Origins: Natural Selection is Not Evolution

[@paulhuggins8971]

I love these videos, i'm going to use them on my face book to help people understand that we don't come from a fish...but from God! thank you Jesus...and thank you Origins..excellent!!

[@toddoryall7420]

Yes, tell people the truth about our origins.

[@stevepierce6467]

I didn't come from a fish, but fish and I came from a common ancestor. You and I even share 50% of our genetic information with..........TREES!

[@knightclan4]

Thanks for showcasing top scientists in their field. The observational science is what helped me see the truth of Christ as who He said He was.

[@toddoryall7420]

This video helped me to know more about truth in science.

[@stevepierce6467]

Christ is one thing, and understanding science in the real world is totally unrelated.

[@knightclan4]

@@stevepierce6467 Jesus said if you don't believe what Moses wrote, why would you believe what I say

[@knightclan4]

@@stevepierce6467 Moses wrote about the flood as a real event in history. The evidence supports it if you aren't brainwashed. Try to see how logical Catastrophism is over Uniformitarianistism. Good luck

[@stevepierce6467]

@@knightclan4 I am quite sure that neither Jesus nor Moses had the vaguest idea how nature works. I do however believe in one lesson from Jesus, one also expressed in every known religious sect on earth, but rarely followed by anyone; the Golden Rule.

[@markmeiri1518]

Fail - we know how new genetic content is created. Fail - we do know that one kind produces new kinds. We know how reptiles became mammals, how fish became amphibians, how dinosaurs became birds etc. Fail - Natural selection can either reduce OR increase genetic diversity.

[@rociomallet]

How natural selection increases new characteristics in the animals? Explain the mechanism from where the new characteristic comes.

[@toddoryall7420]

I think the opposite could happen if long hair dogs will lose their hair by getting shorter hair and less hair in hot climates, but short hair dogs will never get long hair in cold climate, because it would be new information to get long hair. Keep up the good work Dr. Georgia Purdom we need you in science to tell the truth.

[@InformationIsTheEdge]

But that is exactly what we observe in nature. Short hair or long hair is just variations of the same information.

[@toddoryall7420]

@@InformationIsTheEdge Right, it's what parent the information is coming from, long hair or short hair, also to adopt to the environment either by information already been inherited or loss information. The word evolution is truth, because it just means changes, but not evolution religion of science meaning big evolution, big changes from a dog to a cat, or from one species to another species that is not true.

[@InformationIsTheEdge]

@@toddoryall7420 Thanks for your note. From it, I get the impression that you are trying to combine information theory with evolution. Both are very good ideas but the former does not translate to the latter, one to one. Your comment seems to be suggesting that the gene expression for long hair or short hair is already present in one of the parents. That is not how it works. In all offspring, variation occurs. Hair length, body size, limb proportion, coloration, muscle density, eyesight, hearing... every trait you can name, there will be offspring with more or less of each trait. If the variation in an offspring grants them an advantage, however slight, that offspring is more likely to have offspring and pass along the trait. That is how longer hair animals can come from shorter hair animals. Variation. This is what you would call, micro evolution. Change within species. As you rightly say, evolution is change. Change over time. With enough time to compile enough changes, you can have new species. What you would call macro evolution. For your specific example of a dog changing into a cat, that is magic, not evolution. Cats and dogs both share a common ancestor that lived tens of millions of years ago. The ancestor was not a dog and it was not a cat. It was another, primitive animal. One group of its ancestors became cats the other group of its ancestors became dogs. So from now on, you should know better than to use the "dogs becoming cats" argument. Evolution does not make that claim. Opponents of evolution make that claim in the name of evolution. If you could actually find evidence of dogs becoming cats, you would have disproved evolution because evolution cannot work that way.

[@toddoryall7420]

Did you learned anything from this video, so there had not been no macro evolution just micro evolution, and this had been what scientists had observed in the real world. And, there had not been long periods of time either, just thousands of years, not millions of years, because mutations had been death, decay in our DNA, and it only could go for so long overtime until the human population dies out, and all living things, and the physical creation as it decays, or wears out like a gourmet. You could learn something go to my subscriptions I have, so have an open mind.

