Evolution: It’s a Thing – Crash Course Biology #20


Congratulations! This is our last
episode of our section on Evolution and Genetics,
which puts us at the halfway mark of CrashCourse Biology. So far we’ve learned about DNA,
genetics, natural selection, how cells multiply, populations,
speciation, replication, respiration, and
photosynthesitation. I’m so proud of you. But I couldn’t let this section
end without discussing the iscussion that everybody can’t
help but discuss these days: Evolution. It’s a thing. It’s not a debate. Evolution is what
makes life possible. It allows organisms to adapt to
the environment as it changes. It’s responsible for the enormous
diversity and complexity of life on Earth, which not only provides
organisms with sources of food and some healthy competition. It also gives us some truly
awesome stuff to marvel at. And even though evolution makes
living things different from one another, it also shows
us how we’re all the same. All of life, every single thing
that’s alive on the Earth today, can claim the same shared heritage,
having descended from the very first microorganism when life
originated on this planet 3.8 billion years ago. There are people who will say
that this is all random- It’s not. And that this clumsy process could
not be possible for the majestic beauty of our world. To them, I say, well at least we
agree that our world is beautiful but, well you’re probably
not going to enjoy the rest of this video. To me, there are two sorts
of people in the world, those who are excited about
the power and beauty and simplicity of the
process of evolution, and those who don’t understand it. And somehow, I live in a country
where only 40% of the population believes that evolution is a thing. The only possible reason for that
that I can accept is that they just don’t understand it. It’s time to get real, people. First, let’s understand what we
mean when we talk about the theory of evolution. Evolution is just the idea that
gene distribution changes over time, which is an indisputable
fact which we observe all the time in the natural world. But the THEORY of evolution is a
large set of ideas that integrates and explains a huge mass of
observations from different disciplines including embryology,
paleontology, botany, biochemistry, anatomy and geophysics. In every day language, the
word “theory” means “hunch” or even “hypothesis.” But in science, a theory is an
idea that explains several phenomena at once. Thus, The theory of evolution is
a bunch of ideas that explain many things that we, as humans,
have observed for thousands of years. It’s the theory that meticulously
and precisely explains the facts, and the facts are indisputable. So let’s spend some time going
through the facts, and how evolution explains them
all so well. First, fossils: The fossil record shows that
organisms that lived long ago were different from
those that we see today. Sounds obvious, but two
hundred years ago it seemed a little bit crazy. When scientists first
started studying dinosaur fossils in the 1820s,
they thought that all dinosaurs were basically giant iguanas. That’s why the first fossil
dinosaur was named Iguanodon. It wasn’t until the fossils of
two-legged dinosaurs started showing up in the 1850s that
scientists had to grapple with the idea that organisms of the past
were somewhat similar to ones today like, dinosaurs were reptiles, but
many of them took on a diversity that’s barely recognizable to us. And of all those ancient
not-really-iguanas were all extinct, either dying out
completely or evolving into organisms that survive
today, like birds. Fossils make it clear that only
evolution can explain the origin of these new kinds of organisms. For instance, fossils taught us
that whales used to walk. Whales are cetaceans, a group of
mammals that includes porpoises and dolphins, and biologists long
suspected that whales descended from land mammals. Partly because some modern whales
still have the vestigial remnants of a pelvis and hind-limb bones. But it wasn’t until recently,
the 1990s and 2000s, that the pieces really came together. First, paleontologists discovered
fossils of DOR-oo-dons, cetaceans that had different
skulls from modern whales but still had the same
vestigial leg bones. Then they found even older fossil
remains of another cetacean that actually had hind
legs and a pelvis. The pelvis wasn’t fused to
the backbone like ours is, so it did swim like a whale,
but more importantly, it still had ankle bones And they were ankle bones that
are unique to the order that includes bison, pigs,
hippos and deer. So by following these clues left
behind in fossilized bones, paleontologists were able to track
the origin of whales back to the same origin as bison and pigs. This leads us to another series of
facts that evolution explains: Not how animals were different, but
how they are incredibly similar. Last week we talked about
Carl Linnaeus and how he classified organisms by their
structural similarities. Well he didn’t know anything
about evolution or genetics, but when he began grouping
things in this way, he hit upon one of evolution’s
most prominent clues: homologous structures. The fact that so many organisms
share so many finely detailed structures shows us
that we’re related. Let’s go back to the whale. Like my dog, Lemon, and me,
the whale has two limbs at the front of its body,
its front flippers. And so does this bat, its wings. Inside our limbs we all have the
very same structure: one longish bone on top, connected to two thin
bones at the joint, followed by a cluster of small bones called
the carpals, and then our fingers, or digits. We each use our forelimbs for
totally different purposes: the bat flies, the whale swims,
Lemon walks and I… you know, jazz hands! Building limbs like this isn’t the
most efficient way to swim or fly or walk. Our limbs have the same structure
because we descended from the same animal, something like
this more-gan-uh-cah-don here, which, yeah, has the
same forelimb structure. In the first stage of
our existence, every vertebrate looks almost
exactly the same. Why? Because we’re all descended from
