What is the Evidence for Evolution?

Support Stated Clearly on Patreon: / statedclearly
Biologists teach that all living things on Earth are related. Is there any solid evidence to back this claim? Join us as we explore the facts! We start with a close look at the origin of whales from land mammals, and then touch on the origins of several other critters, including our own species.
If you want to learn more about whale fossils and evolution, we have articles for you to enjoy on our website!
statedclearly.com/articles/cat...
To learn more about whale embryos, check out the work of Dr. Hans Thewissen here: web.neomed.edu/web/anatomy/DLD...
For an in-depth view of whale evolution, read Dr. Hans Thewissen's new book "The Walking Whales" www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=...
Corrections:
Dolphin embryos shown in this animation come from spotted dolphins. Adult is a dusky dolphin.
Photo of bowhead whale pelvis comes from the Department of Wildlife Management, Barrow, Alaska

[@Creaform003]

Video gives three separate lines of evidence to support evolution. Creationists: But where is the evidence!?!

[@EdwinLuciano]

+Adam Boyd It reminds me of a scene in _Johnny Dangerously_ where a young prosecutor goes to the corrupt DA with evidence against the mobster who is bribing him to keep him out of jail: *Prosecutor* Sir, I have got conclusive evidence: Notarized depositions, tire prints, blood samples. I've got eyewitness accounts, murder weapons, fingerprints... *DA* Hold it. Hold it, kid. It's flimsy. It's not enough. It'll never hold up in a court of law.

[@tetraxiphos]

+Adam Boyd It is about the quantity of data but the quality or the meaning of the data. Three separate lines of data sounds impressive until you realize it's built on assumption, bias and imagination. At least the whale thing.

[@Creaform003]

Tetra Xiphos So scientists imagined the existence of back legs on whales? And imagined the genetic similarities? And imagined fossils into the ground? Funny because when I hear the word imaginary, a giant magical man in the sky would come to mind before I would ever think of something like whale feet. And when I hear the word bias, I think people indoctrinated as children by their parents into religious doctrine. It is no coincidence that those who ignore the evidence for evolution also happen to be raised in a religious setting.

[@EdwinLuciano]

Adam Boyd Whales are descended from animals that lived on land!? That's insane! A guy was swallowed by a whale and lived inside it for three days and three nights? Yeah. Why not?

[@tetraxiphos]

+Adam Boyd _"...back legs on whales?"_ Back legs where? Did you check this claim? _"...genetic similarities?"_ Lots of things have genetic similarity. Do you know how similar your DNA is to a banana? _"...fossils into the ground?"_ Of course not. They didn't imagine fossils, they imagined the implications of those fossils. They assumed things based on what they think happened not what they observed. _"Funny because when I hear the word..."_ Now you are speaking on your particular bias. _"...something like whale feet."_ ...is wholly ridiculous. The whale does not have feet. It's a marine animal. What use for feet would it have? _"...those who ignore.. evidence for evolution (are) raised in a religious setting."_ That is not an empirical observation. Lots of people with religious(?) backgrounds believe in the kind of evolution sold by Darwin. Some scientists that use Evolutionary concepts in their explanations and hold this view believe in a god. I realize that it's standard for atheistic evolutionist types to presume low intelligence or malicious intent on those that disagree with them. What I don't understand is why, after invoking intelligence as a primary discerning factor, they don't use their own to help settle the matter.

[@aimbotecho262]

I currently go to a christian school, my teacher showed us this video to prove that evolution isn't real, not realizing that this is a pro evolution video. Then when she realized it went on about how this video is fake and a lie.

[@gcmgome]

I went to a Christian school as well ...that is why I am an atheist today. Your teacher sounds like some of my former teachers.

[@RandallWilks]

Lol. I love it.

[@standingwithukraine2695]

You should write one of your papers on why young earth creationists don't accept evolution. It certainly keeps them on their toes.

[@miri8851]

I'm really sorry to hear you aren't getting a proper education, but you seem smart I too didn't receive a proper education but the internet is a vast body of knowledge and you can self teach the things you cant learn at school

[@numbersix9477]

@@richardgregory3684 If the stars aren't set in the firmament, why don't they all fall down and crush us? If the firmament isn't a crystal sphere, what keeps the water above it from pouring down and drowning us? ... I believe in the firmament because it keeps me safe and because Genesis says it's there. You should too.

[@ergonomover]

Good morning fellow apes! According to the prestigious Smithsonian Institute: "No matter how the calculation (of genetic similarities) is done, the big point still holds: humans, chimpanzees, and bonobos are more closely related to one another than either is to gorillas or any other primate. From the perspective of this powerful test of biological kinship, *humans are not only related to the great apes - we are one.* The DNA evidence leaves us with one of the greatest surprises in biology: the wall between human, on the one hand, and ape or animal, on the other, has been breached. The human evolutionary tree is embedded within the great apes."

[@TheParaxore]

So im confused, how does the shape of animal bones show evidence that evolution is the reason for the similarities? It seems like this still only shows evidence that all life on earth seems to be related but thats a different claim then the theory of evolution right?

[@bigbabatunde1218]

Atheists and 'evolutionists' willfully misunderstand and willfully misrepresent DNA and genetics.

[@ergonomover]

@@bigbabatunde1218 Fortunately we have plenty of scientists who provide material for laymen like us. Would you be so kind as to provide an example to support your extraordinary claim? You don't think the shape of fossil bones can reveal info on function? Please show your (cough) science on this, not just baseless claims.

[@SamFey]

​@@ergonomoverMy, my, you have been a busy little shill haven't you. Provide evidence for evolution or concede that you have no evidence to post. It's no good looking at your script you were provided with from your handler. You'll have to improvise. Humiliation awaits you.

[@ergonomover]

@@SamFey Shill as in payed? Sounds great, but your insinuation fails, I do this for free, too bad you dislike it. Transitional fossils Archeopteryx, Tiktaalik, Ambulocetus, Australopithicus Afarensis, Homo Erectus, Lokiearcheota, Pikaia, Cloudina, Haikouella, Saccorhytus Coronarius, shared human DNA with bonobos = 98.5%, fusion on human chromosome #2, endogenous retroviral insertion points, vestigial structures, nested hierarchies, atavisms (such as mentioned in this video). I could go on and on, do you need more spoon-feeding? I expect a full, point-by-point rebuttal, not just hand-waving.

[@stephanyayala5404]

When you're here because of your teacher and online school

[@markdunham9949]

my condolences. your teacher sent you to the wrong place. it's just a bunch of self made biologists that like to make up big names with phony explanations they never have any evidence to show the public but that doesnt bother them. A better alternative would be something like robotics, programming or arduinos hobbyist kits to learn C ++ programming language statistics, physics, chemistry, computer science, those are the REAL sciences

[@markdunham9949]

@Doc Reasonable yeah, to all student referred to this site. dont bother wasting your time. go learn something useful like programming unless you want to learn made up phrases like "the Acheulian Hand Axe " like "hyoid bone " like "variant of the FOXP2 gene " and we must NOT forget the "Denisovans " and "bonobos " atheists also have the inside track to the christian faith that even CHRISTIANS never had! they are experts on the bible and according to these people we all cram into a building and pretend like we're talking to the invisible man

[@Angelmou]

Good day Stephany Ayala, Congrats, the uploader gives a good basic overview of the topic. I also recommend this video series for more details: kzbin.info/www/bejne/d4m0gZKIYt6cq9k as classification of all life and subclades.

[@RandallWilks]

There are people on this website, Mark Dunham being one of them, that continually accuse others of lying. Those who do so without corroborating evidence reveal themselves to be the liars.

[@williamdavis5946]

same dude

[@AmxCsifier]

Hippos are vegetarian but they ain't bringing it up in every conversation, just saying

[@velociraptor938]

They also are the most dangerous animal in all of Africa. So they have a great PR department...

[@STR33TSofJUST1C3]

They're vegetarian, but trust me, they wouldn't let a carcass go to waste. I've been to Africa and seen Hippo's feed on a buffalo carcass.

[@FedorSteeman]

Sounds like they're a bunch of hippocrites. XD Sorry, I just couldn't let this opportunity pass by...

[@velociraptor938]

***** I see what you did there...

[@tobiashenriksson9557]

What's your point?

[@ergonomover]

The guy below claims DNA does not exist, so when his house is robbed and the thief left behind strands of hair, the forensics team extracts DNA from the hair and it matches the DNA of a known offender, he is arrested and there is a trial. Things go south when the guy below takes the stand and says "this defendant did not rob my house, because DNA does not exist." His lawyer says, "Are you sure? We found all your stuff in the house of this thief, don't you want your treasures?" The guy below answers "stop trying to trick me, DNA is fake".

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

😂

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*The 66 year old b-allet dancer 😂 A. Eldridge aka "docreasonable"/"ergonomover", who insisted that ostriches have no wings, was laughing that his creator is a "bad" designer, I quote him:* _Only 2% of an organism's DNA even has any function...What sloppy tinkerer would design junk ?_ *He later on, suddenly increasing his initial prediction from 2%: to 32% 😂:* _The Yale School of Medicine says "68% of human DNA is functionless junk_ *Quoting Yale School of Medicine:* _Yale scientists played a leading role in an international effort to map the 99 percent of the human genome that doesn’t produce proteins-perhaps ending the notion that those regions are “junk.”_

[@ergonomover]

"He later on", not not he, someone else. Your _Drewdar_ screwed up again. Get it fixed soon, okay?

[@nickm655]

When all the comments are about creation vs evolution but i'm just here because my Biology teacher linked a video to do an assignment

[@gokusayan]

It's better to avoid controversy

[@StatedClearly]

Let your teacher know that if you watch these on our website, there are no ads! www.statedclearly.com/videos/ Also, ask for extra credit for giving your teacher this tip ;)

[@christionhunt6185]

@@StatedClearly haha you don't need to if your school chromebook has ad-blocker lololol

[@christionhunt6185]

(S)-Riley Dunn LLLLL

[@Maxb.rico505]

Same here

[@MomQuestionMark]

Randall wilks needs to calm down dude he got like 5000 comments 😂

[@linglingzeng2857]

That's the ticket. If you can't refute what someone says, then attack them personally. Makes perfect sense. In an effort to offset creationist propaganda, Mr. Wilks has posted factual information he backs with scientific studies, not like the empty claims of anti evolutionists. He has on several occasions invited creationists to try to refute what he writes and none have ever done so. Since they have no evidence to offer, it is much easier for them to attack him personally. As Mr. Wilks has often said, "Truth is determined by EVIDENCE". All that creationists have ever demonstrated is that they have no evidence to support the creation story or to seriously challenge evolution. Lies, distortions and personal attacks is their style.

[@railway9710]

@@linglingzeng2857 robux

[@markdunham9949]

@@linglingzeng2857 I would never personally attack you even though your name sounds like a bunch of forks and spoons that dropped to the ground

[@linglingzeng2857]

@@markdunham9949 Thank you for that. You make it unnecessary for me to comment on your substandard intellect.

[@linglingzeng2857]

@@michaelgray9059 No, I did not know that, and neither do you. Neither Dr. Jeanson nor anyone else has ever provided evidence supporting creation mythology. Moreover, creationist website "Statements of Faith" automatically reject any evidence that contradicts a biblical account. There is no sense trying to communicate with those who have rejected reason.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*Nature isn't able to put 7-8 pieces of a puzzle together, but atheists are dreaming that it can put many billions of dynamic parts, each with its own set of functions, all interconnected, together.*

[@DocReasonable]

"Nature isn't able to put 7-8 pieces of a puzzle together". Neither is god. Pray for him to do it for you and see what happens. Shhthead.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

@@DocReasonable *My comment is only for intelligent people, b-allet dancer A. Eldridge. Please abstain from posting rtrdd replies.*

[@DocReasonable]

​@@lorann-ut5cq Explain how Ur all-powerful god is unable to assemble a simple jigsaw puzzle. OR admit Ur a liar.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

@@DocReasonable *U don't need explanations because u cannot understand them, r-trdd Andrew. Remember u insisted that ostriches have no wings. Please keep fooling around because that's the only thing u're meant for.*

[@DocReasonable]

​@@lorann-ut5cq God can't put together a simple jigsaw puzzle, and that makes Larsen cry.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

gtgh *Meanwhile the undeniable evidence of an intelligent creator found in DNA simply crushes Aronra's cult. Even Dawkins admitted it, I quote him:* _if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer._ 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@StatedClearly]

Some are asking if whale hips still have any sort of function. Yes they partially do. In normal land mammals, hip bones serve 3 main functions: 1) attaching the legs, 2) supporting internal organs 3) anchoring muscles of the sex organs. Whales have lost the first two functions but maintain the third.

[@tetra8909]

you said there are 3 but only statedv2?????

[@ms.muffin7592]

Galaxy Husky did you other to click "read more"...

[@thegamerbros7713]

Stated Clearly 😂😂😂 where did they come from and where did O2 come a rock

[@thegamerbros7713]

Galaxy Husky because it's a lie they make up stupid things and how about if what they found were dinosaurs that haven't been found orbits just Clay that a man child made

[@RandallWilks]

Thank you for providing the confirming evidence.

[@Skulltaro]

If the spaghetti monster isn't real then why are he planets shaped like meatballs?!

[@m0rshe]

And why is DNA shaped like pasta?

[@Nothing_serious]

Why is the blood colored like tomato sauce?

[@UTU49]

Maybe the Christian God is real and He made planets shaped like meatballs in order to test our faith? This theory needs serious work. :(

[@Scyllax]

Gay Jesus Physics. It explains meatball formation too.

[@mosquitobight]

So the book of Jude not only "predicts" there will be people who doubt Jesus, it actually claims they are a sign that Jesus is returning soon? Isn't that exactly the kind of thing you would expect from a religion that wants to claim exclusive validity and scare people away from believing anything else? How is that different from other major religions?

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*A. Eldridge and his trolling account "ergonomover":* _Senor Reasonable lives at Greenwich +12, I am at +1, we are two different people, Scientist Flanders is on Greenwich mean time, in England while I'm in France._ *Andrew and his trolling account "senor reasonable":* _Like I told you, gargoyle, my country is 8 hours ahead of Europe_

[@TheHairyHeathen]

Are you also in the Southern hemisphere (you're not a flat earther too, are you), if so then we could possibly meet and have a fact to face discussion. Would you like that, or do you need to hide behind a keyboard to hide your shame?