[@InformationIsTheEdge]

@@toddoryall7420 Macro evolution is just micro evolution on a much longer time scale. To suggest that micro evolution occurs but macro does not is like saying that you can see the minute hand on the analog clock moving but not the hour hand so the hour hand doesn't move. Direct observations of the molecular record clearly demonstrated the kinship of whales and hippos. You can literally count up the base pairs and see how close or far in time hippos shared a common ancestor with whales. Turns out about 40 million years ago. Now you and I can know it's millions of years rather than thousands because there are fossil skeletons of animals that share common features with whales and we can date the geologic layer from which they came. As for mutations, are you and adult human that eats ice cream or cheese? Then YOU have a mutation! Lactose tolerance is a mutation. All other mammals lose their tolerance for milk shortly after weaning. Are you able to wiggle your ears? If not, you have a mutation! You have the same 4 muscles surrounding your ear as does a house cat. But you also have a mutation on the gene that tells that muscle to develop and the gene is inactivated. The vast majority of mutations do not even present themselves as observable traits. Here is how I know that this presentation is false and how I can know that you will not be able to teach me anything about evolution. This entire presentation is just a series of bad arguments AGAINST the evidence for evolution. I say they are bad arguments because they do not have observations, testing or successful predictions to back them up the way scientific claims do. Opponents of evolution are not producing any research. They do not have teams out in the filed looking for anachronistic fossils, a SURE-FIRE way to disprove evolution. There are no laboratories dedicated to finding non DNA replicators, again, a bullet-proof way to disprove common descent. If you are to have a chance in this arena, you would need to do 3 things. 1) you would need to have evidence against evolution. That is, you would need observations that contradict the findings put forward by scientists to support evolution. 2) you would need a replacement idea. An idea to explain the vast diversity of life found on Earth today. 3) you would need evidence to support your replacement idea. That is how you could be right in this arena. So far, I have never met a single opponent of evolution that was able to offer up a plausible number 1). Maybe you'll be the first! Good luck.

[@sportdutch]

Evolution is for the birds.

[@WienArtist]

So true! Well, at least that is what Darwin thought...LOL!! :-9

[@sportdutch]

@@WienArtist Darwin today would be laughing at himself out of absurdity knowing what we know now!

[@toddoryall7420]

And, dog poop.

[@WokeandProud]

Yes because birds are theropod dinosaurs.

[@rociomallet]

No.

[@johnbrinsmead3316]

yeah because tetrapods will allways produce tetrapods and eukaryotes will allways produce eukaryotes.

[@toddoryall7420]

Yes, it is true species always product varieties of their kind.

[@jt2097]

Just a thought. If God wanted to build into the genetic code of any given species that they should evolve at some point of time or under certain conditions He could do so. If He can include code to change a caterpillar into a butterfly in a couple of weeks I'm sure He could change a hippo into a whale over a couple of thousand years. I'm not saying it happened, I'm just saying that if God wanted to do it He could. If evidence of evolution was ever discovered we have nothing to fear. God is still the creator.

[@2fast2block]

"If evidence of evolution was ever discovered we have nothing to fear. God is still the creator." Their goo to you evolution can't happen. It happened the way God said.

[@jt2097]

I should have been more specific. Evolutionists believe birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs. Now I can think of nothing less plausible and more ridiculous than that scenario, other than maybe a cow or hippo turning into a whale. But, what I was saying was that if some evidence arose that something like that was proven it would not prove Darwinian microbe to man evolution. With God anything is possible. We know that evolution does happen if you accept it as change over time. That is how we got all the breeds of dogs from a wolf, either natural selection or selective breeding happens,but no living thing can turn into anything which is not already contained in their created genetic make up. Darwinian, microbe to man evolution is just a made up story.

[@2fast2block]

@@jt2097 "With God anything is possible." That's totally false. God can't lie. God can't contradict Himself. If a cow turned into a whale by evolution then Genesis would not be right. What is it that it so hard for you to comprehend? God does NOT need any help from the lying goo to you evolutionists.

[@jt2097]

@@2fast2block God is the way He is because He chooses to be that way, not because He 'has' to be that way. You speak in a confrontational manner. Rudeness lowers the world's opinion of us. Jesus said... "By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another

[@2fast2block]

@@jt2097 You said earlier, "With God anything is possible." I showed you were wrong and you don't like that. You'd rather be able to say anything you want and if anyone shows you're wrong, you then say they were rude and confrontational. You act like a kid. Have at it. If you want to say stupid things, then YOU should learn from them when confronted rather than being stubborn and continue to be stupid. Having love does not mean being a wimp, it means speaking up. You, "If evidence of evolution was ever discovered we have nothing to fear. God is still the creator." Sorry, but if evolution was discovered by "He could change a hippo into a whale over a couple of thousand years.", then that contradicts what God said in Genesis. You just don't care though. Your pride is all that matters.

[@Jaggerbush]

So the argument would also presuppose that rabbits were always on the earth? For that matter- alligators were here since adam and eve? Serious question.

[@elizabethdinny7894]

Why so little views in 3 years?

[@stevepierce6467]

Maybe folks are starting to realize that creationist nonsense is just nonsense.

[@rociomallet]

​@@stevepierce6467explain then what is the mechanism for evolution scientifically.