the same initial vertebrates. So our structures are the
same as other mammals and other vertebrates, sure, but it
also turns out that our molecules are the same as, like, everything. In fact, if we were ever to
find life on Mars or something, the sure fire way of knowing
whether it’s really extra-terrestrial is to check and
see if it has RNA in it. All living things on our planet use
DNA and/or RNA to encode the information that makes
them what they are. The fact that we all use the same
molecule itself suggests that we are all related,
even if very distantly. But what’s more, by sequencing
the DNA of any given creature, we can see precisely
how alike we are. The more closely related
species are, the more of the same DNA sequences they have. So the human genome is
98.6% identical to that of the chimpanzee, our closest
evolutionary relative, and fellow primate. But it’s also 85%
the same as a mouse. And I wonder how you’re going to
feel about this, about half of our genes are the same as in fruit
flies, which are animals, at least. So, just as your DNA proves that
you descended from your parents, your DNA also shows that you
descended from other organisms and ultimately, from that one
prokaryotic microorganism 3.8 billion years ago that
is the grandparent of us all. Now when it comes to species
that are very similar, like say, marsupials, their
distribution around the world or their biogeography, is also
explained extraordinarily well by the theory of evolution. Animals that are the most similar,
and are the most closely related, tend to be found in the same
regions, because evolutionary change is driven in part
by geographical change. As we talked about in
our speciation episode, when organisms become isolated
by physical barriers, like oceans or mountains, they take their
own evolutionary courses. But in the time scales
we’re talking about, the geographical
barriers are much older, and are often even the
result of continental drift. So, marsupials. You know about marsupials. They can be found in many places,
but they aren’t evenly distributed around the world. By far the highest concentration
of them is in Australia. Even the majority of mammal fossils
in Australia are marsupials. So why is Australia rife with
kangaroos, koalas and wombats while North America
just has, opossums? Fossils show us that one of
marsupials’ earliest ancestors found its way to Australia before
continental drift turned it into an island 30 million years ago. More importantly, after Australia
broke away, placental mammals like us evolved on the main landmass and
quickly outcompeted most of the marsupials left behind,
in what would become North and South America. So, very few marsupials
remain in the Americas, while Australia has been drifting
around like some kind of marsupial Love Boat. Darwin’s finches are another
example of biogeographical evidence As he wrote in The Origin of
Species, Darwin observed that different species of finches on
separate Galapagos islands were not only similar to each other but
were also similar to a species on the South American mainland. He hypothesized that the island
finches were all descendants of the mainland finch and changed
over time to be more fit for their environments,
a hypothesis that genetic testing has since confirmed. Now, you’ll remember, I hope,
a few weeks ago, when I told you about Peter and Rosemary Grant, the
evolutionary biologists/lovebirds who have studied Galapagos
finches since the 1970s. One of their greatest contributions
came in 2009 when studying finches on the island of Daphne Major. They discovered that the offspring
of an immigrant finch from another island and a Daphne Major finch
had become a new species in less than 30 years. This is just the latest example
of our fourth body of evolutionary evidence:
direct observation of evolution. The fact is, we have seen evolution
take place in our own lifetimes. One of the fastest and most common
changes we observe is the growing resistance to drugs
and other chemicals. In 1959, a study of mosquitos in a
village in India found that DDT killed 95% of the mosquitos
on the first application. Those that survived reproduced and
passed on their genetic resistance to the insecticide. Within a year, DDT was killing
only 49% of the mosquitos, and it continued to drop. The genetic makeup of the mosquito
population changed because of the selective pressures caused
by the use of DDT. But it’s not just tiny
changes in tiny animals, we’ve also observed larger
animals undergoing some pretty striking changes. In 1971, for instance, biologists
transplanted ten Italian wall lizards from one island off
the coast of Croatia to another. Thirty years later, the immigrant
lizards’ descendants had undergone some amazing, fundamental changes
like, even though the original lizards were mainly insect eaters,
their digestive systems had changed to help them exploit the island’s
most abundant food source: plants. They actually developed muscles
between their large and small intestine that effectively created
fermenting chambers, which allowed them to digest vegetation. Plus, their heads became wider and
longer to allow them to better bite and chew the grasses and leaves. These are all great examples of
microevolution, allele frequency changes that happens rather
quickly and in small populations. Macroevolution is just that
microevolution on a much longer time scale. The sort of thing that turns
hippos into whales is a lot harder to observe for a species that,
200 years ago, thought dinosaurs were big iguanas, but part of the
power of the human mind is being able to see far beyond itself and
the time scales that our own individual lives are limited to. And I for one, am
pretty proud of that. Let’s all at least agree
that the world is a beautiful and wonderful place. And life is worth studying
and knowing more about, and that’s what Biology is. If you want to go back and watch
parts of this video again please click on the annotations in the
little table of contents over there. If you have questions for us,
please leave them on Facebook or Twitter or in the
YouTube comments below. Thanks to everybody who
helped put this together. And we’ll see you next time.