[@lorann-ut5cq]

@@TheHairyHeathen *The way u humiliate urself is amazing, poor Andrew!*

[@TheHairyHeathen]

@@lorann-ut5cq I see, you are a coward, who is terrified of stepping out from behind your keyboard. Got it!

[@lorann-ut5cq]

@@TheHairyHeathen *Am I a coward? 😂😂😂😂😂 Poor c-nt!*

[@TheHairyHeathen]

@@lorann-ut5cq Yes, you are, and a foul mouthed one at that. You seem to lack any respect for your own religion.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

ftt *Believing in Aronra's cult leads to severe, painful and irreversible rtrdtion. For instance, the 66 year old b-allet dancer A. Eldridge aka "ergonomover"/"docreasonable"/"flandidlyandersFRS" insisted that ostriches have no wings and the Italian translation of Saturday is Saturno as it can be seen in my last beautiful v1de0.*

[@ergonomover]

Flagged for hate speech, privacy violation and harassment.

[@Ihaka17]

Quick question: All living things consist of proteins. The code for each protein is contained in the DNA/RNA system. However, proteins are required in order to manufacture DNA. So which came first? Proteins or DNA?

[@StatedClearly]

+Abraxos, funny you should ask! I just wrote an article last month that we are currently turning into an animation. statedclearly.blogspot.com/2016/05/what-is-rna-world-hypothesis.html?m=1

[@biologicallyyaseen]

All living things are made of proteins

[@StatedClearly]

That depends on how you define life. Virions are only made of RNA but they replicate, evolve, and display a variety of behaviors. It's worth noting, however, that they have to infect a cell and use its protein in order to replicate.

[@Ihaka17]

Virus are living organisms. Your article is nothing new, and has been concluded to be unrealistic. I'll point this out later.

[@biologicallyyaseen]

Abraxos Viruses aren't living organisms

[@Ethentent]

This video is playing on a loop at the San Diego Natural History Museum. Well done!

[@Ethentent]

@Oscar Hero Considering it was debunked over 60 years ago, and since I don't want to rewatch the video and I didn't see that part of the museum, I'm going to guess no. A quick Google search would answer your question though.

[@Ethentent]

@Oscar Hero I highly doubt that. The scientific community has openly debunked it.

[@Ethentent]

@Oscar Hero You seem to be deliberately trying to smear scientists and science museums to further your own anti-science agenda. The Piltdown Man was declared a hoax in 1953, yet it's only in the last few years that we've discovered how exactly Dawson produced his forgery. Any museums that display replicas of the Piltdown Man have accompanying signage which state exactly what it is: NOT legitimate science, but a forgery produced by fraudulent means. It is displayed as a warning that the story of the Piltdown Man, while historically significant for its negative impact on the scientific community and the public, is in fact false and any claims to the contrary should be disregarded.

[@Ethentent]

@Oscar Hero Just because a few scientists have falsified evidence doesn't mean we should write off evolution as a whole. Try to see beyond your myopic religious beliefs and learn some real science.

[@Ethentent]

@Oscar Hero Also, Lucy wasn't a hoax.

[@SamFey]

Giraffes allegedly have the same number of bones in their necks as we do. The real question is: *Did we used to be giraffes or did giraffes used to be us?* 😂😂😆🤦

[@ergonomover]

Are any of your 7 neck vertebrae anywhere near 10 inches long? If so, you must be very tall. The common ancestor of all mammals lived about 200 million years ago. All mammals like whales, monkeys, bats and you have 7 neck vertebrae. Is your silly question about you trying to be silly? Careful, if you stick around, you might actually learn something, probably not from me, but that's okay.

[@mattneilson644]

Answer just one question, how do you get life from non-life? Scientists, with all the ingredients and perfect lab conditions can't do it. After that we'll get to the hard questions?

[@Angelmou]

This video here is about ALREADY existing life diversification by well known heridity laws. Like how Equus had speciated variations such as the species of horse or the 3 zebra species (Grevy, Steppe and mountain with different chromosome numbers) or the wildass/donkey species adapted to desert mountain terrain. The topic sheds a HUGE light upon how 1 ape broodstock with many thousands of mating pairs had bonobos, chimpanzees and humans as 3 ape variations. So that people understand how ape variations work. This video here is about hoof mammals adapting to the water lifestyle as whales with the hoof feet to whale flippers and the nose to blowhole migration in opposition of the bird to water adaptation as penguins with birdwing to penguin flippers or the canine to the water lifestyle called pinnipeds with pawfeet to seal flipper adaptation. Your question is about origin of the very first cells (without any cellcore and cellorganelles) from already existing already selfreplicating ribocyte ancestral structures. Basic understanding: Lifeforms are still entirely compound of nonliving material. You have neither a magical lifeforce nor some ingredient that would be fundamentally different to nonlivng structures. The term life refers to a set of processes like reproduction, metabolism, food absorption etc. Similar how the term fire or flame refers to a process of burnable compounds in burning reactions (active). So is the origin of life research about how autocatalysis and acid replicators came to be to developed metabolism and to maintain those traits. When you write something: "with all the ingredients and perfect lab conditions can't do it." We do not talk about this topic to be a piece assemble challenge like you would have some dozens of puzzlepieces to glue or stick them as a lifeform together as this is NOT how first life originated. It is a false image. You seem to have a false task/challenge image in your mind when you try to approach the topic and how to solve it. You can't just have the image in your mind that you would be a puzzle piece assembler or a watchmaker or some sort of engineer to fiddle parts laying well sorted next to eachother around nor in a broader sense to be a cook that throws some ingredients into a pot either. You look what acid structures exist like in outerspace or in vulcanic ponds or in hydrothermal vents and so on how those acid structures interact due to laws of physics and chemisty and what conditions allow the structures all by themselves to diversify and to maintain a type of autonome unit. Such as micelles and which acids are able to get caught within the micelle fatbubbles and survive or gain complexity with a long chart you write about hundreds of interlocking of complexity observations where humans have no imagination freedom when it comes to it. Basically like you can also do a chart about needles, cubes or dendritic complexity gain in snowflakes from simplistic water droplets and mindlessly write the gain of complexity in nature down without any human imagination or faith freedom - like a robot to collect the data. Then you look what mechanical parts split fatbubbles, burst them or let maintain them and so on also with another chart you just mindlessly collect data. When you have hundred steps as overview you have a good base to understand how primitive acid replicators work, how they "survive" and so on. This is what the origin of life research is doing. This is long before any DNA becames a reductasis of those earlier RNA structures with the methyluracil (thymine) from the uracil base and so on.

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

Nobody knows yet, especially not theists. They're not even close. Scientists are not far off though. 😊🖖

[@gcmgome]

The proper definition of evolution is as follows: *"Evolution is any change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations."* As you can see, this definition, which is used by all of science clearly implies that there must be something already living to evolve from. This begs the question why you would pose this challenge in the comments of a video about evolution when is it irrelevant to the topic? Are you unaware that evolution does not address life origins? Most people who have some science education understand that the leading life origins hypothesis in Abiogenesis has a great deal of evidence supporting it but is as yet still considered by science to be inconclusive. It appears as if you were not aware of this position held by science either.

[@DenisK21]

Does one need to know how the planet formed in order to understand plate tectonics?

[@mattneilson644]

@@DenisK21 two different things.

[@emmanuelramirez71]

half the comments: did your teacher send you other half: Randall Wilks

[@linglingzeng2857]

That's the ticket. If you can't refute what someone says, then attack them personally. Makes perfect sense.

[@wiilsomaliyed5257]

dude got thousand likes for thousand coments

[@farenhite4329]

Creationists are getting a smack down by Randall Wilks lmaooooooo.

[@ballshippin3809]

Creationist still be like: "I don't care what you say, I still haven't seen a monkey evolve into a human so evolution is still false!"

[@Astronut128]

And let us never forget the elusive Crockaduck.

[@joerichmond5499]

+OnceUponAtimeThereWasAyoutubeUserWithAlongName 1992 If you cannot observe it, it is not empirical science. Sorry.

[@poisonhemlock]

+Joe Richmond Have you ever gone to space and seen that the Earth is round? I can't imagine you would believe it otherwise.

[@joerichmond5499]

I do not believe the Earth is flat. That is a false accusation. But no, I have not been anywhere to observe that it is round.

[@poisonhemlock]

So you've traveled around its entire circumference, then? I admit I'm a little jealous, I've always wanted to travel the world. Not to prove that it's actually round, of course, because I understand that such theories can be demonstrated by indirect evidence, and I can accept a thing as being true when that indirect evidence weighs overwhelmingly in its favor, rather than having to directly observe every feature and every event in the universe before I can self-righteously decree that it is credible and worthy of "empirical science." Just for the experience. See new things, try the food, and all that.

[@bigbabatunde1218]

*"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualist accounts of evolution.".* Stephen J Gould.

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

Your defence for _"God-did-it"_ being true is to quote-mine Gould? 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣🤦‍♂️🤣

[@bigbabatunde1218]

@@FlandiddlyandersFRS 'Evolutionist"s' own foot in mouth, unrecanted, undenied public record comments exposes the open secret lie that is 'evolution' as taught and you cannot even begin to muster a defense pr any supporting evidence for 'evolution'.

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

​@@bigbabatunde1218 Why don't you post the entire quote in its full context, coward.

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

​@@bigbabatunde1218_"Creationists are dishonest out of pure necessity. When you attempt to rationalize irrational beliefs, there is no other option than to distort and deny the truth."_ - John Pieret

[@ergonomover]

"Faced with these facts of evolution and the philosophical bankruptcy of their own position, creationists rely upon distortion and innuendo to buttress their rhetorical claim. If I sound sharp or bitter, indeed I am-for I have become a major target of these practices." SJ Gould, evolution as fact and theory, 1984 Nothing about creationist dishonest changes, eh?

[@lorann-ut5cq]

fffc *Meanwhile the undeniable evidence of an intelligent creator found in DNA simply crushes Aronra's cult. Even Dawkins admitted it, I quote him:* _if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer._ 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@20thcenturyboy8]

out of the 58 thousand comments half are made by one person

[@austindenhoed4685]

Kind of annoying, I’d say.

[@sorcshots1527]

So true, so true

[@tadstrange1465]

Like Randall calm the fuck down

[@saskia4313]

@@tadstrange1465 He still comments to this day lmao

[@tadstrange1465]

@@saskia4313 He do be speaking facts tho

[@Pirulla25]

Really well done. Congratulations, I can imagine the hard work to make all this animations. If at least some people can understand and accept this true, your work is done. Keep walking, guys.

[@tales_padua]

***** Grande Pirulla!

[@draexinkirthas4529]

No, that's not what he is saying at all actually. What he is saying is that even though this video (and thereby the animations that go along with it), must have taken a lot of hard work to make. However if at least some people come away from this video understanding and accepting the overwhelming evidence for evolution (the topic of this video), then their (the video's creators) hard work will have paid off.

[@wade5941]

Guzman..that was my first thought also. Too funny.

[@numbersix9477]

Guzman 1611 "So I love you enough to get you saved and to see you in heaven." --- If I don't qualify for Heaven, what does God intend to do to me?

[@luciosobrinho7508]

Canal do Pirula Você por aqui? hahaha

[@bigbabatunde1218]

Regarding dishonesty..... *"The problem* (dishonesty) *gets even worse because it shows up institutionally in places you wouldn’t want it to be, namely in the United States in medicine and in education, you know, two activities you would think would be inclined to be most immune from dishonest behaviour, and yet, they have become some of the most dishonest activities in the country. You have the universities engaging in two kinds of racketeering, college loan racketeering and intellectual racketeering. They’re defrauding and ruining financially their customers, the students, at the same time as selling them insane fields of study that are not real. And of course you have the medical system which is simply just bankrupting people even more than they’re treating them”.* James Howard Kunstler Author.

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

😂 tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorist 👆

[@bigbabatunde1218]

@@FlandiddlyandersFRS How so? It's common knowledge.

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

​@@bigbabatunde1218 😂 It's just an opinion. Not fact. Dismissed!

[@bigbabatunde1218]

Opinions based on observed factual evidence.

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

@@bigbabatunde1218 You obviously don't have the foggiest idea what counts as evidence.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*I still didn't get that one, how did animals evolve from laying eggs to developing embryos in the uterus and managed to survive along the way?*

[@DocReasonable]

SPEAK ENGLISH. That's not it.

[@RandallWilks]

Your ignorance is not proof that invisible supernatural entities exist.

[@TheHairyHeathen]

We see examples in many living creatures in which eggs are retained internally, and then give an apparent 'live birth'. Marsupials give birth to extremely undeveloped embryos as they don't have a proper placenta, which only develops late in the pregnancy, and then nurture these underdeveloped young in a pouch. Instead of thinking you have a gotcha question you can use to trick deceive everyone who doesn't have sufficient knowledge of biology to answer your question, why don't you try to study some actual biology?

[@lorann-ut5cq]

@@DocReasonable *My question is for intelligent people, not for b-allet dancers who insist that ostriches have no wings. So, please abstain from answering it, rtrd.*

[@TheHairyHeathen]

@@lorann-ut5cq yes, whenever you get an intelligent and informed answer, you run away like a big girl's blouse.

[@RandallWilks]

Did anyone hear about the creationist that won a Nobel Prize for disproving evolution?.......... Yeah, neither did I.

[@akoskormendi9711]

Appearantly every creationist can disprove evolution, yet none of them had won a Nobel Prize. Hmmm 🤔

[@RandallWilks]

Thank you Joely for revealing your double digit IQ. We won't waste time with the likes of you.

[@SupremeOverkill]

Did anyone hear about the evolutionist who who disproved the existence of God?... Didn't think so

[@SupremeOverkill]

@@akoskormendi9711 so, nothing is disproven until someone wins the Nobel Prize? That's just about the stupidest thing I've heard. Definitely the stupidest thing I've heard today

[@akoskormendi9711]

@@SupremeOverkill No evolutionist wants to disprove God, and you can't disprove something that cannot be proven in the first place m. Disprove there is a microscopic tea pot between the orbit of Saturn and Uranus. Shifting the burden of proof is a logical fallacy, you need to provide evidence for youd assertion first, so it can be debunked. Until then, dismissed.

