness of things. However, regardless of the camp you are in, you can't know for sure, and most likely ever know for sure, what's what, no matter what you know or claim to know, cause if you did, the world would not exist as is, and this imbecile debates would end shortly afterwards, and philosophy would continue to expand without so many roadblocks. Sure, science is cool and tries to solve stuff, but if "champions" of it as Mr. Richard here, are so driven by proving other people wrong, and not on discovery that leads to the very own evolution he talks about, and then some, is this really scientific? Beyond trying to prove or disprove God exists or not, how can you possibly know how many layers are above all you think you know, should these kind of questions were answered? If we can't even solve (confirm) our own layer (even if its only 1), and this makes me laugh honestly, how can you be so certain, so proud, of what you think the "truth" is? how you can you know for sure, even if your camp somehow "proves", or convinces itself anyway, that it is the -only- layer there is? Think of anything you want, religions, multiverses, whatever. Even simulations, which provide a way of abstracting and grouping. How can you know which one is the -true- source? If there is God, what if God created other Gods, or other God, to God other things, with different parameters? why does it have to be linear? why do you want it to be linear? If its all simulated, same thing. If its all random, same thing, although a bit more provocative, but crazier to solve or even fathom. What if the sequence is order and amazingly beautiful design, and within it, dumb and ugly design, and within it, a spark of beautiful design, and within it a simulation, and within it, an abstraction of beautiful design, so on... who's the idiot for not knowing the source, where, and why is "idiot" to begin with?

i lost any respect for this scumbag dawkins when he spent his life bashing christianity but actually shat himself when asked to say islam wasnt real, because hes scared shitless of muslims.

Undrar vilken drog det är han vill mörka, Benzo?

haha riktig grabb

I mean if animals and humans are the result of omnipotent being design...why we are just a bunch of meat and guts and fecalmatter and not this indestructible supermundane substance that soul or god is supposedly made of? A pure mind, the very embodiment of infinity create such a organic mess...

DDR Socialistens "ärlighet" omfattar aldrig den egna vandeln. Berlinmuren var helt nödvändig för "demokratin" och för sådana som Boströms "verksamhet"... PonziSocialisterna lever mycket gott på sina skenheliga solkiga skattemedels- bedrägerier. "Partiverksamheten" stinker som en färsk DDR hundskit under Svenska folkets sulor.

Vilket äckel🥵

What a load of crap - The recurrent laryngeal nerves supply sensation to the larynx below the vocal cords, give cardiac branches to the deep cardiac plexus, and branch to the trachea, esophagus and the inferior constrictor muscles. The cardiac plexus is a network of nerves including both the sympathetic and parasympathetic systems. It is split into two parts. The superficial part is located below the arch of the aorta, and between the arch and the pulmonary [lungs] trunk And is responsible for influencing heart rate, cardiac output, and contraction forces of the heart. So the laryngeal nerve supports the cardiac plexus, which is responsible for heart rate, cardiac output, and contraction forces of the heart..... Where is the evidence that the laryngeal nerve is a bad, inefficient design or unnecessarily travels to the heart? See: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4706824/ Or Grey's Anatomy www.bartleby.com/lit-hub/anatomy-of-the-human-body/5j-the-vagus-nerve/

So the tissues below don't need information before anything in the brain? I feel like a lot of things that affect this area very quickly affect those below.

The irony here is remarkable. Here's a man credentialed from the highest institution in the world; he completely lacks the capacity to design and build a giraffe, yet somehow has acquired the knowledge to judge the current design as flawed. And, to boot, he actually has an audience who will listen to him prattle on in ignorance. Where was he when the giraffe first stretched its neck to the high branches? Emtpy words without knowledge or experience.

Boss: "Where the hell is the Production rollout?!" Me: Richard Dawkins demonstrates laryngeal nerve of the giraffe

This is making a bold assumption that a shorter nerve will keep the Girrafe alive and work as intended. I just don't see how this justifies bad design. What if longer necks need longer circulation of blood. This is too simple an illustration. I expected more from Dawkins.

Evolution of the gaps argument, we don't know why therefore evolution did it. NB that they are making a theological argument on how God should've done it, without explaining how evolution done it except to invoke a just so Rudyard kiplingesque on how the Giraffe got its long neck and other fables.

richard dawkins is a troll

its a connected design, evolution is #dependent so this is proof that life is a #fractal #equation #quantumtunnelingevolutionarysystem

#lol

That's the great 👍👍

This is a pretty bad reason to say there’s no creator fam, yes it could be closer but if we and all the animals can still breathe and live our entire lifespans with that nerve like that then what would be the reason to change it, I’m just curious like why would it have to be changed if we all still function

This fact is utterly undeniable and an excellent proof of evolution. Your logic is undeniable

Comments: "Duhhhhhh da nerfs wraps around da heart and i didunt even needs tah, soooo gooo evolution!!!" Reality: Common sense says this "error" in design wouldn't be the same in ALL animal species if it did not serve a purpose. Otherwise our bodies would be literally infested with completely useless errors that offer no benefit or purpose. Even the length could serve a key function of the nerve.

Simply brilliant example 👍🏻

What if it needs to coil

Humans know nothing , what if it's intelligent in a way that Humans can't precive yet

Haha

😅😅😅😅