100 Replies to “Evolution: It’s a Thing – Crash Course Biology #20”

  1. Funny how people who believe in evolution just choose to forget that there were fossils made by humans and buried underground🤦🏽‍♂️😂

    But hey just because you believe in evolution, it doesn’t make you dumb👍🏽

  2. “When confronted with the order and beauty of the universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it’s very tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it.”

    —Physicist Tony Rothman, former post-doctoral fellow at Oxford University

  3. WALKING WHALES LIE; Pakicetus was a wolf like mammal. It had a bone in it's inner ear called an "involucrum" that resembled something found in whales. It was fully terrestrial (lived it's entire life on land) and looked nothing like a whale but neo-Darwinist, desperate for a whale ancestor, tagged it Pakicetus or "Pakistani whale". Ambulocetus, Maiacetus, Kuchicetus and Rodhocetus were extinct variations of sea lions or otters. They were amphibious (lived part of their lives on land and part in the water). They used their hind legs and tail for swimming and their four limbs for walking on land.

    Basilosaurus and Dorudon were extinct whales that were fully aquatic ( lived their entire lives in the water).

    Land and amphibious mammals have nostrils for breathing on the front of their heads. Whales have a blowhole on the top of their bodies to breath.

    The blowhole of a whale is surrounded by thick muscular “lips” that keep the hole tightly closed except when the animal makes a deliberate effort to open it at the surface. Total submersion thus takes less effort for whales than for animals that must actively exclude water from their air passages. Coming onto land is not a natural act for a whale; beached whales die if they're not quickly helped back in the water.

    Land and amphibious mammals use four legs—tail assisted for amphibians while in water—to move around in their environment. Whales use a fluke to move around in their environment. Land and amphibian mammals can survive without the tip of their tail. Whales can't survive without it.

    Flukes are flat horizontal lobes at the ends of their tails. Fluke movements are coordinated by a complex system of long, powerful tendons connecting them to specialized muscles in the tail.

    These are a few of the myriad of changes they would have to undergo. For neo-Darwinist it would take hundreds of millions of random mutations (random variations for traditional Darwinist), to compel a fully terrestrial mammal to turn into a fully aquatic mammal.

    The biggest problem for the "walking whales" is the empirical evidence–Darwinist refuse to acknowledge–of the fossil record. It's all but complete. Paleontologist have not discovered the fossils of innumerable transitional intermediates, falling between and linking land mammals and aquatic mammals. All the natural history museums in the world should be overflowing with them.

    With enough imagination anyone can invent a story about how land mammals evolved into whales. But an imaginative story isn't empirical science.

  4. "Although all species have supposably descended from other species through natural selection and variation, no one has ever observed the origin of even more be species by this process. Since fossils, embryos, and molecules research don't demonstrate common ancestry, as they all conflict with each their, the evidence for Darwinism is underwhelming at best." -Johnathon Wells, Ph.D.

  5. Observably, chaos always produces order. Obviously, entropy isn’t ‘a thing’. Anything can happen in billions of years, right? Anything?Could homologous structures suggest a signature, like handwriting? I’m so lost, not.

  6. Those are not hind limb bones! Learn a little something about whale anatomy if you please.

    That structures look the same doesn’t prove one morphed into the other. This proofs both decent and an intelligent being reusing the same succesful structures.

    Telling people that 60% don’t understand you or implying they are a little less intelligent than you proof nothing but arrogance.

    Different finch beeks? Seriously? Still in 2019 this is brought up? C’mon guys. They change back and forth all the time depending on circumstances. Show us how the beaks arrived in your vid. Not just that they change in size. Who cares.

    Putting macro evolution in the footnote and not even going into it really says enough.

    The whole video should be about MACRO evolution. Not about the observed changes in all species which in most cases are genetically detrimental.

  7. Am here to learn about evolution….but it hasnt answered my question on the origin of life…plus all those millions of years…the assumptions made to measure fossils…

  8. I like how he proceeds to “facts” about similarities in structures between kinds of animals and then doubles over into his own faith that this means we are “factually “ related and facts for proof of evolution when actually. It could mean- same designer used the same tools for other animals. The same way a tank inventor used tracks when he invents the half track.

    Not to mention that the very example
    Of the whale he used the finder subtracts the feet the fins and the tale – to leave well just a whale and even other whale exmaoles latter found out to be land animals all along. Not to mention that whales need hip bones to give birth so- they not exactly left over hinges since Its clear they still use their hip bones in birth.

    But yeh- you keep sprouting those words facts.

    Here is a fact. Mutations can only duplicate- curropt – delete or move data that’s already exists around but cannot produce New information. Can’t add information that would result in the required information needed for Darwin theory to even stand. Instead we find off information activated and expressed. Pre packages code. Which points to designer .

  9. Haha the fact is that the DNA is similar the theory is that it proves we are related . Notice the jump from fact the fiction.