[@osiand9328]

Nothing annoys me more than science denial. Thank you for making this video

[@minsapint8007]

What about pineapple on pizzas?🙂

[@levibutinroblox477]

By the way, just so you know, evolution is not science. Just because it is taught in the subject of science doesn't mean it's science. For if you do believe that evolution is science, you are saying that one who does not believe in evolution does not trust science.

[@RandallWilks]

@@levibutinroblox477 Bwahahahahaha!!!!! Roblox is a game platform that allows children to create and be anything they can imagine. That makes it entirely appropriate for creationists for whom pretense is a way of life. They make endless assertions for which no evidence exists, yet pretend they are somehow superior to others. What you fail to understand is that *TRUTH is determined by EVIDENCE,* not by what anyone says and not by words in an old book. The rules of evidence are this: *If you don't have any...YOU LOSE!*

[@RandallWilks]

@@levibutinroblox477 One of the great things about religions is that, since they are all fabricated nonsense, their proponents feel entitled to fabricate whatever additional nonsense they feel is warranted. Since facts are an anathema to you, the incongruity of your claims about science sailed right over your head. Of course, your religion entities you to do so and pretense is what Roblox is all about. In the REAL world, the following is what REAL scientists have to say:

[@RandallWilks]

*The American Association for the Advancement of Science statement on evolution:* *"Evolution is one of the most robust and widely accepted principles of modern science. It is the foundation for research in a wide array of scientific fields and, accordingly, a core element in science education. The AAAS Board of Directors is deeply concerned, therefore, about legislation and policies recently introduced in a number of states and localities that would undermine the teaching of evolution and deprive students of the education they need to be informed and productive citizens in an increasingly technological, global community. Although their language and strategy differ, all of these proposals, if passed, would weaken science education. The AAAS Board of Directors strongly opposes these attacks on the integrity of science and science education. They threaten not just the teaching of evolution, but students’ understanding of the biological, physical, and geological sciences."* Creationists, who are often scientifically illiterate, often make the claim that evolution is not really science. The AAAS, in essence, is saying they lie.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*As a matter of fact DNA, math, the laws of physics and all the greatest scientists of this planet point to an intelligent creator.*

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*Any intelligently designed thing is proof of an intelligent maker, but of course only intelligent beings can acknowledge that.*

[@ergonomover]

Thus dumbly designed things like pseudogenes causing cancer in babies absolutely refute "intelligent design" creationism.

[@Nahrandi4]

Strawman argument. This only works under the assumption of humans to be a creation. Kinda makes your comment ironic but what do I know

[@TheHairyHeathen]

So now show us how to identify whether or not something is an _"intelligently designed thing"._ What would be the detectable & measurable, properties, qualities, and attributes of something you are not already familiar with as having being designed by humans, which unambiguously show it is a _'designed"_ thing, which something not designed could never possess. So far you haven't even attempted to answer this question. It DEFEATS your claim. If you cannot identify _"Intelligent design"_ then you cannot claim such a thing exists beyond what humans design.

[@PingSharp]

Considering that this was made 9 years ago is insane. Truly a high quality video

[@bvbxiong5791]

it's cool and all, but an objective curriculum would also involve what the bible says also.

[@Thatchxl]

⁠@@bvbxiong5791maybe in the context of comparative religions, but not in science. Unfortunately following the scientific method does not lead to concluding the Earth is 6000 years old or that we were made by god. Would be cool in a comparative religions setting, and discuss similarities and differences with other origin myths.

[@aengor]

@@bvbxiong5791 are you really so dumb to think that biblical bronze age superstitions have any relevance in this video?

[@skpride415]

​@@bvbxiong5791What objective curriculum could possibly be added by the Bible on the subject of evolution? The Bible is part of religious teachings, not science. Bible vs evolution is not a true dichotomy nor are the two mutually exclusive. Would you also ask that evolution be taught along side religious studies? I presume you wouldn't, and for good reason.

[@themustardthe]

@@bvbxiong5791 you're misunderstanding the definition of "objective"

[@hiukas.]

4.4 k dislikes? Man some people can't handle the truth.

[@Angelmou]

More like they won't handle reality. Some happily admit they won't even believe in math and logic like 2+2=4 when the bible would say otherwise: kzbin.info/www/bejne/j6TIlJykq5hpbdk

[@chrishunt3674]

Where did the worm come from

[@dzagoproductions3450]

@@chrishunt3674 where did the homosexual come from

[@hiukas.]

@Winston Grettum watch the video.

[@hiukas.]

@@chrishunt3674 from cells

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*After denying vehemently, that TheHairyHeathen is his account, A. Eldridge finally admitted that it's his account.* 😂😂😂😂😂 *he,his account "TheHairyHeathen":* _oh, is everybody who challenges you called "Andrew" are they, or is this just your paranoia ramped up to overdrive?_ *me:* _Internet - the place where people come to l-augh at the c-r1c-ture A. Eldridge "ergonomover"._ *he, from his account "TheHairyHeathen":* _No, I laugh at gullible creationists who have been suckered into believing childish magical mythologies and fantasies._

[@TheHairyHeathen]

My goodness, you are a very dishonest person aren't you, and yet I'm sure you claim your religion demands that you do not "bear false witness"? Funny how if you thought you imaginary friend were actually real, you would so blatantly ignore it's commandments.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

@@TheHairyHeathen *Nope, I recorded you and it will appear in my next v2de0. Anyone can search for 'ballet' 'dancer' ergonomover' and find beautiful v2de0s about a c-rcture who l-ies more than s-tan and is more s-tpid than a snail.*

[@TheHairyHeathen]

@@lorann-ut5cq just more evidence of your dishonesty and paranoia. Because I responded in an OPEN forum to a statement you directed at nobody, does not confirm your paranoid delusions.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

@@TheHairyHeathen *Why did u respond with "Nope, I...." to a post of mine that was about Eldridge?* 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@ergonomover]

@@lorann-ut5cq Because you mentioned him - by name 4 words into your trashy OP, are you really that dense?

[@youngandrew66]

Do we ( er..ok, i) think that sea mammals were beach and shore mammals who spent so much time running into the waves to avoid landlocked predators that their dna thought 'fuck it lets get really good at this and kind of.. stay in..?

[@ergonomover]

Over generations, any genetic mutation that helped sea mammals catch more seafood, avoid predators and have more offspring, was likely to be passed on at reproduction. Beneficial mutations can accumulate.

[@varyolla435]

Yet there are species today which exist between land and the ocean are there not. Some have remained that way for millions of years - such as reptiles. In so much as their environment has not altered such that they needed to remain in one environment or the other = there is no "incentive" for them to evolve any further.

[@marcdc6809]

@@ergonomover I also noticed that it's hard to let go of the idea of agency behind the evolution process... one of these shore mammals that would not be able to get on land anymore, but lacked the ability to sleep while in the water, would just die, drown... so it does take some mutations and adaptations that allow the animal to stay forever in the water before it totally lets go, after which some mutations that make the legs unusable just don't matter any more and if these mutations add to the streamlining they'd actually take over the genepool... Survivor bias, many mutations just die out, and small benefits spread through the population at exponential rates... this is just a process that you can't see while watching one single animal going about his business...

[@ergonomover]

@@marcdc6809 What you said reminds me of the calculation of 4 billion extinct species to date. Today, we have maybe over 100 million (only around 2 million species catalogued) - it is the cream of the crop, the lone survivors in a sea of death. Also, experts in genetics hold that species arose as populations as you have described, not as individuals. There is a standing axiom or rule that species which dwindle to under 50 members are in great danger of extinction (low gene pool, genetic depression and defects from inbreeding). It might be safe to say agents of evolutionary change include the environment and ecology (food chain), operating on such a large and interconnected scale as to be hard to grasp.

[@marcdc6809]

@@ergonomover I guess another example is how birds evolved, the dinosaur with feathers had a lot of advantages, even if flight is not immediately one, and when the climate cooled down the feathered ones would have a clear and present advantage over the naked ones, preserving body heath, keeping the chicks safe... number of eggs that can be hatched by one bird... they didn't just all develop feathers, but the gene that allowed for feathers spread like wildfire in the population over generations...

[@lanamay]

anyone wanna help with my assignment lol because apparently we all got the same work.

[@nadiii15]

Lana May what u said 😭

[@Evan.Alvarez]

Lana, saaame

[@goldenmemes51]

John Smith Nick Fuentes is right we need to stop all immigration bases af

[@angeliquedianova2266]

@John Smith Funny you should mention "prof/teacher/scam artist". Your Kent Hovind sold fake cancer cures to unwitting victims, also convicted on two counts of mail fraud, along with criminal contempt, income tax evasion, failure to pay property taxes. Kent Hovind is almost as fake as your "John Smith" troll account. Cheers! 🙂 🤗 🤩

[@karaokekid9025]

@John Smith can you stop trolling already

[@limegrass6194]

This is a cool video and all but I still have one question, how the F**K did the blobfish evolve?

[@RandallWilks]

Blobfish are the exception; they were created. ;-)

[@RandallWilks]

+Drank Yeah, that was the night he gave you shit for brains.

[@AlexanderKSwart]

LimeGrass619 to not get stalked by big fish because who want to eat pink slime( I'm looking to you McDonalds)

[@SweatyShivers]

Just googled 'how did the blobfish evolve', it's even uglier than the fish.

[@betin731]

No, they're RELATED to whales. Did you even WATCH the video?!? get rect, dude!

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*The immune system is incredibly more intelligently designed than any defensive system made by humans and demolishes Aronra's cult*

[@TheHairyHeathen]

Yeah, what's your evidence? Remember, your personal incredulity is NOT evidence.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

@@TheHairyHeathen *Internet-the place where people come to l-augh at the c-r1c-ture A. Eldridge "ergonomover"/"TheHairyHeathen".*

[@TheHairyHeathen]

@@lorann-ut5cq Oh, so you're telling me you are talking out of your back side, and don't have any evidence for your claim. Got it!

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*After denying vehemently, that TheHairyHeathen is his account, A. Eldridge finally admitted that it's his account.* 😂😂😂😂😂 *he,his account "TheHairyHeathen":* _oh, is everybody who challenges you called "Andrew" are they, or is this just your paranoia ramped up to overdrive?_ *me:* _Internet - the place where people come to l-augh at the c-r1c-ture A. Eldridge "ergonomover"._ *he, from his account "TheHairyHeathen":* _No, I laugh at gullible creationists who have been suckered into believing childish magical mythologies and fantasies._

[@TheHairyHeathen]

@@lorann-ut5cq Yes, we heard you; you have no evidence to back your claim. We understand, you have nothing in your hand except your tiny shrivelled member.

[@SamFey]

*"For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine.* *Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.* *They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths."* 2nd Timothy 4: 3 and 4.

[@halogen5580]

universe: *waits a thousand billion years for the earth to be created* humans: *creates the bible and states that the earth is 4000 years old* universe: am i a joke to you?

[@adik7192]

god: *doesn't exist* humans: *take god seriously* god: am I not a joke to you?

[@perparimbytyci6982]

No religious book says earth was created 4000 years ago, that's just stupid

[@wmr.8.149]

Beverage Fissure 6000

[@cqproton]

Potato Baby he made a joke, people found it funny, which means it served its purpose. What was the purpose of your comment? Seems like you didn’t think ahead of the red rage 😂

Killermemes. exe imagine being so stupid that you believe it takes intelligence to make artificial intelligence and yet you don’t believe it took intelligence to make biological intelligence even though you know biological intelligence is far mate advanced!

[@user-gv3nq5uv4h]

evolution does not by any mean contradict with the existence of God. we simply say that God created this world and install this way of evolution as innate aspect in it...

[@STR33TSofJUST1C3]

Ali 22 then please explain how sin fits in this concept. Assuming you're referring to christianity.

[@user-gv3nq5uv4h]

sin comes from man as he pursuit perfection, as men trying to achieve perfection each one for his own self they come across unparalleled ways, so some of them commits sin as trying to force their way on behalf of others or on behalf of their own righteousness.

[@STR33TSofJUST1C3]

Still doesn't explain how sin came to be, and perhaps most importantly: Why did God create the concept of sin in the first place. Second, you're not at all describing sin from Christianity. What you're describing, although very vague, is somewhat akin to indoctrination or forced dogma. That is not sin as described in the Bible. So, you're not talking about the Christian god at all. Christianity is incompatible with evolution. So you're actually trying to speak for the existence of an unknown god, am I right? A deistic perspective?

[@user-gv3nq5uv4h]

yes, you are right, i haven't read the bible, yet.

[@STR33TSofJUST1C3]

I strongly recommend reading it. Reading the Bible throroughly is the leading cause of atheism.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

gffg *Newton nailed it:* _In want of other proofs, the thumb would convince me of the existence of a God._ *But the b-allet dancer A. Eldridge aka "docreasonable"/"ergonomover"/"randallwilks"/"flandidlyandersFRS"/"walkergarya" thinks that Newton was s-tpid and he (the one who insisted that ostriches have no wings) is smart.* 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@TheHairyHeathen]

Newton also believed in ALCHEMY. Is that another magical belief that you share?

[@lorann-ut5cq]

hhh *After denying vehemently, that TheHairyHeathen is his account, A. Eldridge finally admitted that it's his account.* 😂😂😂😂😂 *he from his account "TheHairyHeathen":* _oh, is everybody who challenges you called "Andrew" are they, or is this just your paranoia ramped up to overdrive?_ *me:* _Internet - the place where people come to l-augh at the c-r1c-ture A. Eldridge "ergonomover"._ *he, from his account "TheHairyHeathen":* _No, I laugh at gullible creationists who have been suckered into believing childish magical mythologies and fantasies._

[@TheHairyHeathen]

@@lorann-ut5cq Yes, a LOSER who cannot defend their irrational muttering, will frequently try to change the subject, or attack the other party in the conversation, instead of engaging about the issue which THEY had raised in the first place. Repeating yourself, just confirms your status as a LOSER.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*The same b-allet dancer A. Eldridge aka "ergonomover"/"docreasonable"/"randallwilks" who insisted that ostriches have no wings, also said that codes are random and the law of conservation is not about keeping energy constant because....the word "conserve" means "save". There are plenty of v1de0s about the "ballet dancer ergonomover" which capture beautiful moments like this.*

[@ergonomover]

Flagged for harassment and bullying.