[@stevepierce6467]

@@rociomallet Parents produce offspring. Have you noticed how each child is slightly different? Have you noticed how sometimes some kids grow up but for whatever reason don't marry and have kids? The genetic variants carried by those kids do not get passed on to another generation. Over many MANY generations those tiny differences and variants either get or do not get passed on, thereby leading to bigger changes over time. Over a long time, this leads to development of different species, genus etc. The time involved is far longer than we can conceive of, millions of years. Imagine the earth's history laid out on a football field, 4.5 billion years. Imagine a kickoff run back, from the goal. Out at the 16, life first appears. The arrival of humans, Homo sapiens, is when he gets tackled as time runs out, a heart-breaking 1/6 of an inch from the goal, after a 99+ yard run! There are literally millions or billions of generations of plants and animals to produce these changes we see in evolution.

[@rociomallet]

@@stevepierce6467 the mechanism of reproduction is not the mechanism of evolution, because reproduction means to copy other of the Same nature, to copy other with the same amount of DNI, that's why the doctor said "all these dogs have 78 cromossoms", "it's a Decrease in variety" (of the genes that belong to certain cromossom). So there's no way that reproduction can produce a gene in the next generation that is not already present in one of the progenitors or both. That's why reproduction means to produce again the same. Look in Google "reproduction" or in your dictionary: reproduction : "the action of copying something". What you and evolutionist are saying is that: new genes are popping up into existence from nothing. That is not only against science, it's against any reason.

[@stevepierce6467]

@@rociomallet I for one am not an exact copy of either of my parents, nor are my sisters exactly like me. Even among humans, from one generation to the next, there are anomalies, genetic defects, odd things that happen that can also introduce variations, including different numbers of chromosomes. I didn't make it up; if you would deign to read a science book, you would learn how it all works. Yes, a copy machine makes (almost) exact copies, but plant and animal reproduction is a vastly more complex living process that produces offspring different from the parents. As for your creationist vocabulary, "of the same nature" is their way to show that they do not truly understand biology. We are all "of the same nature," composed of cells made of molecules. Every living thing has genes and they are all of the same living nature. Green plants produce oxygen that animals need, animals who produce carbon dioxide that plants need. We have a strong symbiotic relationship. You know that you are a very close relative of chimps and bonobos, but did you know that you share 50% of your genetic material with.....wait for it!.......TREES!!!

[@kyleboffa793]

I would like for them to define KIND

[@budd2nd]

Kyle Boffa They can’t, because the term Kind has no scientific meaning. It is just a woolly catch-all term, that can be used to mean anything.

[@2fast2block]

@@budd2nd Had you read the article it said.... ---"Man’s attempt to classify plants and animals is sometimes arbitrary. Therefore, the original kinds may have been in some cases what we now arbitrarily define as species; in others as genera. In many cases, in view of the high probability of rapid variation after the Flood it may well have been what we now call the ‘families’ (dogs, cats, horses, bears, etc.). This is an area for potentially important creationist research, through studies of hybridization, post-Flood paleontology, genetics, and molecular biology. In any case, we can be sure that such variation definitely was within the limits of the kind, whatever precisely that may have been."--- At 8:25 she said "kinds, so to speak". Origins: Natural Selection is Not Evolution That's the title of the video. That is what was covered. Watch it and prove them wrong if you don't like it. Tell us the points they got wrong that proves natural selection is indeed a part of goo-to-you evolution.

[@Joh2n]

God describes it many times in the Bible as bringing forth. Rabbits produce rabbits. They stay rabbits. Isolated populations may mutate enough to not interbreed, still rabbits. There is no process or mechanism to change the rabbit to another animal. Georgia explains it completely.

[@markmeiri1518]

Come on - we do get new genetic content through mutation. How is lying and misleading part of your faith?

[@rociomallet]

Not true. Mutations are defects of a pre-existing gene, it's not a new gene. If it is a new gene, explain the mechanism that puts in existence that new gene.

[@KARAIsaku]

Only three or four mutations in humans are known to be somewhat beneficial, but with some horrendous negative effects as well; for example the sicle cell anemia mutation that gives certain protection against malaria, but at the cost of very serious other health issues. I already know millions of detrimental ones, like the ones that trigger cancer and genetic diseases.

[@luish1498]

@@rociomallet «explain the mechanism that puts in existence that new gene.» you just said , mutations. Mutation creates slightly different versions of the same genes, called alleles.

[@rociomallet]

@@luish1498 mutations cannot create anything, to create you need intellect in the first place, mutations destroy a function, do not create anything.

[@luish1498]

@@rociomallet very wrong....A missense mutation is where a single base pair may be substituted to alter the usual amino acid, producing a new amino acid. Both missense and frameshift mutations may change the alleles causing variations in the trait.

[@jameswelsh3433]

Very well explained. Macro evolution is impossible.

[@rociomallet]

Any kind of evolution is impossible.