  10. Holy smoke this guy is delusional. He still using finches tahtkold argument? Hahaha damn son. Darwin’s theory is from one kind to another – creation theory is – kinds producing other kinds of the same kind .finvhes producing different kind of finches but always finches .

    In the case of mutation that helped resistance – that didn’t add new information just because a mutation lost information that the poison couldn’t attack. Hello? No Darwin evolution. Everything he said isn’t fact or science proves/ it’s his interpretation. Well not his- some other guy who wrote a book about it interpretation lol- do I smell a religion here or what

  11. Most scientist agree the possibility of evolution From a mathematical Perspective Is ludicrous.

  12. Lots of holes. How about chromosomes?
    If evolution is true, how come a blue green algae did not evolve?! Scientist found a fossil of a bluegreen algae and they calculate its age around 3.5billion years old. That is considerable amount if time to evolve. But how come they did not?

  13. So if evolution exists, that means we're all just a big happy evolved accident with no real meaning of our existence and once we die that's it. Lights out.

    I feel bad for anyone who believes this. It's gotta be a scary way to live life. I hope some of you can open your eyes and realize how perfect and beautiful of a world we live in. All of this can't be an accident. With all of the "laws" of nature, it makes more sense that someone or something of a higher power created everything. And science is actually getting closer to finding God. For all of the unexplained in our world, it makes more sense for there to be a God rather than that we evolved from molecules at the beginning of the universe.

    Here's a thought: if we evolved, if creatures evolved, where are all the in-between stages in fossils? If humans came from apes, but both live today, where are the in-between stages living today?

  14. Here's a thought: if we evolved, if creatures evolved, where are all the in-between stages in fossils? If humans came from apes, but both live today, where are the in-between stages living today?

  15. Many people think the theory of evolution is true, however I have spoken to the Holy Spirit quite a few times and he has spoken back to me he replied back to me answering my questions. Can evolutionists answer me this question: What did the Holy Spirit evolve from? Why is it that he is able to reply to me when I ask him something?

  16. "Evolution is gene distribution changes over time." 1:56 How about the ORIGIN of new proteins? Microbes have thousands fewer genes that encode proteins than humans. So thousands of NEW genes encoding proteins must have evolved. How? Natural selection can't help because a partial or incorrect protein doesn't work at all.

  17. "Macro evolution is just that micro evolution on a much longer timescale." 10:46 NO! Macro evolution would require new proteins, new molecular machines, new molecular processes that simpler organisms don't have. Amphibians fertilize eggs externally. Reptiles and mammals fertilize eggs internally. HOW could THAT TRANSITION occur "gradually"??? It couldn't have. It was designed.

  18. Cool. I'm waiting for you to comment on genetic researcher Michael Behe growing generations of E Coli bacteria showing mutations are actually counterevolutionary in result.

  19. WALKING WHALES LIE; Pakicetus was a wolf like mammal. It had a bone in it's inner ear called an "involucrum" that resembled something found in whales. It was fully terrestrial (lived it's entire life on land) and looked nothing like a whale but neo-Darwinist, desperate for a whale ancestor, tagged it Pakicetus or "Pakistani whale". Ambulocetus, Maiacetus, Kuchicetus and Rodhocetus were extinct variations of sea lions or otters. They were amphibious (lived part of their lives on land and part in the water). They used their hind legs and tail for swimming and their four limbs for walking on land.
    Basilosaurus and Dorudon were extinct whales that were fully aquatic ( lived their entire lives in the water).
    Land and amphibious mammals have nostrils for breathing on the front of their heads. Whales have a blowhole on the top of their bodies to breath.
    The blowhole of a whale is surrounded by thick muscular “lips” that keep the hole tightly closed except when the animal makes a deliberate effort to open it at the surface. Total submersion thus takes less effort for whales than for animals that must actively exclude water from their air passages. Coming onto land is not a natural act for a whale; beached whales die if they're not quickly helped back in the water.
    Land and amphibious mammals use four legs—tail assisted for amphibians while in water—to move around in their environment. Whales use a fluke to move around in their environment. Land and amphibian mammals can survive without the tip of their tail. Whales can't survive without it.
    Flukes are flat horizontal lobes at the ends of their tails. Fluke movements are coordinated by a complex system of long, powerful tendons connecting them to specialized muscles in the tail.
    These are a few of the myriad of changes they would have to undergo. For neo-Darwinist it would take hundreds of millions of random mutations (random variations for traditional Darwinist), to compel a fully terrestrial mammal to turn into a fully aquatic mammal.
    The biggest problem for the "walking whales" is the empirical evidence–Darwinist refuse to acknowledge–of the fossil record. It's all but complete. Paleontologist have not discovered the fossils of innumerable transitional intermediates, falling between and linking land mammals and aquatic mammals. All the natural history museums in the world should be overflowing with them.
    With enough imagination anyone can invent a story about how land mammals evolved into whales. But an imaginative story isn't empirical science.