[@TheHairyHeathen]

Looks to me like somebody is living in your head RENT FREE. You never responded to my observation that the forelimbs of ostriches do not function as wings. I'll tell you this, EMUS definitely have no wings; their tiny shrivelled forelimbs do not even have any musculature, they are an undeniable VESTIGIAL structure, that no _"intelligent designer"_ would ever make, except to deliberately deceive humanity into believing they were the result of natural processes like evolution. Do you worship a trickster god, do you worship Loki?

[@yash___5497]

Welcome to ur biology online lesson 🙂

[@umadbro9329]

Im here cuz of a quarter test I have in 30 mins lol

[@umadbro9329]

@Akki Sci channel Lol I got a 82% which is an A (idk how). I'm gonna have to study more because I had to guess in some of the questions

[@umadbro9329]

@Dillon Sudduth ?

[@umadbro9329]

@Dillon Sudduth no I'm just confused on what u meant

[@umadbro9329]

@Dillon Sudduth o ok gn

[@JoshuaDWarner]

First, remember the Bible says that Christians will be ridiculed and insult for their belief, so when you ridicule and insult us for our belief you are actually fulfilling Biblical prophecy. Second, most of use respect that you believe in evolution, so why can't you respect that we believe in creation?

[@RC6790]

+Joshua Warner Respect belief? My grandmother believed that little men lived down by the river. I respect evidence and evolution has millions of pieces of evidence backing it. Show me one piece of evidence from the natural world that supports creationism? Live with your wishes if you want but I'd rather reality.

[@gloopnart35]

Bruh that aint a prediction. The people that wrote and advocated their book along with others were ridiculed for the foolishness they spoke about. It aint a prediction that you will be laughed and jeered at for speaking nonsense. The way they wrote it was their way of coping with being laughed at. All you have done is taken up their burden.

[@A_A610]

You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to your own facts.

[@AcquiredCents]

"Fulfilling bible prophecy" LOL - "Mockers and stalkers!!!" Of course haha! Oh geez, you don't believe in prophecy for real do you? No offense, you might want to brush up on reality. 'Credible sources' Try them... o.O

[@ja31472]

My respect is based on if you are using those beliefs to vote and change laws or education policy. "fulfilling Biblical prophecy" - How does this "prophecy" have weight when it was inevitable that there would be different religions with multiple sects, and humans routinely ridicule other humans for almost anything? That's no more a prophecy than saying "somewhere on earth it will rain in the next 10 years." I might care if the bible had an exact description of something in science or mentioned me by full name, weight, height, date, skin color, facial features, etc, and then said exactly the words that I used 2000 years before I said it (assuming it's not generic, everyday speak) along with proof that it hasn't been modified since (because a common tactic of many so-called prophecies is to lie and claim something was said in the past when in reality it was made up by a person who already knows the present).

[@bigbabatunde1218]

*'Can you imagine how an orchid, a duck weed, and a palm have come from the same ancestry, and have we any evidence for this assumption? The evolutionist must be prepared with an answer, but I think that most would break down before an inquisition.'* Professor E. J. H. Corner Botany Department of Cambridge University.

[@ergonomover]

Here are parts that you left out: "The theory of evolution is not merely the theory of the origin of species, but *the only explanation of the fact that organisms can be classified into this hierarchy of natural affinity.* Much evidence can be adduced in favour of the theory of evolution - from biology, bio-geography and palaeontology.. The point, of course, is that there are thousands and thousands of living plants, predominantly tropical, which have never entered general botany, yet *they are the bricks with which the taxonomist has built his temple of evolution,* and where else have we to worship?" (E.J.H. Corner 1961, from 'Evolution', p. 97, in "Contemporary Botanical Thought", Anna M. Macleod and L. S. Cobley (editors), Oliver and Boyd, for the Botanical Society of Edinburgh) Try to avoid dishonestly mined quotes in the future, yours was 63 years old, things have advanced in the meantime.

[@bigbabatunde1218]

@@ergonomover And still you, and them, cannot address what was originally posted. Where's your evidence?

[@ergonomover]

@@bigbabatunde1218 Evolution is "the only explanation of the fact that organisms can be classified into this hierarchy of natural affinity." was omitted by you in your OP. It totally refutes your intention to distort. Who is "them", you mean Flanders? English not your first language?

[@bigbabatunde1218]

@@ergonomover 'Evolutionists' seeking to prove 'evolution' isn't even credible

[@ergonomover]

@@bigbabatunde1218 You might be right, it's like saying gravitationalists seeking to prove gravity. Proof is not a metric in science, all you doing here is demonstrating your scientific illiteracy.

[@voisierberlaimont]

*Believing in Aronra's cult leads to severe, painful and irreversible rtrdtion. For instance, the 66 year old b-allet dancer A. Eldridge aka "docreasonable"/"flandidlyandersFRS" insisted that ostriches have no wings and the Italian translation of Saturday is Saturno as it can be seen in my last beautiful v1de0.*

[@chucklesdarwinwaswrongevol236]

You’re exactly right

[@daliborjovanovic510]

This video is a beautiful masterpiece of informative media.

[@savvyphilosopher]

Yes, informative, but is it true?

[@eliasmontoya5058]

Savanna Addison theres a difference between a theory and theorized fact. Gravity is considered a theorized fact for example. Evolution doesnt disprove the existence of a god but it seems to have disproved that a god made every creature. If a god exists, then he set up evolution

[@eliasmontoya5058]

Savanna Addison theres flaws in the theory of evolution as well and scientists acknowledge them but they don't disprove evolution. They just question our understanding of how some creatures evolved

[@savvyphilosopher]

+Elias Montoya if you can conclude that God created everything, why would he create things to go through the long stressful process of evolution? Why wouldn't he just create everything the way it should be? In Genesis 1:31 it says "God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning-the sixth day." Everything was "Very good." Why would it be called very good if there was still so much to be done? Evolution is imperfect. God is perfect. Evolution involves death. God didn't want death on the earth. You can do the math. :)

[@savvyphilosopher]

Ardipethicus Ramidus, Niels Bohr has never been my go-to when it comes to matters of Theology. The Bible - the original source - is where I go. If you are such a Theologian, try telling me why that statement Niels said is true. By the way, I'm not telling God what to do, I'm telling people about information of God that is already recorded in the Bible. Theology is what I've studied most, so if you have any questions relating to the subject of theology, I would love to answer them.

[@alexblack534]

Hey everybody! Let's evolve to become even better humans. spread your arms and move them up and down so we may have flaps to fly or glide. let's evolve to flying humans by moving your arms up and down everyday.

[@barnabyaprobert5159]

Thanks for you report from Moronville (voting 100% for Drumpf).

[@alexblack534]

Barnaby ap Robert I'm just saying how ridiculous evolution is.

[@barnabyaprobert5159]

Evolution is proved by every single one of the BILLIONS of fossils found all over the world and all DNA.

[@kael6311]

This is not your everyday stupid, this is advanced stupid That is in no way what evolution states

[@alexblack534]

Axl K Prz yes it does.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

juj *Meanwhile the undeniable evidence of an intelligent creator found in DNA simply crushes Aronra's cult. Even Dawkins admitted it, I quote him:* _if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer._ 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@voisierberlaimont]

*Exceptionally a beautiful one from Newton:* _In want of other proofs, the thumb would convince me of the existence of a God._

[@voisierberlaimont]

*The peak of irony: the b-allet dancer A. Eldridge is using an impersonating, girlish account "maylingng"*

[@voisierberlaimont]

@@maylingng4107 *I'm really sorry if Newton and all other greatest scientists made u mad, Andrew. Why do u use this impersonating account btw?*

[@maylingng4107]

@@voisierberlaimont The greatest scientists? You know nothing about science or scientists, Oscar.

[@voisierberlaimont]

@@maylingng4107 *As I said, I'm really sorry if Newton and all other greatest scientists made u mad, Andrew. Why do u use this impersonating account btw?*

[@maylingng4107]

@@voisierberlaimont Why would Newton bother me? Newton was a brilliant physicist, and besides, he has been dead for almost 300 years. You Oscar, however, are just an imbecile and a royal pain in the rear.

[@anthonyesin7630]

So you’re saying the whale from the croods was real?!

[@Angelmou]

No that is fantasy. The hoof artiodactyl ancestors like Pakicitidea did not look like modern bluewhales on 4 stompy legs. The modern look did not exist in the past.

[@RandallWilks]

Well, Tony, most people lacking cognitive ability are at least smart enough not to advertise the fact. You, on the other hand, flaunt your ignorance for the world to see. What happened to you? Fetal alcohol syndrome? Dropped on your head as a child? Most likely you are the product of a long family history of incestuous relationships.

[@user-oh7ds8pm1o]

Prove it.... Crickian!!! Seen any aliens lately?

[@numbersix9477]

@@user-oh7ds8pm1o Do you number your sock puppets?

[@typingcat]

"But Satan staged all of those in order to deceive us!"

[@RandallWilks]

Yeah, you gotta watch that Satan, facts are his secret weapon.

[@RedStreak24]

+Randall Wilks lol

[@pawthorne7089]

"SATAN" and "DEMONS" are smart people. but watch out! We use fact bullets that can't be blocked! Well, they can be, with dumb arguement shields, but you'll usually just attract MORE "DEMONS" to the fight. And usually the"DEMONS" win because facts don't lie.

[@rockyavg7212]

Satan isn't physical being , so that's not right

[@thatfrog05]

Nope your just but hurt because, we just found prof for evolution and not your holy book

[@veselisaonichar8875]

Теорија еволуције је и даље - само теорија. Теорија може бити неубедљива или убедљива. Убедљиво приказана и неубедљиво приказана. Међутим, некад и неубедљива и неубедљиво приказана теорија може бити тачнија. Сама убедљивост - дакле - не значи ништа. Кључни аргумент за "сулуду теорију" је то што је космос - бесконачан. Тако се некад мислило. Међутим, астрофизика је од скора (20.век) пронашла да је Космос - коначан. Измерила је и количину "материје" и "анти-материје". У коначном скупу, смањује се вероватноћа за постојање таквих сулудих процеса. Сличност између јединки - не значи - ништа. Чак ни ДНК анализа не значи ништа. Јер нпр. потомство има пола гена једног пола другог родитеља. Али и родитељ има пола гена своје деце а пола неког другог. Тако можемо да извучемо сијасет погрешних закључака ако се водимо тиме (ДНК анализом), суво на основу добијених података, без упита и смислу и да ли резултат који смо добили (закључивањем - убедљивим) уопште - има смисла. Еволуција - нема смисла. То је њен пропуст, и зато кажем сулуда и апсурдна. Сулудо је све што је без смисла речено, па макар било и - убедљиво. Теорија еволуције спада у оне лажи које се упорно понављају без обзира што су сви осведочени у њихову лаж и бесмисао. То је део "нове парадигме" науке, која се базира - на - лажима. Не било каквим него моделованим, јер њима више није циљ наука, него научници, а преко научника - контрола умова друштва. Научницима се нуди "парадигма и модел" по којем ће да раде и да буду покорни "анти-догми". Део анти-догме су све научне недоказане теорије, које су оповргнуте у процесу научног доказивања али су услед политичких или других интересних и ненаучних разлога остављене као мртво месо у здравом телу науке, да својим смрадом укваре њен здрави остатак. Савест многих научника се побунила али су они цензуирани. Хришћани су у праву. Библија је тачна.

[@happilysecular1833]

Q: Why did the creatard jump off the building? A: He thought gravity was "just a theory"

[@veselisaonichar8875]

​@@happilysecular1833 Ето, доказ да људи који су склони насиљу - верују у Еволуцију. Да није насиља, заиста. Насиља над здравим разумом, те теорије не би ни било након доказа да је лажна. Еволуција - и јесте - насиље. Насиље над свима нама. Највеће насиље над онима који јој поклоне своје драгоцено, заиста, поверење. Покушај да умириш свој ум. Разбистри своје емоције. Пронађи срећу. Не био ти ја икад - судија шта ћеш чинити, него сам ти.

[@happilysecular1833]

@@veselisaonichar8875 You sound like you’re talking about yourself in third person. Religious countries are the most violent and creationism is violence against common sense just like the belief that the earth is flat. In case my previous joke flew over your head or the translation failed, I was saying that the THEORY of evolution is just as proven as the THEORIES of gravity, DNA, atoms, microorganisms and dinosaurs. You’re just crying because science isn’t playing along with your childish religious fantasies.

[@user-mk9qy4yd5t]

The assumption or assertion is that similar features imply or demand macro-evolution. Are other explanations possible?

[@happilysecular1833]

There is no assumption nor assertion. Macro evolution is speciation which has been observable in American Goatsbeard flowers since the 1950s.

[@walkergarya]

Ring species prove Macro-evolution.

[@Angelmou]

You seem to be highly confused. The term MACROevolution refers to speciation by the mechanism of micro evolution. Meaning equus to horse species, donkey species and 3 zebra species is an example of macro evolution (speciation) over many generations of small microevolutionary changes. Same goes for 1 ape broodstock into chimps and humans and bonobos. The term macroevolution does not refer to a fantasy idea in some creationists minds that donkeys could morph into their own cousins like horses or into dogs. Nor does macroevolution refer a chimp would swippswapp into a human or a human into a bonobo as all of those fantasy demands of swippswappery creationists imagine would directly violate the laws of evolution like laws of monophyly. In evolution a lifeform can only be a further adaptation of what the ancestral broodstock already was in a hierachical matter that a lifeform is never able to just completely losing. This is the reason why all 12,000 bird species from tiny hummingbird species to giant ostriches are still birds and also STILL dinosaurs and also still lobe finned fish and also STILL eukaryote cell clusters. This is also the reason humans are not only still apes today, despite of being humans, they are also still primates, mammals, synapsidian, amniotes and also lobe finned fish, despite the fact that laypeople do not see the gene and anatomical fishyness in humans anymore, biologists still do. ;-)

[@gcmgome]

This is a statement that does not make any sense *"The assumption or assertion is that similar features imply or demand macro-evolution."* Who exactly is asserting such a confused notion? I always urge people who want to join a science discussion about evolution to learn the basics first. Start with how evolution is properly defined, then look up the definitions of the words "microevolution" and "macroevolution". While you are at it, learn the proper definition of a scientific theory and pay particular attention to how science uses the word "theory" differently than how it is used in everyday parlance. Once you know and understand these definitions, you will understand that both microevolution and macroevolution result from the exact same process with scale being the only difference. This newfound understanding will also allow you to see why suggesting that there is some imaginary relationship between the similar features of different species and whatever bogus definition you have for macroevolution, exposes your lack of science education. *"Are other explanations possible?"* How about start with understanding what science actually teaches us before looking for alternatives.