[@stevepierce6467]

Interesting claim. How do you know this to be true?

[@rociomallet]

@@stevepierce6467 because to evolve you will need new functions, and to create new functions you need intellect.

[@stevepierce6467]

@@rociomallet That is not really how evolution operates. I don't "need new functions," but rather over millions of generations some functions gradually develop and others gradually disappear. I observe that most biblical creationists have little or no grasp of the incredibly long time periods involved for evolution to take place. But then, I remember that they do not even accept the idea of long periods of time, so understanding evolution is automatically rejected out of hand.

[@rociomallet]

@@stevepierce6467 a function can disappear when the animal is sick, but a function cannot develop, develop means creating new functionality, and that recreation requires intellect. And time has nothing to do with the capacity of creating things or putting things in existence, or functionalities. Time is not a creator, time has no creating capacities.Time is not a mechanism that creates anything. The animals already have their functionalities complete, and the genes sometimes decrease in variety but that always is decreasing, never means new functionality just less variety of the same gene.

[@dagwould]

'Natural selection' is more a propaganda term than a scientific one. There is no 'selection' by ecosystems of viable organisms. The ecosystem is a viability filter. The organisms that are the least unfit, or most comparatively viable in an ecosystem survive. So 'evolution' proceeds with eco-niche filtering of organisms...and that gives the game away. An organism hampered by small changes that have no benefit (that is a gradualist change in its characteristics but no new survival capacity imparted), would be filtered out. This is always the way to open up a clarifying discussion when someone says 'natural selection' is the basis of evolution.

[@WokeandProud]

No it's just one mechanism that drives it.

[@TheStarflight41]

The theory is wrong ..and it is not reflected in the fossil record.

[@InformationIsTheEdge]

Evolution by natural selection is a fact. Only someone utterly ignorant of what evolution actually is and equality ignorant of paleontology and what fossils are, could assert a claim as ill informed as yours.

[@redearth8256]

Delusional

[@2fast2block]

"Delusional" Did you actually think that it was not noticed you didn't contend the points made in this video but felt good farting out "Delusional" as if you're some sort of thinker?

[@wattycuffee5664]

Your delusional if you believe in macro evolution

[@redearth8256]

@@2fast2block all points that evolution deniers think support their argument have been discredited for at least a decade, so no need to waste time going over them for the millionth time. Think harder

[@redearth8256]

@@wattycuffee5664 there is no differentiation between micro and macro, there is only evolution. You don't believe it because you don't understand what makes it true. Here's a handy video from KZbin to educate you, "Potholer and Hovind come together" by Potholer54. Also it's you're, as in you are, not your

[@2fast2block]

@@redearth8256 can you help me then, smart person. Smart person, I'll let you go ALL the way up to your evolution of life part. You got to skip all that led up to that because you're not THAT smart. So, tell me smart person how did we get life from non-life to give the first life that did all this 'evolutionizing' as you claim? That must have been some fantastic first life to do your fairytale, I mean facts that can't be denied. You're smart and thought this through. You have nothing to be embarrassed about, so tell us how this first life got going and got your goo-to-you evolution going.

[@rihkarrdoh9513]

Natural selection is a mechanism for evolution

[@igotstoknow2]

What is the physical mechanism? Shouldn't there be billions of examples? Why are bacteria still bacteria? What were pre- and mid- hummingbirds? Evolutionism is an excuse to support anti-God lifestyles.

[@rociomallet]

No, because natural selection is for individuals that already possess the particular variety of gene. Evolution implies to develop (gain) a particular characteristic in order to survive, this never happens.

[@mouvementebr3575]

Alien Panspermia not God

[@InformationIsTheEdge]

I did a quickie look up of Dr Purdom. She is not published in any secular publications. All of her work that I was able to find is either self published or published by Answers In Genesis, a creationist website. Please, people. Do your own research. Find out what science has to say for itself not what its opponents have to say in its name.

[@toddoryall7420]

It is because Evolutionist has a dogma religious belief system.

[@InformationIsTheEdge]

​@@toddoryall7420 Evolution is supported by facts not beliefs. Do you know the difference between a fact and a belief? I'll bet you don't.

[@aprilshower7799]

Aa a medical doctor myself, who also has an undergrad degree in biology n molecular biology....i can say that these doctors have made great explanations of scientific topics as simple as possible for the general public to understand or comprehend...

[@aprilshower7799]

Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection gave European colonialist the affirmation that they were a superior race...leading to today's racism....

[@InformationIsTheEdge]

@@aprilshower7799 It has been my experience, doctor that when people cite their credentials rather than refute the points I've raised, they are almost always playing fast and loose with the truth. Your credentials do not alter the fact that Dr. Purdom is not published in any peer review publications and none of her work in science is able to support her creationist claims.