  20. People don't believe in evolution because SOME don't understand it while others willfully refuse to understand it because of religion. This is why the acceptance of evolution is lowest in countries with high religiousity. This also explains why Americans have a lower acceptance of evolution than Western Europe. The population is just much more religious, that and also the enormous ideological divide between liberals and conservatives, with the conservatives bordering on fanatical.

  21. Evolution is a theory of man and a waste of our time. What scientists don’t understand is that they are disproving their own theory’s, here’s one for example… wouldn’t the water in the Grand Canyon evaporate after the millions of years just sitting their and why aren’t monkeys turning into humans today? I find it very interesting how you people can deny God so much and you think science is on your side, but no… it’s on ours.

  22. Religion states, "We are like an unclean THING, like filthy RAAAAAAAGS."

    Evolution basically states, "We came from noTHING to animals, covered with either hair, fur, or wool;" RAAAAAAGS, towels and rugs, after their skinning and drying.

    M.A.N. states, "MYSELF AND NOTHING, (e)lse." What an arrogance, entwined with such an ego; MAN(E.)

    Namasté; loving, sharing, caring, and giving.

    "Love life for life is love and love is l.i.f.e., and life is for everlasting; love is for everlasting, as well – Youniversal Laws teach and practice Younity from The YOUniversity of the Youniverse."

    The True Meaning of P.E.A.C.E. – People Everywhere Are Coming Enlighten.

  23. Does human species still evolve? When I was a student about 20 year ago they claimed it didn’t. There are some observable traits such as teeth loss cause more and more people are born with no second incisors or premolars not to mention wisdom teeth. I wonder whether vaccines can trigger further evolution in humans.

  24. There is one trend in science and that is SENIOR scientists have abandoned evolution to favor a designer of this universe.

    Molecules to man….chuckle. Occam's Razor flattens this atrocity.

    One variable(robust) favors a designer(God) of the universe.

  25. That 1st "mico-organism" pesky little thing eveloutionist have no idea where it came from. "Indisputable" facts – hardly! Nice "picture" of whale with legs, but nothing of the kind has ever been found! Almost bought a car from a guy that talked fast, like this guy, but fast talking don't make it so – just confuses your audience hoping they buy what your selling.

  26. Darwin isn't wrong… in a way

    He said himself that evolution is just a theory, not a fact. Therefore he is not wrong since evolution was just Darwin making an educated guess. So no hate on Darwin but…

    Evolution is not real
    In Genesis it clearly states it did not take millions of years for man to develop. Also since Adam + Eve talked, we didn't ever grunt or snort. They also planted their own food. They didn't run around like deranged tigers.

    So if anyone has questions about anything just ask and I will tell you a Bible verse to answer it!

    -Ava the Songbird

  27. So? It's a thing? As in once upon a time there was nothing and then something came from nothing and then everything came from that something and nothing controlled it and still we have a workable model today?

  28. Blow your science teachers mind:

    Bible exposes what is true and what is false in nature worship and evolution. And age of the universe.

    Our Heavenly Father Has Metaphors:

    Heavenly Father. Creator of all. He is the beginning and end of time. Time creates all, He Is Father Time. Because He Is The Great "I AM". He Exists. The Invisible God.

    Mother Earth, Mother Mary is The Holy Spirit. Space for Life to be born. Garden of Eden. The Wound of Life. Earth bears Life, if given Time, and Mother Mary gave life. The Tree of Life to us.

    The Son, the Redeemer of mankind, eternal life. The tree of Life. Which grows out of Mother Earth, at the time appointed by the Father. The tree of life for us, and Heir to the Throne as the Son of Father Time. And the Son of Mother Earth.

    The Holy Trinity,

    They Are different persons but of the same family. The Perfect Holy Family of the Royal Kingdom of Heaven. There is only one God, one father of time, and one royal family. And the Royal family has the authority of the king.

    three in one and one in three. 3/1+1/3=3.33333333 That's three point three repeating.. forever, never ending. 3 forever.. father son and mother, forever.

    They are 3 and 1, both. Also they are 1 and 3 both. 3+1+1+3=8 8 is the symbol for eternity.

    Ancient universe?
    The Heavenly Father Made Everything, Everything we see in the universe. Just saying that He created it is saying Time created it. And He Chose Mother Earth to impregnate with His Image. It took Time to Make Earth. It took Time to make the whole universe. It took the Father to make everything oh, Father = Time. But not some kind of lifeless time, it's intelligent time. Look at His Message..

    God made the Earth and God made man from the Earth. God grabbed a handful of the garden, and breathe life into it. Father time and Mother Earth come together, From time, and dirt, (evolution)AKA Father and Mother, we got man, and woman. And He breathed life into man. And made woman from man. Father Time came first and man came first, and Father Time used man to make woman. It took time (the father) to make woman from man.

    But if He is time, and He's intelligent, and He says he did it in 6 days oh, and he predicted what y'all would see with metaphors from the very beginning of our recorded history.. I would take his message seriously.