[@DocReasonable]

Evolution verified for religious crybabies: DNA scarring occurs when small blocks of DNA units are accidentally deleted or, in other cases, inserted. Insertions and deletions are created by cuts in the DNA followed by reattachment at the cut sites. Like actual scars they have a particular location and profile. Humans and chimps share literally THOUSANDS of such random, accidental scars. Humans share many such scars with all the other primates. The idea that this could have happened by pure coincidence is impossible. It is irrelevant if some of these scars are detrimental, neutral, or beneficial. That this could have originally happened IN EACH SPECIES INDEPENDENTLY is statistically impossible. @user-mk9qy4yd5t

[@jrmckim]

When you're in your 30s and you are watching this because you enjoy learning

[@thanushan3981]

Same

[@sciencenerd7639]

yep, that is me as well!

[@brianedwards7142]

I'm 55 and I still haven't lost that childish desire to know everything in the world. I know I can't but I can try.

[@GSDKXV]

23

[@brianedwards7142]

@Mister Fukable Too bad you're lying. The fossil record is spilling over with transitional forms (whales, horses, humans....)

[@gaurav.raj.mishra]

Creationist: I have a 15$ note. Scientist: That is absurd. 15$ notes do not exist but if you insist then prove it to me. Creationist: I can't prove I have a 15$ note but can you disprove it. Scientist: No I can't disprove it but I do have a 100$ note. Here it is(shows the note) Creationist: That's just your opinion.

[@Gordon_Freeman_PhD]

Pretty much lol.

[@steadfastneasy26]

@Gaurav Mishra the fossil record refuted 5m 4s kzbin.info/www/bejne/qImclX6tfsdkY6M

[@titan1853]

SteadFast nEasy Well, well, well.

[@gn3441]

@Steadfast nEasy. LOL! Do you realize that that video is speaking of million of years? How do you fit the bible's generations on that time span? I will now explain some of the video's inaccuracies: 1 The Cambrian "explosion" took millions of years. 2 It looked like a sudden explosion because: a) At the time there was no previous fossil evidence. That evidence has been found. b) There is a record bias because soft animals don't fossilize easily. 3 Most earth fossil record is devoid of complex organism because it took life billions of years to change the planet's chemical environment. Complex life requires oxygen. 4 The fossil record is fragmentary because fosilization is a rare phenomenon. 5 That "Scientific dissent from Darwinism" comes from the Discovery Institute! I bet those pseudo scientists will gladly accept your donation to "the cause of God".

[@steadfastneasy26]

@GN LOL!!! right back at ya!!! No, the video is refuting millions of years. Citation on your "found" evidence. NOTHING fossilizes easily. That's why it took a sudden catastrophic worldwide event for the depositing of these fossils. That is also why you can call it a rare phenomenom. There is nothing in the "Scientific dissent from Darwin" that YOU can point out to be wrong.

[@suchacap22003]

How come whales evolved blowholes in just a few million years But sea turtles and giant marine reptiles dont have blowholes Whys that

[@suchacap22003]

@@AI_Alien_Intelligence how does that make sence earth is a lonely planet of 8 billion people whales are from earth

[@suchacap22003]

@@AI_Alien_Intelligence how does that make sence?

[@matteomastrodomenico1231]

Other animals simply evolved the ability to close their nostrils. 🤷‍♂️

[@Javas_The_Shark]

The prehistoric marine reptiles (excluding sea turtles) also sorta have "blowholes" similar to the basilosaurids, maybe if they never went extinct, they will evolve similarly to cetaceans? Idk.

[@voisierberlaimont]

*I really do love all the greatest scientists of this planet. First of all because of all them l-aughed at Aronra's cult.*

[@maylingng4107]

Another lie from Oscar/Gustave/or from one of his 30 sock accounts.

[@humankinglobetard3000]

Never heard of AronRa but yes, scientists laugh at cults like Christianity, islam and any other cult that deny scientific facts such as evolution or the earth being round.

[@Angelmou]

@@humankinglobetard3000 AronRa is a science communicator. The original poster "voisierberlaimont" is another of over 35+ sockpuppet account of the trolluser Gustave Larsen/Oscar/atheism_.../David/SusieBrundy etc. AronRa taught him once the terminology of felidae and feline in 1 comment section he did not care about. I usually highly recommend AronRa's Systematic classification of life series, as it gives a very good overview of most major intermediate forms (hundreds) from the single cell eukaryotes to humans at the end of the series. Creationists run away from that as most reasons how organs reshaped, what selection factors were involved and what side lineages branched off at specific time periods from the former ancestry are presented in clear terms.

[@voisierberlaimont]

*When the 66 year old b-allet dancer A. Eldridge aka "maylingng"/"docreasonable"/"ergonomover"/"angelmou" insisted that ostriches have no wings, I realized that he is an evolutionist.*

[@maylingng4107]

@@voisierberlaimont Piss off, Oscar!

[@foytsgarage2085]

what if a higher power (im not choosing one) created the first few organisms so they would grow (evolve) into modern day organisms?

[@lucianmacandrew1001]

ForumLight Well, Evolution is actually the BASIS of biology. No matter if YOU think it is anti-science, basically EVERYONE that actually works with science (97,5%), accepts it as one of the strongest explanations in the history of science.

[@Shad0wBl0wer]

That would be cool :3 any evidence of it?

[@foytsgarage2085]

***** no evidence, just a cool thought.

[@RandallWilks]

Science makes determinations only when there is sufficient evidence to do so. There are hypotheses as to how life began, but none rise to the status of a theory. Science has no problem saying 'We don't know'. That is a much more honest answer than pretending that one does know.

[@Zoronii]

The modern belief of the Catholic Church is that evolution (as well as the Big Bang), do not contradict the Bible, and that God is still responsible for the laws of the universe which allow these things to occur.

[@cliftonjarvis8010]

Good trick

[@numbersix9477]

Getting people to fall for a nonsensical 3,500 year old origins story? Indeed it was a "good trick"!

[@bigbabatunde1218]

*'Every palaeontologist knows that most species don’t change. That’s bothersome....brings terrible distress.... They may get a little bigger or bumpier but they remain the same species and that’s not due to imperfection and gaps, but stasis. And yet this remarkable stasis has generally been ignored as no data. If they don’t change, its not evolution, so you don’t talk about it.'* Stephen J Gould 'Evolutionist'.

[@ergonomover]

"Faced with these facts of evolution and the philosophical bankruptcy of their own position, creationists rely upon distortion and innuendo to buttress their rhetorical claim. If I sound sharp or bitter, indeed I am-for I have become a major target of these practices." --SJ Gould

[@bigbabatunde1218]

'Evolutionists' rely on assumptions, gross extrapolations, biased inference, guess work and when all else fails lies. Anyone with eyes, ears and a brain.

[@bigbabatunde1218]

Atheists and 'evolutionists' are completely unaware of the genetic impossibility of 'evolution' as taught by evolutionists and the complete ignorance and waving away of the origin of life needed for 'evolution' to then allegedly take effect. Professional game players who are well aware but instead choose to double down and be pedantic to avoid addressing anything with evidence they do not have.

[@ergonomover]

@@bigbabatunde1218 Your hand waving will not make life stop changing over time by genetic mutation and natural selection. By "evolutionists" you mean "scientifically literate", but you are trying to make it sound like a religion? More dishonest obfuscation on your part. You haven't even pretended to try to refute the lines of evidence in this video.

[@SamFey]

​@@ergonomoverParents giving birth to the next generation is and never has been evolution. Prove otherwise if you disagree.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*Internet - the place where people come to l-augh at the c-r1c-ture A. Eldridge "ergonomover".*

[@TheHairyHeathen]

No, I laugh at gullible creationists who have been suckered into believing childish magical mythologies and fantasies. Grow up already.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

@@TheHairyHeathen *We only see people l-augh t u, poor Andrew!*

[@DocReasonable]

@@lorann-ut5cq WHICH people?? Only U are giggling like a rtrd'd schoolgirl around here, Loran.

[@TheHairyHeathen]

@@lorann-ut5cq who's _"we"?_ All your sock puppet accounts? Perhaps you are suffering dissociative identity disorder (DID). After all religious fundamentalism does encourage mental disorders.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

@@TheHairyHeathen *"We", the sane people, rtrd.*

[@MyChannel-eo8ic]

WW3 in the comment section!

[@Vaginadick]

The video didn't explain Anything💀

[@Angelmou]

This is a video of a whole series of videos - here is part 2 of it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fWW5eoGIisqSpZY What is unclear to you? If you need more infos MAYBE you should read a book of that topic.

[@lastshadowartist]

just go through the comments, you'll get more knowledge about evolution than you learned in your entire life

[@RandallWilks]

This is just one of a whole series of short, explanatory videos from Stated Clearly. Check out others at www.statedclearly.com/videos/ I would also recommend the 3 part "Your Inner Fish" series as a good place to start for those seeking a better explanation of evolution. www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/your-inner-fish-series Most KZbin videos, such as this one, of necessity skip over much evolutionary history due to time constraints, leaving the impression of few evolutionary steps. There is however, a series of short videos of about 10 minutes each, the Systematic Classification of Life series, explaining evolution using taxonomic branches to trace evolutionary relationships. I recommend viewing at least some of the videos, if only to get an idea of the vast numbers of evolutionary changes that have taken place. Here is a link to the series playlist. kzbin.info/aero/PLXJ4dsU0oGMLnubJLPuw0dzD0AvAHAotW

[@happilysecular1833]

Why do humans and chimps share over 200 ERV markers in the same locations in both genomes? Why have there been three new variations of American Goatsbeard flowers if macro evolution doesn’t happen? Why do antibiotics need to kept up do date with micro organisms if they don’t evolve? How do you explain ring species? Where can I find a single example of a non-transitional fossil? Why does DNA show that some species are more distantly related than others?

[@SamFey]

9:36. Where's the evidence?

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

All around you.

[@TheHairyHeathen]

I posted evidence which you were unable to refute. BTW, you claiming _"Nuh ah"_ is not a refutation.

[@robertmcmillan3638]

Neither of you two have posted anything but shit here. Address what was posted. Other people can see this you know. If you're still doing this tomorrow (Monday) then you're beyond being a sad attention seeker.

[@walkergarya]

1. ERV markers are non coding sequences of DNA inserted into the genome of host organisms by viruses. These markers are inserted at random and are used by the virus to take over the cell and produce more viruses. Humans and chimps share over 200 ERV markes that are in the same locations in both genomes and have the same content. The ONLY feasible way for this to happen is for our species to have a common ancestor that also had these 200+ ERV markers. 2. Almost all mammals produce the Vitamin C they require. Humans have the gene to produce Vitamin C but there is a single bit error in the gene that renders it useless. The only other mammals that have this error are the members of the primate sub-order Haplorhini; Tarsiers, New World Monkeys (Platyrrhini) and Old World Monkeys (Catarrhini) including the family Hominidae (humans and other apes). 3. Most mammals do not see in 3 colors. The gene that allows humans to see yellows, blues and reds is only found in one group of animals, primates of which we are a member species. Some 40 million years ago a gene duplication mutation occurred doubling the OPN1MW gene sensitive to the yellow/green section of the light spectrum and a later mutation of this resulted in the OPN1LW gene that enables primates having this to see the color red. This mutation is unique to primates and as a primate, we too have this form of color vision. 4. Valid Scientific Theories can be used to make predictions. Darwin noted that the bones in the wings of birds resembled the fused finger bones of other animals so he predicted that fossil bird would be found with unfused finger bones. Less than 5 years later, archaeopteryx was found with feathers, a long bony tail like a dinosaur, teeth and unfused finger bones in the wing. 5. Dr Neil Shubin wanted to find an early fish that could crawl up onto land. Eusthenopteron of 385 million years ago was similar to the later Acanthostega of 365 million years ago but there was too much difference for there not to be an intermediate species so he looked for exposed sedimentary rock of the right type and age and found this in the Canadian Arctic on Ellesmere Island and found the intermediate species that was then named Tiktaalik. 6. The human and chimp genomes have been compared and the two are over 98% the same. More over, where there are differences the are those genes that enable brain development, different hair growth, language development. 7. The fact that new medicines have been tested on animals for side effects and efficacy shows that the underlying biological systems are biologically similar and therefore related however distantly. 8. Embryology hints at the Evolutionary history of species with snakes developing limb buds in the early stages of development that then get reabsorbed. We have the fossils of primitive snake that have vestigial legs that extend beyond the body of the snake and it is a regular "birth defect" in snakes to have non functioning legs. 9 Whales evolved over the past 55 million years from land animals. This is shown through the fossil record that start with Pakicetus that was identified as the precursor to the whale lineage by the presence of an S shaped bone in the skull of Pakicetus that is unique to whales as well as an unusual double tendon arrangement on the limbs of Pakicetus and is still found in the flippers of modern whales. Neither of these features are found in any other animals. It is also noted that by comparing the genomes of many species, the closest living relative of whales is the hippo, another aquatic mammal. 10.Genomes contain non functioning genes called pseudogenes. Mammals, including humans have the gene to produce egg yolk due to the fact that we evolved from egg laying ancestors some 100 million years ago. 11. Birds are descended from and are a living branch of dinosaurs. We have found many dinosaur fossils with the imprints of feathers preserved, even dinos that were too heavy to ever fly. Even the velociraptor of "Jurassic Park" fame has been shown to have the anchor points on the bone of its fore limbs of feathers indistinguishable from the same bumps found in eagles or geese. This case is further reinforced by the fact that chickens still have the DNA for a long bony tail like a dinosaur. 12. Characteristics of animals and plants are strictly divided by phylogeny. Only birds have gullets, feathers and beaks, features that have all been identified in dinosaurs. Only mammals have lactation glands and hair. Only reptiles and snakes of land animals are cold blooded. 13. The creationist's cry that there are no transitional species found is an outright lie. 14. "The story is this. At some time after the separation of the human and chimpanzee lineages, two ancestral chromosomes, #12 and #13 in the chimpanzee, fused end-to-end to form a single chromosome, #2, in humans. Chimpanzee chromosome 13 forms the short arm (2p) and part of the long arm (2q) of human chromosome 2, while chimpanzee chromosome 12 forms most of the long arm (2q) of chromosome 2. The primary evidence for this fusion is the comparative genetic content of these chromosomes. That is, most of the genes in chimpanzee chromosome 13 are found in human 2p, and most of the genes in chimpanzee chromosome 12 are in human 2q. The chromatin binding patterns line up, the sequence analysis confirms, and there have been some lovely FISH studies that show the correspondence. What has since been done is that a prediction was made that there ought to be fragments of telomeres (the end caps of chromosomes) in the middle of chromosome 2, at the fusion site. Which has been examined. And the prediction has been confirmed.

[@bigbabatunde1218]

​@@walkergaryaEndogenous retroviruses found in various species are bits of dna found inside an organism’s genome that looks like a retrovirus. 'Evolutionists' claim that these are 'junk' sequences that came from past viral dna despite the lack of supporting evidence for this then the likelihood that alleged ancient 'ape like ancestors' passed this on to their 'evolutionary' offspring is not probable or high when a shared common environment between many co existing species in the past is a more reasonable conclusion to come to. Shared similarities doesn't equate to shared common ancestry. Those sequences aren't even 'junk’ or viruses. Endogenous retroviruses could be evidence of common design as well as shared environment but are certainly not evidence for common descent. They should certainly no longer be touted as the ‘smoking gun’ that proves ape to human evolution. Up to 80% of human endogenous retroviruses are transcribed non randomly, therefore strongly suggesting a functional role. Thousands of endogenous retrovirus derived sequences are associated with cell type specific expression of neighbouring genes allegedly. More and more examples of viral sequences that have some kind of function in human cells. For example, many endogenous retrovirus sequences play a role in human gene regulation so are functional. They are there for a reason, and so are highly unlikely to have come from retroviruses, unless you want to reclassify what you think a virus is and what it's for? Which if true makes 'evolutionists' entire endogenous retroviruses argument null and void. And if thousands of endogenous retroviruses really were inserted by retroviruses, the body’s own apoptosis defense mechanisms should have dealt with most of them long ago. Why we allegedly still have so many endogenous retroviruses (allegedly) suggests they were not caused by past viruses and aren't an 'evolutionary' leftover. * *"Every palaeontologist knows that most species don’t change. That’s bothersome....brings terrible distress.... They may get a little bigger or bumpier but they remain the same species and that’s not due to imperfection and gaps, but stasis. And yet this remarkable stasis has generally been ignored as no data. If they don’t change, its not evolution, so you don’t talk about it.”* And *"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualist accounts of evolution.".* Stephen J Gould. Pick the bones out of that 🤡🍿🙂🍿

[@voisierberlaimont]

*Simply beautiful and true saying from Pasteur:* _Too little science leads away from God, while too much science leads back to Him_

[@happilysecular1833]

Stop talking to yourself, Oscar

[@RandallWilks]

@Yuan-Xi _Louise_ is feminine, _Louis_ is masculine. Note the the city St. Louis, as well as the u.s. state Louisiana were named for the French King. Note: much of the U.S. west of the Mississippi River was originally claimed by France but was purchased by the U.S. by president Thomas Jefferson.

[@freddy2nt]

"But where is the evidence?" - Every creationist after watching this

[@standingwithukraine2695]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z2XNdpuapsZokJY

[@mmmM-bl6jk]

All this evidence doesn't falsify creationionism. One designer therefore similarities.

[@mmmM-bl6jk]

The real question is why is evolution the answer to these similarities. I dont understand. Ho does this falsify creationism?

[@lisandromarichelar2715]

​@@mmmM-bl6jk Well, explaining how all life forms can be traced to one, the first. If you follow other equally strong evidence in other fields (physics, chemistry) you realize that the first way of life is a rare but natural process, which occurs in the first earth oceans, here and probably in many other places. Then, you go further, to the origins of the earth, the stars, the galaxy, the universe ... and suddenly you realize, I don't need a god to explain any of this, in the same way I don't need Zeus to explain lighting. , or Poseidon the waves, or Cupid love, or God my existence. God have been almost always there, is simply the easy answer to a question for lazy people, a tale to live happily in the ignorance. Now, i must say that the idea of an intelligence 1000 years more evolve can sound as god to all of us. Science is not about the non existence of god, is about all the possibilities and God is one, but there is not evidence to backed up. My english is not very good, y hope that the text is not a grammatical disaster.

[@theone3589]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/iJLZaaacqq95j8U explain this.

[@mistersneakage958]

Science of the gaps

[@Lexi2019AURORA]

It's against your religion?

[@ceoofbananaco.9960]

ok. disprove it

[@RandallWilks]

Science works to expand human knowledge. There are still gaps in modern human knowledge, but religions sprang from primitive human imaginations as their knowledge was all gaps.

[@ericsmith1453]

speculative and does not present irrefutable evidence but yes the earth can be flat if enough of this type of evidence is presented

[@walkergarya]

The evidence for Evolution is overwhelming, from multiple scences. Your denial of this shows you are only interested in your dogma, not reality.

[@Angelmou]

"speculative" There is nothing speculative about reading the genetic heritage record. "and does not present irrefutable evidence" Then try to refute the total lack of all modern blowhole whales in all old paleozoic and mesozoic burials of all countries of the entire world in presenting 1 whale skeleton in those burials as just 1 example. "but yes the earth can be flat if enough of this type of evidence is presented" Flateatherism can only work by denial of repeatable observations like the curvature photos and video footage like of weather satellites etc. Like creationism/antievolution can only work in denial of repeatable observations like the denial of the ape info base genes in humans like Notch2nl or Arhgap11 as 1 example or the hoof astragalus bone anatomy and hoof mammal DNA heritage in whales.

[@Lexi2019AURORA]

Mental gymnastics is the best you've got?

[@Angelmou]

@@user-tu1co9xl1k The user walkergarya is still not Andrew. And the evidence is in the video you did not watch at all. And no we already had 1000x that mere handwavable similarity is not the evidence it is exact organ repurposement readable in the DNA incl. the exact names of the mutations as heritage record like in whales the astragalus hoof anklebone anatomy the hooffingers to flippers in contrast to seal/pinniped flippers from canineform paws in contrast to birdwing to flippers in penguins etc. and the silenced omac&tomac readable scent smelling genes for the nose to blowhole migration now not expressed as the whale nostrils are not in front of the face for landscents to be smelled as 1 example. This is something you can't ever address by their very names as all your feelings are revealed to be falsely imprinted to human fantasies detached from facts such as genetics and the heritage record readable there. As you can't address any gene heritage names like in the bird example with the feathers from the SHH and BMP saurian scale to rachis and double rachis anatomy you are in denial like a person is in denial of globe photos.

[@walkergarya]

@@user-tu1co9xl1k You are a waste of my time. If you want to believe creationist garbage, go ahead, you are beyond my help. Wallow in your ignorance like a pig in it's own shit.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*It looks like the rtrd was triggered by my posts quoting his mentor Dawkins....* 😂😂😂

[@Saskatchewanna]

As people become more educated you see more and more atheists

[@yoyogorilla1]

+NC Polar Coincidence? I think not lol.

[@dejanhaskovic5204]

NC Polar And that is awesome! People are waking up!

[@abstractrussian5562]

Schools are modern churches. People are told about evolution and stuff, their faith in science is hardened, so we get atheists. Some of them are fundamentalists, like those who bless gods and explode everything, but fundamental atheists don't kill people... by exploding themselves in the name of God. Ofc atheists kill people, they just do it differently. Atheists are same people as christians or muslims. They just do things differently. It's funny to see how atheists replicate things that are done by other "believers". Classic priests convince people that there are God, that Earth is created by a thing that is like us with human type of mind. Teachers tell us that quantum physics is very important to us. I don't try to argue on the line "science vs God", I just stay outside of this line and find it funny.

[@yoyogorilla1]

+Abstract Russian Schools aren't modern churches, you don't need faith in science, that's why it's science. Science requires evidence to prove theories, I don't think you understand lol

[@abstractrussian5562]

They are similar. Everything needs faith. Science is my faith. I just try to be more than just believer in science. All people believe in something and the way how they believe is very similar, they just believe in different things. And the process of education is very similar to what churches were doing hundreds years ago. Why I even thinking about it? Because we are living in the world when it is harder to say that your faith is wrong. Everything seems so clear and noncontradictory, so we forget that the world is just a chaos that we will never understand until we die (and still will not understand). Remember the movie Matrix. We are not living in matrix (but who knows?) we create our own matrix and live within it. And the things from what our matrix is made is other's thoughts that we learned during the life.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

bbn *Newton nailed it:* _In want of other proofs, the thumb would convince me of the existence of a God._ *But the b-allet dancer A. Eldridge aka "docreasonable"/"ergonomover"/"randallwilks"/"flandidlyandersFRS"/"walkergarya" thinks that Newton was s-tpid and he (the one who insisted that ostriches have no wings) is smart.* 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@TheHairyHeathen]

LOL. Now you're so insecure you're using your own sock puppet accounts to give your drivel "Likes". There's nothing sadder than somebody who has to pretend to themselves that they are being validated.

[@SamFey]

8:19. What common ancestor between whales and hippos? You don't get to make things up and hope that no one will notice and call you out on it.

[@ergonomover]

I did what you don't dare to do, I looked it up: Whippomorpha is a suborder located within the Order Artiodactyla, and the clade Cetancodontamorpha. It contains the clades Hippopotamoidea (ancestors of hippopotamuses) and Cetaceamorpha (ancestors of whales and dolphins). The only one trying to make stuff up must be you.

[@DocReasonable]

"What common ancestor between whales and hippos? " Never heard of sirenians?? For example, dugongs and manatees. Tw@t.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*Even more fun....the rtrd tells the world what was 350 million years ago, but remember he insisted that ostriches have no wings...* 😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@voisierberlaimont]

*Exceptionally beautiful one from Newton, with much love:* _a-theism is so s-enseless and o-dious to mankind_ 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@maylingng4107]

Another lie from Oscar/Gustave/or from one of his 30 sock accounts.

[@happilysecular1833]

Giving yourself phony likes doesn’t make up for a lack of citations, Oscar.

[@voisierberlaimont]

@@maylingng4107 *I'm really sorry if Newton and all other greatest scientists made u mad, Andrew.*

[@maylingng4107]

@@voisierberlaimont Oly dogs get mad. But humans like you, lie a lot.

[@markfry4304]

Still waiting for the evidence. Is that on another video?

[@SamFey]

They'll never provide evidence only biased guess work.

[@DocReasonable]

A small sample of Christian hoaxes: the Shroud of Turin (admitted by the Catholic Church as an artwork from 1390) the Spear of Destiny (at least two known) actual blood of Christ (not congealed after 1,970 years) pieces of the Cross and the Ark (enough to build a shopping mall) the fake Josephus mentions of Jesus the original Crucifixion nails (thousands of 'em) the Tomb of Christ (several) the Birthplace of Christ (several) the Dead Sea Scrolls at the Bible Museum, all of which are FORGERIES the Exodus (never happened according to multiple archaeological expeditions and the actual historical record) Noah's Ark (at least 4 have been found, including a natural rock formation) Roman chariot wheels in the Dead Sea (poorly Photoshopped graphics) gigantic human skeletons as big as skyscrapers (more devious Photoshopping, obviously) all claims of miracles, none of which has ever been scientifically verified every word of the Bible etc etc....

[@yuriynekrasov1995]

Intermediary species are all fine and dandy, but we need to see species intermeidary to intermediary species, and species intermediary to species that are intemediary to species before that.

[@maylingng4107]

Every generation of every species is an intermediary species. Obviously you do not understand that evolution occurs in populations (not in individuals) at the molecular level. Over thousands of generations the small molecular changes add up to a significant changes and a new species is recognized.

[@yuriynekrasov1995]

@@maylingng4107 oh, I understand that this is what is believe to be true, I just don't understand how those two nostrils in the picture would gradually make their way up to the top without it entailing a massive structural overhaul of the entire species. You can't change one thing without changing the rest of the body. And those changes don't happen lightly. I understand the idea of small changes accruing over time, but I don't understand how that ties in with most species existing today having remained anatomically unchanged for hundreds of thousand of years. Humans have looked the same for 300,000 years. Let's take a million years then: how radical a change can occur in a million years? Not very. And Purgatorius existed 65 million years before humans. I don't see how you can go from what looks like a squirrel to a human in 65 million years given all that. If someone could please finally explain that to me, that would be great.

[@maylingng4107]

@@yuriynekrasov1995 No species alive in any period remains anatomically the same Each generation of every species is different at the molecular level from the previous generation. Evolution (emergence of new species) have been observed in nature and duplicated in the laboratory. Purgatorius is the ancestor from which all primates. IT BECAME EXTINCT MORE than 40 million years ago, succeeded (evolved into) by all the 500 or so primates. Humans definitely do not look the same or identical to humans living 200,000 Years ago.

[@Angelmou]

@@yuriynekrasov1995 Doctor Banjo you ain't a talking orang utan anymore?!

[@SamFey]

10:13. All living things on Earth are not related by descent but share common hallmarks of intelligent design. Not the same thing at all. You guys really need to do better but cant seemingly.

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

Intelligent Design was debunked 20 years ago. Do try and keep up, child.

[@TheHairyHeathen]

And yet I gave you evidence that all living things on earth ARE related, which you were unable to explain.

[@walkergarya]

1. Intelligent Design is nothing more than creation science with a cheap lab coat. The exact same definition is used for both. 2. While ID proponents claim it is scientific and NOT religious in nature, internal documents at the Discovery Institute clearly identify the "designer" as the god of the Christian bible. 3. In the Dover Trial "Dr" Micheal Behe admitted that if the definition of science were changed enough for ID to meet that definition, astrology would also meet that definition. 4. ID fails the first test of science by invoking a causal agent for which there is absolutely no testable evidence, namely the "Intelligent Designer" or god. 5. ID is an assertion for which there is NO supporting evidence and NO scientific merit.