    The fulfillment and the difference between the Bible and the other studies:

    And His Spirit breathe life into woman, Virgin Mary, and made the Son of man, from woman. Which metaphorically makes The Virgin Mary; Mother Earth, and blessed above all women. The Comforter, The Garden. The Holy Spirit.

    Our Heavenly Father time, uses the product of man, to select Mary, to represent the Garden of Eden, Earth, to Bear the seed of the tree of Life, Jesus, our savior.

    And now, Invisible Father Time, His Wife who is the Virgin Mary, and His Only Begotten Son Jesus, are the Heavenly family who will Host Judgment at the end of this.

    Hope whatever you're believing in has an honest savior, turn to Jesus, He is the Truth.

    All of this was written 2000 years ago and older. The work of man is nothing compared to the Word of God!

    I think God is making fun of your science and false beliefs.. I don't think he's saying that it really took that much time, I think he's saying that he predicted what you would say. He clearly says that he made it in six days and on the 7th day rested. But also, a day with him is like a thousand years to us and that might have been an understatement. Either way, whether he is agreeing with scientific version of history and principles of nature worship or not, he's right oh, and you should accept salvation through Jesus, especially if you believe in these things.

  29. Hello Guys,
    Great video!
    I was just trying to check the references you use to support your video however the link is not working.
    Can you check it please?
    Thanks a lot and keep up the good work!

  30. Is not that they don’t understand it is just that they refuse to believe in it because there is this book called the Bible that has been used to manipulate people into believing something else.

  31. Immediately after someone says they don’t believe evolution, they say something which demonstrates that they have no idea what it is and didn’t even try to understand before denying it. My buddy didn’t even go to biology while it was being taught because “I didn’t come from a monkey”

  32. I must address a few things:

    Firstly, the commenters who attempt to mockingly claim that the Bible talks of evolution are ignorant; the Bible tells of ultimate origins, not of changes through time. I myself do not find the theory to be convincing due to the holes in it, but I will not elaborate on this just now.

    Secondly, there are those in the comments who claim that we Christians don't believe in evolution because we do not understand it. How many of you actually attempt to understand what Christianity is and what it teaches before writing it off as a "fairy tale," equating it to a "flying spaghetti monster?" The only reason a Christian should be here is to learn as much as possible about it and, therefore, understand why we do not accept it as true. I will just pick a few points to explain.

    6:14: The fact that we use the same molecule itself is not cogent evidence that evolution is true; in fact, I as a Christian would claim that it serves as evidence that rather than there being one common ancestor, there would be one True Creator who used similar structures for a variety of creatures. It makes sense that a Creator would use such a complex and amazing structure for multiple living things.

    9:24: No you haven't, rather, you have seen adaptation. If that is what you call evolution, then sure. I believe God put within creatures the ability to change to suit their environment. Natural selection and speciation are also very easy to observe. It is what you call macroevolution that I refuse to accept simply due to the sheer lack of evidence.

    You atheists must exercise faith in order to believe in such evolution, and as Richard Dawkins so eloquently stated, "Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence." Conversely, the Bible states that, "Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." I will accept that you are attempting to, "see far beyond the human mind and time scales that individual lives are limited to," but sir, please do not talk about macroevolution as if it is a scientific fact. You use just as much, if not more faith to believe in macroevolution than any Christian uses to believe in God's Word.

    I am not here to argue with anyone in the comments as I feel that it will do no good in the search for truth. I have chosen to place my faith in God and His Word, not fallible scientists.

  33. He uses many jumps to conclusions. Like because our limbs have some similarities we must have the same ancestor. Or DNA similarities show you are from the same ancestor. But no proof. It could just as easily be explained by the same building blocks being used by a Creator. In fact, the fossil record shows no intermediary fossils and explosions of new life forms coming into existence suddenly, not over long periods of time. His evidences of evolution are within species, not from one species to another. Animals can adapt to their environments, but they change back once the environment returns (i.e. finches beaks). No macro evolution evidence.

  34. For God (eternal) a million years is like a day. After a long search seeking for truth He found mea and reveal himself to me. Jesus (One with the Father God, save me from death wich is the consequence of sin, disobeying the creator of everything who created beauty and order all so we can live. How complex and beautiful His creation is and He made it all so we can live. And now I'm forgiven of my sin trough the death of Jesus His only son who gave Himself because He loved us so much.

    In my search for truth I went for occultism, various philosophies and long meditations, novels books and observation but everything disolved itself by time like smoke that vanishes in the air. I went from bed to bed experimented with all types of pleasure because maybe I would find some truth there (like King Salomon writed in the book of eclessiastes) at the end as he said, there is nothing new under the sun, so follow Gods commandmentes. He is eternal, He knows better I cannot add or take of what jas beeen said in this page I haven't read and I don't want to be controlled by fear so I rather give my testimony of how God save me in love. Like the book of Song of songs said «Many waters cannot quench love and the floods cannot drown it». In the beggining when the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob created the heavens and the earth the earth was dark and void and the spirit was hovering over the waters and the the light came and He saw that it was good and He separeted the light from darkness and then He acummulated the water so the erath could come forward… slowly but surely in a series of days and since the beggining He defetead darkeness and death and loved us until the end. Observing creation is a beautiful thing there is no space for we not noticing the care and intricacy that the Father put in it for us from end to finish love and He is our eternal love.