[@bigbabatunde1218]

​@@FlandiddlyandersFRS'Debunked' by who? You? 😂🤣🤣🤣😆🍿🙂🍿

[@bigbabatunde1218]

​@@TheHairyHeathenYou keep saying that you have posted evidence. But we only have your word for it as there's no evidence filled posts here from you.

[@AngusDanu]

Here are some things Jesus Christ said of Himself. “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” John 14:6 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16 "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son." John 3:18 Jesus asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. Matthew 16:13-17 Skeptics said for centuries, said "The bible we have now has been corrupted through the centuries.". In 1947 the Dead Sea Scrolls were found and proved otherwise. They said, "There's no way Israel can become a nation again as God promised in preparation for the end times.". Israel became a nation again in 1948. All this being said, it does require faith to believe. Hebrews 11:6 tells us, "And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him." Also John 20:27-29 states, "Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.” Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” Don't be deceived, Jesus is the Son of God and the only way of being saved from God's judgement for our sin. Christ consciousness won't save you. Believing Jesus was an ascended master, a prophet or a good teacher won't save you. Romans 10:9 tells us how to be saved, "if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved". Trust in Him, He shed his blood and gave His perfect life for you. Call on Him, He loves you, and He hears you.

[@davidrosen5137]

Faith is the excuse people use to believe something without evidence. "Skeptics said for centuries, said "The bible we have now has been corrupted through the centuries.". In 1947 the Dead Sea Scrolls were found and proved otherwise." This in no way demonstrates the supernatural origin of the bible. "They said, "There's no way Israel can become a nation again as God promised in preparation for the end times.". Israel became a nation again in 1948." What happened in Israel in 1948 has nothing to do with the bible prophecy you mention.

[@Angelmou]

" Jesus Christ said of Himself." Actually what a real person named Yeshua/Yehosua REALLY said in his life is long forgotten and vanished into oblivion. When you quote scribbles fabricated by humans dozens of years AFTER Yeshua/Yehosua was even alive like the John scribbles on paper it means literally nothing. Truth is also established by evidence. That water is drinkable for example is such a mundane truth or that rivers flow downstream. Screaming for an everlasting life is you being greedy and dwelling in self centrism. The thinking a fictional person would grant you your greed wishes is void of sense as well, and it also has nothing to do with any of the topics beneath this video.

[@DocReasonable]

How did the authors of the Gospels know what Jesus said when he was alone or in a private conversation with no witnesses? The whole thing was invented decades if not centuries later.

[@gcmgome]

The hilarious aspect of the words you just copied and pasted is in the fact that these words were first spoken by John Wesley ...a cleric and theologian wandering the British countryside circa 1770ish. The implications of which bible lobotomized nitwits never seem to fully comprehend so let me help you out: The one true path to heaven was revealed to Christians almost 18 centuries after the alleged death of Christ. I don't know what to say to someone who is adhering to a central tenet that is so laughably inconsistent with documented history.

[@DocReasonable]

​@@SusieBundy-cw4oy Susan Larsen just said: 'Jesus is indeed the Truth and the son of devil'... OMG!!! Would not wanna be U on Judgement Day, Lardarse... or any other day

[@nelissteyn7056]

So I just want to make sure I understand correctly...all of this is based on the interpretations made based on observations? And because there are astonishing similarities observed it 100% establishes the theory as fact that all living creatures are similar in blueprint but have slight changes in design based on functions etc. and that means obviously all creatures had to have come from two specific ones because the blueprint used shows all living creatures evolved from a single creature and not that there is a basic design varying between species? So the argument for the theory of evolution which could never be replicated scientifically is based on similarities in observation and not scientific studies scrutinised in a laboratory? It is a weak argument and cannot be stated as fact or proof because observations are subject to interpretation and interpretations are fluid...so I understand it as follows... a group of people look at something, see similarities and interpret the meaning of the similarities in a certain way when all they can prove consistently is that there are similarities...and what if someone comes with a different interpretation? Will it be entertained or shunned? So here are the facts given and my interpretation of it: 1.There are anatomical similarities between species 2. There are DNA similarities between species 3. There are embriotic development similarities at the early stages of conception and somewhere very clear and obvious differences begin to show... Your interpretation is that clearly they evolved from some vommon ancestor Mine is that clearly there is a blueprint used so clearly there is design and clearly there are bound to be major similarities and major differences due to minor variations. Can we state as fact that creatures evolved and changed so drastically? No we can't it is absurd yo claim that as fact. Can we state as fact that there are forms of an evolutionary principle taking place in nature, yes because it can be consistently observed in micro evolution. Can we state as fact that there is a clear design to animals. Yes you would be a fool to disagree. Will I force my interpretation on anyone? No Are you forcing yours onto those who disagree with you? Yes. Funny how it works isn't it?

[@gcmgome]

No one is forcing you to accept anything. This is a free society where you can remain as ignorant and as obtuse concerning this topic as you choose to. If you want to ignore the mountains of evidence that all points in the direction of evolution have at it, no one cares. But if you want to advance the notion of some invisible entity with magical super powers having a hand in biodiversity, excuse the adults in the room for not taking you seriously. There is no Easter bunny....those are little round rabbit turds, not chocolate, it's best not to eat them. By the same reasoning, there is no invisible creator designing living things from a common blueprint only to watch an almost total percentage of those designs go extinct. What a silly idea.

[@maylingng4107]

There are more than a hundred science societies, each composed of hundreds (some of thousands) of PhD biologists. Can you list any one of these that agrees with the trash you just posted (intelligent design)? But you claim to know better and more than all of these million+ biologists?

[@DocReasonable]

Evolution verified for religious crybabies: DNA scarring occurs when small blocks of DNA units are accidentally deleted or, in other cases, inserted. Insertions and deletions are created by cuts in the DNA followed by reattachment at the cut sites. Like actual scars they have a particular location and profile. Humans and chimps share literally THOUSANDS of such random, accidental scars. Humans share many such scars with all the other primates. The idea that this could have happened by pure coincidence is impossible. It is irrelevant if some of these scars are detrimental, neutral, or beneficial. That this could have originally happened IN EACH SPECIES INDEPENDENTLY is statistically impossible.

[@Angelmou]

"So I just want to make sure I understand correctly...all of this is based on the interpretations made based on observations?" Humans do not have the interpreation freedom you wish they would have. This is a false faith you hold encouraged by humans but not by reality itself. It is the same nonsense like a kindergarten teacher says the kids they can imagine how the world is by how they want...so that Earth could look like a glass of marmelade or a cube or a pink giraffe. Reality does not allow the naive idea that you can just have some personal opinion on the matter how the planet looks nor about lifeform origin. "And because there are astonishing similarities observed" We do not talk about mere similarites you could handwave by some human ideas. We talk about exact organ and tissue repurposement with exact names directly readable from the allele frequencies even with copyerrors and scars by viral damages in the exact locations. A very mundane example: Birds and crocodiles share more scars in the genome at the same places than with other groups of animals because of the archosaurian heritage from the earlier perm time period (also crossmatching genetic clocks). This is also the reason you do not find any crocodiles nor birds in all paleozoic layers before their archorsaurian broodstock ancestry were well established to have birds and crocodiles as later variations. Otherwise you can show "haha a permian feather or a cambrian croco scale!" what you can't. "it 100% establishes the theory as fact that all living creatures are similar in blueprint but have slight changes in design based on functions etc." Lifeforms are born by their parents, they ain't designed. Design is an activity that did not exist in the time period of the distant past before thinking organs were ALREADY well established to perform the first time the activity design. This means the very origin of the design activity lies in the much younger ages not in any of all the older ones. In the distant past there was no design and to think otherwise is a denial and not any legit opinion by how history and the order of history works. "and that means obviously all creatures had to have come from two specific ones because the blueprint used shows all living creatures evolved from a single creature and not that there is a basic design varying between species?" Different types of speciation aka allopatric, peripatric, parapatric and sympatric speciation are observed in nature and also in laboratory EVEN TODAY. Species do neither just appear by speaking magical spells into thin air and then "poof" they would be there, nor does any biodesigner use some disessembled bodyparts like some jigsaw puzzles to assemble them into a living breathing wolf that jumps around for example. Again: Lifeforms come from their respective parents. "So the argument for the theory of evolution which could never be replicated scientifically" We replicate breeding laws and heridity mechanism ALL the time. You have bread on your breakfast table as grassplant variation because of evolution of grass with 8x more nutrient info gain into rye and wheaten and barley - not because you did pray to a deity as 1 example and swoop you have a slice of bread appearing on your dish. You try your very best to misportrait the topic for a complete false sense of security (like non existing interpretation realms which were never there) which is not allowed by the cold and merciless reality. "is based on similarities in observation and not scientific studies scrutinised in a laboratory?" Evolution theory is always scrutinized in lab - but it did withstand the test of time with more and more uncovering of DETAILS of evolution - like what exact genes mutated for turtle shells, parasites to adapt and bacteria to bypass hosts or how info gain to more nutrient complexity takes place or which duplications happened and what type of organ function changed or ain't in use anymore. Today millions of secrets were revealed even the shape of bug reproductive organs. Like the lung organ as variation of the swimmbladder gullet bag base to store oxygen with SOX mutations and more readable from the lung organ swimmbladder base. Also the artifacts of the past exactly where we predict them with millions of correct prophecies. Like with whales where they still have backlimb toe genes, backlimb fiber genes, backlimb muscle genes, backlimb legbone genes - but offswitched and partially broken, while sometimes like in a dolphin they can grow back partially - exactly like whiskergenes with dolphins growing whiskers and so on. "It is a weak argument and cannot be stated as fact or proof because observations are subject to interpretation and interpretations are fluid" No. Humans have no fantasy freedom when it comes to facts. As personal hopes of humans are not allowed when it comes to cold technical overviews if you don't want to become dishonest. "...so I understand it as follows... a group of people look at something, see similarities and interpret the meaning of the similarities in a certain way when all they can prove consistently is that there are similarities" Which is crossconfirmed by the fossil intermediate forms you completely ignore but there is a huge problem you ignore anyway... ;-) "...and what if someone comes with a different interpretation?" There are different interpretations about a lot of details. For example it was unclear how turtles got their shells as the fossil record did show BOTH pathways. Either first the shell protection formed by scale merge and then the rips enlongated beneath the merged scales or vice versa. By the anatomy and the fossil record findings it was unclear how turtles got the shells, because there Both ways were found in older burials (before any modern land or back to the water adapted turtles were established as broodstocks.) The funny thing is teams of independent Geneticists analyzed the regulatory gene cascades what genes re and deregulated the ripcage and it turned out that first the rips expanded then the shell protection happened. It turned out the flattened rip-enlongating and burrowing reptiles are the ancestral form of actual turtles and the transitional forms which were found also in the fossil record, anyway. BUT there were ALSO cousin reptiles that just looked like turtles (they were basically fake turtle look a like) for the laypeople's eyes, while they weren't real turtles by tiny detail differences in the anatomy. There the scales first merged shelllike and then the rips broadened they have a slightly different ripcage anatomy, while those were NOT the ancestor of any modern day surviving turtles as the genetic heritage record revealed, those turtle look alikes went extinct with the time of the dinosaurs. I give you here a prob you ain't aware of: "Will it be entertained or shunned?" All is tested. We also tested the idea of design signals. You seem to be completely unaware of the matter that we could read Design / Creation in the DNA like "this is a human hand designed to be a human hand" *IF it would be there* . BUT that is simply not what we *ACTUALLY* observe and read in the DNA itself, repeatably. Hands of humans for example are not "designed" like by blueprint or out from scratch - All of that would be readable aka Del/ Gli /Xtj + / - regulation deformations & organ recycling. Translated into proper english it means: Lobe finned fish fin MINUS 2 digits PLUS Finger enlargements = "paw" MINUS the webs PLUS Thumb opposable = Human Hand in this steporder readable. Containing recycling the former ancestral hierachy incl. unnecessary digits deactivated of the lobe fin base. This is why humans are to exact 0% ray finned fish - but to 100% very specific 7 digit lobe finned fish descendants with deregulated digit parts. RIGHT NOW. Not for example 17 or 22 digit lobe finned fish deformations in that exact recycling-repurposement order. That is why we as humans are today even still very specific DEFORMATIONS of highly specific digit lobe finned fish GENETICALLY by how the activation order read, but absolute not ray finned fish sub-sub...variations nor specific 20 digit lobe finned fish as cousins etc. This direct and repeatable observation for all human beings makes ABSOLUTE no sense outside of Evolution. It makes absolute no sense to observe facts like that without being very VERY specific digit lobe finned fish deformatory descendants WHATSOEVER.

[@Angelmou]

part 2 "So here are the facts given and my interpretation of it: 1.There are anatomical similarities between species 2. There are DNA similarities between species" Point 2 reveals that you do not understand why DNA similarity is a phrase you do not understand and think you have a vague free field for false ideas in your mind. DNA does not allow you to think in ways you want to think. Like someone thinks that the term "earthball" allows people to think the earth could be a small football to kick around because the term "ball" lets freedom to uneducated people to imagine the size to be small. DNA does not allow antievolution talk to have even air to breath at all. "3. There are embriotic development similarities at the early stages of conception and somewhere very clear and obvious differences begin to show..." Also 4. There are scars by specific viral diseases in the exact hierachical location order of a family tree. 5. There are silenced and broken DNA parts where we know the exact names and the function that sometimes switch back on again like teethgenes of birds, whisker or backlimb genes in whales but usually do not snap back etc. 6. There are no modern species in the old fossil burials neither in ALL marine nor landside ones of the entire world. So do you never have 1 single bird bone or 1 single mammal bone in paleozoic burial ages. 7. We could read Design signals if they would be there, but there aren't any. 8. The activity to design can't exist in time periods before complex thinking organ architecture did develop. etc. You also need to be more concrete and specific. You want to talk very vague so that you think you can't get attacked, while reality does not care how careful and vague you may talk. Reality cuts through the soul with precission so to speak. "Your interpretation is that clearly they evolved from some vommon ancestor Mine is that clearly there is a blueprint used so clearly there is design and clearly there are bound to be major similarities and major differences due to minor variations." There is no design otherwise we could observe that. "Can we state as fact that creatures evolved and changed so drastically? No we can't it is absurd yo claim that as fact." You are not a decider of what is absurd. Whales for example are still hoof mammals, despite of additionally being adapted to the water lifestyle in modern days with intermediate semi-aquatic forms living beach colony lifestyles wobbling on beaches like modern seals before adapting further to the sea with bigger size and sea birthing. This is why none of the 200 species of whales today existed in all old marine burials where ichthyosaurs etc. were found. Whales also lack designed organs like underwater breathing organs they only have landlung adaptations from their mammal ancestry. "Can we state as fact that there are forms of an evolutionary principle taking place in nature, yes because it can be consistently observed in micro evolution." All of evolution is always microevolution incl. apes to humans and chimps. The speed of evolution is always gradual and slow and not macrojumps. You will never have a pair of wolf in the woods all of a sudden giving birth to a sighthound dog puppy with aerodynamic bodyshape to outrun the wolf mother. It needed hundreds of generations of gradual increase of bodyshape aerodynamics for that. "Can we state as fact that there is a clear design to animals." No. Design is not allowed by reality to be even a legit opinion in those topics. It is also not mean humans stealing you this belief. Reality itself does not allow this to be on the table as idea. "Yes you would be a fool to disagree." You are a fool when you think your feelings could trump the cold and merciless reality. "Will I force my interpretation on anyone? No " Reality does not care about human interpretations. A person can stomp all day his foot to the ground and say "the Earth is a pyramid" it will never turn into a pyramid. "Are you forcing yours onto those who disagree with you? Yes." No. Some people are just honest and rub under your nose that there is no opinion freedom in those cold matters of facts. The constitution grants people belief freedom but reality does not allow freedom that the believes match with reality. "Funny how it works isn't it?" It is not funny that you think your Ego could just decide that your opinions would have reality deciding value. Yet it can't. See how funny that is? No one laughs.

[@user-oh7ds8pm1o]

Abiogenesis.... Never seen/observed, never touched never heard never felt never smelled..... sounds like a god

[@maylingng4107]

In 2001, Craig Venter made headlines for sequencing the human genome. In 2003, he started mapping the ocean's biodiversity. And now he's created the first synthetic lifeforms -- microorganisms that can produce alternative fuels.

[@user-oh7ds8pm1o]

😮🤗😮😯😲😲😲😲WOW!!!!!🤗🤗.....that is impressive

[@Lexi2019AURORA]

So you're basically admitting there is no god?

[@happilysecular2323]

@@atheism-themoststupidrelig5703Why are you pretending to think that after all the stalking and cloning you’ve done to her, Oscar?

[@AMC2283]

@@maylingng4107don't be too hard on him, he works at the Crick Stop Mini Mart for less than minimum wage

[@cesar3422]

A is similar to B, therefore B came from A. This is not evidence, as it is a falacy.

[@DocReasonable]

That's not how it works, grub.

[@DenisK21]

Now say something about it that's not a deliberate and obnoxious oversimplification.

[@cesar3422]

@@DocReasonable teach me

[@cesar3422]

@@DenisK21 have you ever studied logic?

[@DocReasonable]

I'm not your free personal biology teacher, shifface. @@cesar3422

[@voisierberlaimont]

*Exceptionally beautiful one from Einstein:* _the f-anatical a-theists are like s-laves_ 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

Tell us what you are doing here every minute of every day of your miserable failed life? Tell us what motivates you to be here 24/7/365 for two decades?

[@Lexi2019AURORA]

13 likes in 1 hour??🤔🧐 Did Susie help you artificially upvote your comment?

[@maylingng4107]

Another lie from Oscar/Gustave/or from one of his 30 sock accounts.

[@happilysecular1833]

@@Lexi2019AURORAThis clown thinks phony likes make up for a complete lack of citations.

[@voisierberlaimont]

*Exceptionally beautiful from the b-allet dancer Eldridge aka "mayling"/"lexaurora"/"happilysecular"/"flandiddlyandersFRS" as it can be seen in my beautiful v4de0:* _Ostriches do not gave wings according to ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA_

[@lorann-ut5cq]

gtg *Believing in Aronra's cult leads to severe, painful and irreversible rtrdtion. For instance, the 66 year old b-allet dancer A. Eldridge aka "ergonomover"/"docreasonable"/"flandidlyandersFRS"/"randall wilks" insisted that ostriches have no wings and the Italian translation of Saturday is Saturno as it can be seen in my last beautiful v1de0.*

[@ergonomover]

Flagged for hate speech.

[@user-oh7ds8pm1o]

"Crickian, what is the god of your superstitious beliefs? "Abiogenesis " "Does your holy belief system have any prophets?" "It has many, but the greatest is Darwin"

[@Lexi2019AURORA]

Nice projection.

[@Angelmou]

The desperation skyrockets when dead researchers are confused with holy people. Especially when creationists are unable to debunk the evidence the researchers presented. So where does the user-oh/David (incl. his sockpuppets) here show the Geospiza Darwin finches or the barnacle research of Darwin to be flawed? The user can't show that. As the observable evidence is unshakable by his ill-mannered behavior. He just tries to attack dead people, who were more honest at the time they were alive than the user is ever going to be in his lifetime where he is proud to be a sinner (also without any salvation). Without lying - the user doesn't get attention. Without bearing of false witness the user can't think about himself as infallible deity detached from mere fallible mortals. Without lying about science he can't pretend that he would be immortal.

[@user-oh7ds8pm1o]

You Crickians are the attacker -mockers..... Crickians just can't accept it.... your superstitious belief system is debunked.....

[@AMC2283]

@@Lexi2019AURORA don't be too hard on him, he works at the Crick Stop Mini Mart for less than minimum wage

[@SamFey]

From the mind, mouth and writings of an evolutionist'..... *"Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural.* *We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.* *It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.* *Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.* Richard Lewontin 'Evolutionary' Biologist. 🤦

[@voisierberlaimont]

*Exceptionally beautiful and motivational this one from Kelvin:* _The atheistic idea is so n-onsensical that I do not see how I can put it in words._ 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@varyolla435]

Online April 23, 2024 - the cycle begins anew as the sockpuppets are forced to "recycle"......

[@happilysecular1833]

Phony likes don’t make up for your lack of citations.

[@voisierberlaimont]

@@happilysecular1833 *Sorry that Kelvin made u mad, Andrew, but he and all other greatest scientists of this planet were too smart to buy Aronra's doctrine.*

[@happilysecular1833]

If AronRa is a chrisian creationist you are absolutely correct.

[@happilysecular1833]

Why do humans and chimps share over 200 ERV markers in the same locations in both genomes? Why do antibiotics need to kept up do date with micro organisms if they don’t evolve? How do you explain ring species? Where can I find a single example of a non-transitional fossil? Why does DNA show that some species are more distantly related than others?

[@voisierberlaimont]

*Beautiful this one from Lord Kelvin says the same thing as all other greatest scientists:* _If you study science deep enough and long enough, it will force you to believe in God._

[@maylingng4107]

Another lie from Oscar/Gustave/or from one of his 30 sock accounts.

[@voisierberlaimont]

*Simply beautiful, from Dawkins:* _if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer._ 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

You must enjoy being humiliated 24/7/367, right?

[@atheism-themoststupidrel]

@@FlandiddlyandersFRS *Why do u try to project ur severe problems on somebody else, Andrew? Look, theists l-augh at u all day long and they have good reasons.*

[@atheism-themoststupidrel]

@@FlandiddlyandersFRS *I mean u r the adult who insisted that ostriches have no wings and that's the peak of rtrdtion.*

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

​@@atheism-themoststupidrel Why do you allow us to constantly humiliate you?

[@seeninthedark]

maybe they were designed that way, another theory! maybe God used the same building blocks for some animals! I understand the theory of evolution and find it rather good in an attempt to find current information in existence and extrapolating from that but just a thought.

[@Angelmou]

"were designed that way," Design is a younger activity that did not exist in a distant past time period before lifeforms evolved a certain amount of neuronal complexity to perform the act of designing much later in younger periods of time. "another theory!" Nope, the denial of the young age of the design activity is not another theory it is just not wanting that history has a very certain order of origins after another. Like someone wishes that tanks would be older than horses so that he can imagine that Julius ceasar did drive in a tank into the battlefields of the roman empire and did not ride on horse back. Only that thinking in that type of way does not fly with the evidence, but tries to ignore the very order of historical developments and origins. Like tanks thousands of years AFTER horses were tamed. "maybe God used the same building blocks for some animals!" Animals are not assembled like blocks or pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. I'm not sure why people think they can have such absurd denial of giving birth opinions. Animals are born by their parents, which were born by their parents (the grandparents) and so on. The past is not open for fantasy believes in denial of that. Over generations copy errors happen - this means that for example equus broodstocks developed the donkey species variation and the horse species variation and the 3 zebra species over 700,000 generations. As we can read it by genetic clocks in the DNA of the speciated variations. So did the ape broodstock have chimps and humans and bonobos as variations in roughly 375,000 generations. We can read that in the DNA as heridity record as well.

[@gcmgome]

The problem with ascribing the complexity found in living organisms to some imaginary, invisible omnipotent designer is that in order to do so, you simply ignore all of what makes it a really silly idea. Skipping past the fact that your God is both imaginary and invisible, which should put him in the same conversation as the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus, there is the issue of extinction. It is estimated that over 99.9% of all species that have ever lived are extinct and that all currently extant species, save a very small fraction of a percentage point will go extinct as well. How can you possibly reconcile this reality with the words "intelligent designer"? Why would a designer continually design living things that will in time no longer exist? Our best estimates are that as many as 4 billion species of plants and animals have lived at some time in the past on this planet. Does it make any sense at all that this imaginary designer went back to the drawing board 4 billion times?

[@RandallWilks]

Bwahahahahaha!!!! "MAYBE"????? What kind of reasoning is that? TRUTH is not what you want it to be. TRUTH is determined by EVIDENCE, not by what anyone says and not by words in an old book. Science is a search for truth and it does so by following evidence to a conclusion which is initially PROVISIONAL _(a hypothesis)._ As further evidence accumulates in support of that conclusion, so does the certainty it is correct. When all evidence supports a conclusion and none refutes it, it may be regarded as a SCIENTIFIC THEORY which, in science, is the HIGHEST DEGREE OF CERTAINTY POSSIBLE. That is true for Germ Theory, Atomic Theory, Theory of Gravity, Theory of Evolution, Heliocentric Theory, Theories of Relativity, et al. They are all explanations for observed phenomena and they are all backed by massive evidence. Science is built on facts, much like a house being built of bricks. But a pile of bricks is not a house and a collection of facts is not science. They become science only after being assembled into a coherent explanation of observed phenomena that is a Scientific Theory. Scientific methodology is designed to eliminate personal bias and follow evidence wherever it leads. THAT is the path to truth, and that is science.

[@DocReasonable]

Theory means 'factual explanation'. Your design fantasy is just that... a fantasy.

[@PoorCreationists]

All Gods are imaginary.

[@voisierberlaimont]

*Exceptionally beautiful this one from Lord Kelvin says the same thing as all other greatest scientists:* _If you study science deep enough and long enough, it will force you to believe in God._

[@maylingng4107]

Another lie from Oscar/Gustave/or from one of his 30 sock accounts.

[@voisierberlaimont]

*The peak of irony: the b-allet dancer A. Eldridge is using an impersonating, girlish account "maylingng"*

[@voisierberlaimont]

*DNA alone is undeniable evidence for an intelligent creator and flusters Aronra's disciples.*

[@baneofbanes]

Not even close.

[@FlandiddlyandersFRS]

Wrong!

[@jacobdittmer5512]

No one is flustered lol. Your god is just as much mythology as odin and zeus

[@timothystebens5575]

Thank you for reading this fairytale to me. Sometimes I enjoy make believe things.

[@Angelmou]

Since when are observations incl. photos of them presented any "fairytale"? There is no belief needed for scientific toolsets.

[@Angelmou]

@@user-tu1co9xl1kAh okay it is just another trolling account of you where you still confuse different people and you still run away from vestigial wings showing evidence of bird evolution ;-) And your sockpuppets denied DNA and the double helix and alleles and so on,

[@Angelmou]

@@user-tu1co9xl1k Your denial of observations by name like the vestigial wing of ostrich evidence for bird evolution shows again how void of sense your trolling remains and your remaining sockpuppets will also be moderated for bearing false witness. As I'm also still not Andrew. ;-)

[@viewfire]

Yeah, the creationist fairy tales are pretty funny.

[@masih9595]

No evolution without God. Man is made in the image of God. We are special.

[@walkergarya]

There is no god. We are an evolved species of ape.

[@Angelmou]

You can personally believe that a deity invented evolutionary processes as people can also be convinced a deity caused the strong or weak nuclear interaction to exist or gravity. This is however a subjective faith projected onto the topic. It is not needed for the tools to be used or to work out.

[@DocReasonable]

'Close the door and pray to your father who is unseen.' (Matthew 6:5-8). So if he's unseen, HOW ARE WE IN HIS IMAGE, BILLY BOB? Cue banjo music...

[@happilysecular2323]

Than why aren’t we invisible too?

[@user-oh7ds8pm1o]

The recent uptick in "alien activity" in the past few years has given Crickians great hope that maybe just maybe they will get to see a space alien in a spaceship before they die...... They have much hope....

[@AMC2283]

do you actually take yourself seriously?

[@user-oh7ds8pm1o]

You're the one that believes in aliens and it's your side led by one of the greats Francis Crick that concludes such​@@AMC2283

[@AMC2283]

@@atheism-themoststupidrelig5703you actually think this floundering weirdo believes in anything you do?

[@voisierberlaimont]

*Simply beautiful, from Dawkins:* _A serious case could be made for a deistic God._ 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@maylingng4107]

Another lie from Oscar/Gustave/or from one of his 30 sock accounts.

[@lorann-ut5cq]

*Unforgettable one from the same ballet dancer evolutionist A. Eldridge aka "ergonomover"/"FlandiddlyandersPhD"/"docreasonable"/"randallwilks:* _Dropped from 250,000 to 237,000. That's a drop of -23,000. Or an increase of 23,000 if you want to be pedantic._ 😂😂😂😂😂