  35. To get a good grasp of evolution. One has had to read "Inherit The Wind" A then, seemingly, honest enough…askance for a seat at the table.
    But, true to my cockroach theory
    These guys were given an inch and took a mile.
    No, to the answer of evolution. No matter how many times you magnify the microscope. No matter how many trees you throw up to hide the forest.
    In the first place was GOD! In the last will be GOD!
    Sooooo……still missing the missing link are we?
    Careful boyos! God is only patient so long.
    The anti-Christ is the true concern of all of us. If we survive that guy, we are golden. But THAT GUY? "Will perform miracles, that if it were possible.
    Would fool the very elect." (Meaning the angels).
    That reminds me. How are you guys fitted out to explain the supernatural?

  36. When you say this, is also saying you believe that the world was created by science, which of course you do… But how could have the world been created by science if something had to create science? You can say this created that and that created this but eventually you hit rock bottom…. There couldn't have been nothing that just magically becomes something out of nowhere, and at the same time science wouldn't care if we live or not… It wouldn't care about connecting our organs and body parts together. In my honest opinion it takes more faith to believe that the world just created itself and somehow knew what life needed to live, like it has a brain, than believing there is a God.

  37. WALKING WHALES LIE; Pakicetus was a wolf like mammal. It had a bone in it's inner ear called an "involucrum" that resembled something found in whales. It was fully terrestrial (lived it's entire life on land) and looked nothing like a whale but neo-Darwinist, desperate for a whale ancestor, tagged it Pakicetus or "Pakistani whale". Ambulocetus, Maiacetus, Kuchicetus and Rodhocetus were extinct variations of sea lions or otters. They were amphibious (lived part of their lives on land and part in the water). They used their hind legs and tail for swimming and their four limbs for walking on land.

    Basilosaurus and Dorudon were extinct whales that were fully aquatic ( lived their entire lives in the water).

    Land and amphibious mammals have nostrils for breathing on the front of their heads. Whales have a blowhole on the top of their bodies to breath.

    The blowhole of a whale is surrounded by thick muscular “lips” that keep the hole tightly closed except when the animal makes a deliberate effort to open it at the surface. Total submersion thus takes less effort for whales than for animals that must actively exclude water from their air passages. Coming onto land is not a natural act for a whale; beached whales die if they're not quickly helped back in the water.

    Land and amphibious mammals use four legs—tail assisted for amphibians while in water—to move around in their environment. Whales use a fluke to move around in their environment. Land and amphibian mammals can survive without the tip of their tail. Whales can't survive without it.

    Flukes are flat horizontal lobes at the ends of their tails. Fluke movements are coordinated by a complex system of long, powerful tendons connecting them to specialized muscles in the tail.

    These are a few of the myriad of changes they would have to undergo. For neo-Darwinist it would take hundreds of millions of random mutations (random variations for traditional Darwinist), to compel a fully terrestrial mammal to turn into a fully aquatic mammal.

    The biggest problem for the "walking whales" is the empirical evidence–Darwinist refuse to acknowledge–of the fossil record. It's all but complete. Paleontologist have not discovered the fossils of innumerable transitional intermediates, falling between and linking land mammals and aquatic mammals. There are six in the Smithsonian. All the natural history museums in the world should be overflowing with them.

    With enough imagination anyone can invent a story about how land mammals evolved into whales. But an imaginative story isn't empirical science.

  38. I truly enjoy reading the heated comments between supporters of evolution and its detractors. As if any of it really matters. We’re all worm food in the end. So much for what we believe and disbelieve.

  39. Bottom line is none us really know anything for sure, so while it is self fulfilling to engage in this entertaining dialogue (I know I enjoy it or I wouldn't be here) let's not forget that none of us really know anything for sure. Can't we all just get along.

  40. Can we all just agree how strongly biased this video is ? They way he speaks about how things are SO "indisputable" is just weird bro

  41. three scientists have just been awarded the 2019 Nobel Prize in Physics for ground breaking discoveries about the universe. James Peebles, Micjel Mayor and Didier Queloz were announced as this years winners at a ceremony in Stockholm. They were jointly awarded the prize on the ''EVOLUTION'' of the universe and of a distant planet around a 'sun-like' star in 1995. They share the prize money of £740.000 which divided by 3 = £246.666 . Ironic eh'?

  42. Before I start, I will say a large slice of people who believe in a God don't suffer from any irrational opposition to science. These religious people function well in society and even have jobs in the sciences that include biology. They recognize that evolution has more than met its burden of proof.
    It is stunning to see so many people get so defiant over a fact. It's also ominous to witness people refuse to recognize evidence that supports what we see, which is life has changed over time. The only thing I can conclude is, for some, religion rewire the fundamental ability to recognize what is real.
    There is evidence that religious indoctrination infects the mind of many theists. A healthy rational mind can recognize that once a sufficient amount of evidence is presented and demonstrated that shows a natural process to be correct, we should let go of any mystical explanation. Most people are willing to adopt evidence-based knowledge over mystical beliefs, but a significant minority of religious people refuse to acknowledge any evidence that contradicts their religious beliefs.
    Here we have a book composed of multiple sources and written thousands of years before modern-day science. This book claims a magical omnipresent/powerful/intelligent creator created everything fully-formed, and these lifeforms are unchangeable. In the mind of a theist, this claim of a magical God is a better answer than an explanation discovered by the most prominent scientific minds. Just the word evolution itself stimulates anger in these select theistic mind. Evolution is a fact and a theory. It's a well-established fact that life has changed over time, and the theory describes how that happened. Even if you reject the theory, you are still left with the fact, and the fact itself contradicts a biblical claim of creation, and that is life was not created fully formed. That form of indoctrination is a level of mental discordance that influences how people view reality.

  43. This is to Steven Humanist and anyone he has misled with his comment. You say that creationists go to secular schools and spend $100,000 or more on a PhD JUST to be able to debunk the fairy tale of evolution. That makes no sense whatsoever, especially when it can be done free. Plus, people who read your comment deserve to know that there are plenty of PhD scientists who totally believed in the fairy tale called evolution until they discovered that the evidence for it didn't existed.

    You also say, "Can you imagine an astrophysicist not believing in the theory of relatively?" Actually, a yes. First, there are 1,000s of professors, scientists, and teachers all over the world who question evolution but are afraid to say anything because they don't want to lose their jobs or funding.

    Second, your hero Eisenstein intentionally fudged the data to make relatively work in order to debunk the results of the Michelson/Morely experiment and falsely "prove" the existence of the aether, or celestial winds. Since then secular scientists have sent up no less than 3 probes all in failed attempts to again and again disprove Michelson's results. All they managed to do is prove that the so-called "axis of evil" is real making it more than just "appear" that the Earth, or at least the Milky Way is in the center of the Universe. Don't believe me? Then Google "the principle movie" watch it and hear Laurence Krause and others say just that…

  44. It's simple: There is no evolution theory, there are many evolution theories. One big theory about evolution is the abiogenesis. The origin of life from non-living matter. This is fundamental for the whole idea of evolution. There has never been an experiment, that showed how living matter apeared from non-living matter. The argument is just: there is living matter, so it had to evolve somehow from non-living matter.

    The most basic thing of a scientifical theory is, that you need to be able to reproduce it. And no one ever reproduced abiogenesis, which is at the heart of all the other evolutional theories.

  45. Lol. So he talks about speciation and adaptation, which no one disputes, and calls it evolution. His Rodhocetus reference has also since been disproven as any kind of whale "missing link" because it has no fluke nor flippers. There is simply no evidence anywhere in the fossil record of animals changing kinds/families, or any evidence – historic or observed – of information being added to DNA which is clearly a prerequisite for evolution. If what he supposes were true, the fossil record would be absolutely littered with transitional forms between animal kinds/families, and there are precisely… zero that have been discovered.

  46. So it is basically the atoms came together to create different genes and started to change over time to create new different genes so the creatures changed over time. Would you believe my basketball and soccer ball came together to create my volleyball.

  47. As a Creationist or Apologist watching this, what's the FIRST thought you have when shown evidence of evolution?
    TO REFUTE IT?
    When the first thing you want to do is argue, it's very clear then …
    YOU DON'T WANT EVIDENCE

  48. Creationist "logic": Life comes from life.
    Me: So you're saying God is a flesh and blood corporeal being?
    Creationist: No
    Me: shaking my head.

  49. You have to look at the origin of the universe, you must either believe that it sprout in existence on it's own or it was created. Should I believe that DNA/RNA evolved in existence or this code was created?

  50. Of course evolution is a thing, I don't get why people believe evolution denies or opposes religion. It doesn't. They can perfectly coexist. My biology teacher is a Catholic that believes in evolution, so am I.

  51. The entire doctrine of evolution has it's foundation built upon the logical fallacy of extrapolation.

    I challenge you to prove me wrong!

    Take any scientific article on the doctrine of evolution and I will show you how the logical fallacy of extrapolation is being used.

  52. we may share tons of dna with apes and monkeys but we also share dna with dolphins, pigs, chickens, zebra fish etc. if we evolved from african apes or whatever why do we share so much dna with other species?

  53. Walter Vieth understands evolution. He used to believe in it. Key word : USED TO. Want to take evolution vs. creationism to a whole new fascinating level? Check out his series on evolution. He is super educated on both topics.

  54. For those who don’t believe in God, evolution “has” to be true, just so you can have some explanation of how life came about. However, there is no excuse for Christians who believe in evolution.

  55. 1:29 – 1:39 – NO HANK !!!!! …………. the only possible reason is a phenomenon called ILLITERACY😂😂😂😂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *