hello, fellow biology students...

I’m not even watching this for biology class. I just love learning about biology and evolution.

If you sort comments by "newest first" on this video, you WILL lose brain cells. This is a warning.

Evolution: nature's way of repeatedly saying "it's not a bug, it's a feature" and hoping it sticks.

that means whoever we end up dating, we'll be related to them. oh sweet home alabama

How to start an argument on KZfaq: 1. Write a comment. 2. Wait...

Dear Randall Wilks, I urge you to stop commenting because I am getting tired of liking your comments. Please stop.

Who has to watch this for science class on google classroom while at home?😁 Pretty good vid tbh..

There is no debate between Creationism and Evolution. Just like there is no debate between the flat earth society and people who accept the earth is round.

*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..

Hi! Who else got forced to watch this... but then actually enjoyed the video?💀😂

Evolution is not random. The mutations that lead to variation may be random, but evolution is not.

Why is there 18k comments about religious comments and like 2 religious ones

Creationist tactic #1: Lie Creationist tactic #2: Lie some more. Creationist tactic #3: Keep lying, no need for evidence; someone is bound to believe the lies. Creationist tactic #4: When challenged to present any evidence for fabricated statements, respond with “prove it is a lie”. Creationist tactic #5: Why stop lying now? You can always claim you are winning. Creationist tactic #6: Claim you are morally superior.

I press “read newest first” and what do you know, it’s creationists being deranged part: 532

Who else is here because of "Biology Class"

I thought I was studying biology but by reading comments in the section below I feel as if I was one of the viewers of war between religious and scientific people.. Well for me God is my soul and science is my teacher

I came just to look at the comments. Not disappointed

who here is watching this for home learning during lockdown? im pleased im looking at evolution at home instead of school cos i have my old friend google around XD

its amazing how few people understand such a simple and obvious process even at this very basic level ... An excellent series of videos 👍

When two badgers get together and you know... "fall in love".

Even Religion evolves.. Oooooh The Irony...

My wife is a biochemistry professor at a major research university. It is true that scientists are on average far less religious than the general public. But many are religious such as my wife's former Ph.D. thesis advisor who is active in his Methodist church. But the evidence supporting evolution is far beyond overwhelming that these religious biologists, like their more secular peers, view it as a basic, established fact of biology. It is viewed as one of the underlying principles of all branches of biology and medicine. As such, modern biology lacks coherence without it. Francis Collins, the former head of the NIH and an evangelical Christian, explains it this way: "Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things."

*IS EVOLUTION A THEORY OR A FACT?* Answer from the U.S. National Academy of Sciences: *It is both. But that answer requires looking more deeply at the meanings of the words "theory" and "fact."* . *In everyday usage, "theory" often refers to a hunch or a speculation. When people say, "I have a theory about why that happened," they are often drawing a conclusion based on fragmentary or inconclusive evidence.* *The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.* *Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). Like these other foundational scientific theories, the theory of evolution is supported by so many observations and confirming experiments that scientists are confident that the basic components of the theory will not be overturned by new evidence. However, like all scientific theories, the theory of evolution is subject to continuing refinement as new areas of science emerge or as new technologies enable observations and experiments that were not possible previously.* *One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed. For example, the theory of gravitation predicted the behavior of objects on the moon and other planets long before the activities of spacecraft and astronauts confirmed them. The evolutionary biologists who discovered Tiktaalik predicted that they would find fossils intermediate between fish and limbed terrestrial animals in sediments that were about 375 million years old. Their discovery confirmed the prediction made on the basis of evolutionary theory. In turn, confirmation of a prediction increases confidence in that theory.* *In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. In that respect, the past and continuing occurrence of evolution is a scientific fact. Because the evidence supporting it is so strong, scientists no longer question whether biological evolution has occurred and is continuing to occur. Instead, they investigate the mechanisms of evolution, how rapidly evolution can take place, and related questions.* From Science, Evolution, and Creationism, National Academy of Sciences and Institute of Medicine. © 2008 National Academy of Sciences © 2019 U.S. National Academy of Sciences. www.nap.edu/catalog/6024/science-and-creationism-a-view-from-the-national-academy-of

Does anyone know how to install minecraft mods?

Almost 40% scientists believe in a higher power, yet the percentage of scientists who accept is above evolution 97% (the general public is 61%) so it's not a matter evidence conflicting with faith or believe. The evidence of evolution describes a physical process in nature that requires reproduction, heritable variation, and natural selection. We can observe these processes taking place in the lab. It's both a theory and an observable fact.

Not even able to read 5 comments in a row before encountering creationists... This is sad, especially in the 21st century. Humanity is a weird thing...

For those of you who have a problem accepting research and scientific theories of biological evolution, just remind yourselves of what you're used to believing in: God's, Devils, Ghosts, Demons, Angels...

Very well and clearly explained, the speaker has a good steady calm voice, well enunciated ☺

Anyone who doesn't believe in evolution is uneducated on the concept of evolution. They either A) Don't understand the concept of evidence B) Don't understand the evidence that supports evolution C) Don't understand that the Theory of Evolution is on the same playing field as the Theory of Gravity, the Heliocentric Theory, the Germ Theory of Disease, the Atomic Theory, and so on. My advice is to make an effort to learn so you don't make foolish choices.

the amount of people who think evolution is a myth is scary tbh

Creationists, show me fossils of bunnies in the Precambrian layer and I'll s-hut up.

So remember kids, on thanks giving, you're really eating grandpa!!! LOLLLLLLLL

If evolution is real, then how come there's no transitional species between Pikachu and Raichu? CHECKMATE ATHEISTS!

Hello world! I am a girl from Russia, and I am preparing for exams) I do not know English, but I am very glad that there are subtitles for Russian!

Someone should try getting into contact with Stated Clearly and inform them of what’s happening to the comment section of their other popular evolution video.

I must say; I really do appreciate your time and effort into this very informative video! thanks :)

I love it when creationists sit there on their behind a computer watching a video on evolution with provides facts and evidence, in an easy to understand way, and then sits there behind their computer screen saying nope! That's rubbish. Go read your bible. Just because your not convinced does not mean that evolution is false. That is called an argument from personal incredulity.

Why are young earth creationists on this channel? Can't they just go to Answers -bullshit- In Genesis or Kent Hovind -fails- debate?

bruh this vid is about evolution why everybody having a war over religion lmao

for you people who do not accept evolution (not necessarily religious people because you can still be religious and believe in evolution) why do you go even go on these videos? Do you specifically go on this just to tell people on how its wrong without evidence or why we should believe you? This is coming from a former intelligent design supporter. I used to go on these videos with an open mind and debating people on this matter on the comment section too BUT supported with evidence. I would seek the knowledge of why people believe certain things and if I don't believe in the same things as other people do I would argue with them without bias or close-mindedness. If their belief wins out using the current evidence then I will change my belief. Pure simple. And so I did because my beliefs are not static , but I always seek answers to things. This is the scientific way to think. Its not you believing in something and trying to cherry pick for evidence you like that may support it.

Is nobody gonna talk about the weird visual glitches throughout the video?

*HOW EVOLUTION WORKS It is helpful to understand that evolution is a molecular process. The random mutations that naturally occur during cell division and replication (mitosis and meiosis) are the raw material for the genetic variation we see in every population of organisms. Mutations are ongoing and continuous for every living species. "Mutations are essential to evolution; they are the raw material of genetic variation. Without mutation, evolution could not occur.''* Those genetic variants are subjected to a selection process that is performed by whatever environment the organisms find themselves. In this respect, evolution is an ongoing, continuous set of natural experiments. Those that work get perpetuated, those that don't, perish. It is as if the environment acted as an umpire who says "There are good mutations and there are bad mutations and there are neutral mutations, but they ain't nuthin' until I (the environment) calls 'em." That is Natural Selection. Neutral mutations just go along for the ride producing neither immediate benefit nor harm (Genetic Drift). The result of those selection processes is organisms best suited for their current environment. Should that environment change, it would put the population under stress. If the population gene pool has sufficient genetic variation it increases the likelihood that at least some offspring should be able to survive and perpetuate the species (albeit one of slightly different genetic makeup). What everyone should understand is that genetic changes do not occur because of some 'need'. The mutations are RANDOM and get selected if they are USEFUL. That is a process called Natural Selection and it is anything BUT random. Let's take the example of the Panda. Bears in general are omnivores, eating plant matter, but with a marked preference for meat when available. The preferred food of the Panda however, is bamboo leaves, which have such low nutritional value that they must eat almost continuously. The Panda would certainly be able to extract more nutrition with a four chambered stomach (as in ungulates and whales) or something akin to a cecal valve that would slow the passage of food, but it has neither in its genetic toolbox. In feeding themselves, pandas are continuously stripping bamboo leaves from their stalks, a process that could be facilitated if they had a thumb. Bears however do not have thumbs, nor do they have genes for them in their genetic toolbox. Nor do new features simply spring into existence. However, if a slightly altered body component provides some benefit, natural selection will perpetuate it. Evolution is modification with descent and results in incremental alterations to what is already there. As an analogy, imagine a robot gardener dragging a hose around various obstacles it encounters in a garden until it can go no further. Now an intelligent gardener could simply retrace his steps and take a different path, avoiding those obstacles. The robot gardener (evolution) is not an intelligent force and cannot do that. With a limited tool kit, it can only (figuratively) add more hose to get the job done. While a thumb would be quite useful to a panda for stripping leaves, evolution cannot rewind to produce one. Instead, it has taken "a piece of hose' (a wrist bone) and enlarged it to act as a stand in for a thumb. That is not an elegant solution and not a perfect one, but it gets the job done. Evolution is does not produce perfect solutions, but tweaks here and there to "get the job done". THAT is how evolution operates. The panda’s "thumb", developed over many generations of holding things, is clearly a co-opted “radial sesamoid” bone from the paw of a bear. Likewise, the 'Red Panda', a raccoon relative with a similar diet, has evolved a similar feature. Based in part on the fact that no tetrapods, (terrestrial vertebrates) exist in the fossil record prior to about 370 million years ago, the Theory of Evolution would predict that tetrapods evolved from fish. If that were the case, there should have existed at one time a fish with characteristics of both fish and tetrapods. In other words a Transitional Species. Until about 2005, there was little evidence for such a creature. There were however, a class of fish called Sarcopterygians or Lobe Finned Fishes, that dominated Devonian seas. What characterized those lobe finned fishes was that those fins were supported by external bones and muscles. Those bones, a single bone, connected to two bones connected to smaller bones, are analogous to the limb bones of all tetrapods, including humans. Most Sarcopterygian Fishes have long been extinct, but they are survived today by two species of coelacanth and six species of lungfish. ucmp.berkeley.edu/vertebrates/sarco/sarcopterygii.html Still, what was missing was a fossil showing characteristics of fish AND tetrapods. When Neil Shubin and his team decided to search for a fossil that filled the gap between the Lobe Finned Fishes that dominated Devonian Seas and the earliest tetrapod fossils represented by Ichthyostega and Acanthostega dated about 370 mya. Since those fossils were found in geologic deposits indicating a freshwater environment and if the Theory of Evolution is correct in its hypothesis that tetrapods evolved from fish, then transitional fossils should be found in similar deposits somewhat older in age. The problem was that geologic deposits of that age are exposed at few places on the earth's surface. Fortunately, a great deal of geologic exploration has been done throughout the world, financed often times by oil and mining interests. They selected an area in the Canadian Arctic, Ellesmere Island, as having the greatest likelihood of success. It took 4 years of searching during the short summers of that hostile environment but succeeded, returning in 2004 with 9 specimens of the fish they named Tiktaalik. It was exactly what one would expect a transitional fish-tetrapod to look like and was found in deposits dated 375 mya. If this was not the direct ancestor of tetrapods, it was something very much like it.This is a great example of using evolutionary theory as a predictive tool. Btw, biointeractive(dot)org is a great source of information for all of science. If anyone has an interest in expanding their knowledge of science they should use it. The genetic variation within a population is referred to as a gene pool. Organisms can move freely within that population breeding with each other, perpetuating any new mutations that work and eliminating those that are less than optimal. Each offspring will most resemble its parents, yet will vary slightly genetically because of unique mutations acquired during meiosis. Thus the genetic makeup of a population will change ever so slightly with each successive generation. Populations are not stable, they expand and contract with changing conditions. So long as there is sufficient genetic variation within a population there will be some members capable of surviving those conditions and perpetuating the species. The alternative is extinction. When populations expand and migrate to new territories, some portions of it will become genetically isolated from each other and no longer share a common gene pool. In such cases, each such sub population will carry a subset of the parent population genome, but subsequent mutations will be unique to each new population (the genotype) that will come to differentiate that population from others (Genetic Drift). To the extent that such populations encounter differing environmental conditions, that environment will exert different evolutionary pressures on that population. New mutations will have a much greater chance of coming to dominance within a smaller population than they would in the larger parent population where they would be one among the many. Over thousands of generations genetic differences accumulate in the different gene pools making interbreeding ever more difficult until at some point speciation can be said to have occurred. Because speciation is a process, rather than an event, it would be no more possible to pinpoint where speciation occurred than to identify where on the color spectrum orange becomes red.

*The DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES at conservative Baptist BAYLOR UNIVERSITY has issued this statement:* *"The fossil record clearly indicates a progression in complexity of organisms from very simple fossil forms in the oldest rocks (>3.5 billion years old) to a broad spectrum from simple to complex forms in younger rocks, that some organisms that were once common are now extinct, and that the living organisms inhabiting our world today are similar (but generally not the same) as organisms represented as fossils in young sedimentary deposits, which in turn have evolutionary ancestors represented as fossils in yet older rocks.* *Mammals, for example, are prevalent today and can be traced back in the fossil record for approximately 200 million years, but are not present as mammals in the fossil record before that; however, fossil forms that have reasonably been interpreted to be associated with the evolutionary precursors to mammals are found in older rocks. Whether biological evolution occurs has not been a matter of scientific debate for more than a century. It is considered a proven fact. The specific mechanisms of biological change over time continue to be a topic of active research, and include mechanisms proposed by Charles Darwin as well as more recently developed ideas based on our growing knowledge of genetics and molecular biology. Using the methods of modern science, our knowledge of the fundamental mechanisms of life has grown enormously since the initial characterization of the role of DNA in reproduction, inheritance and evolution in the mid-1950s.* *The American Geological Institute and The Paleontological Society, partnering with the most respected geoscience societies in America including the Geological Society of America, the American Geophysical Union, and the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (among others), have produced a booklet on evolution and the fossil record that can be downloaded as a PDF file. This booklet was written for the general public by people who have worked with the fossil record throughout their careers, and was thoroughly reviewed by other professional geologists and paleontologists."* www.baylor.edu/geology/index.php?id=62340 That site also has a link to download above referenced "Evolution and the Fossil Record" by Pojeta and Springer. (1 MB PDF file). It also provides links to the position statements from other scientific organizations. This is a science department in religiously conservative (Southern Baptist) run Baylor University that has declared their intent to teach SCIENCE. Imagine that.

It's time for some creationist bingo! First we take a look at Eagle Jones a few posts further down this page. What typical traits can we find in this interesting example? - American? Check! - God did it? Check! - Evolution is a lie, no sources included? Check! - Secret conspiration? Check! - American christians is oppressed? Check! 5 points in two badly formulated sentences. That's something to be proud of Eagle boy!

Very, very good clip. I've watched it several times. Illustrations are good, and the explanation very clear. Keep up with the good work.

*EVIDENCE FOR EVOLUTION - Diversification and Geographic Distribution of Species.* As one travels from one isolated landmass, to another, one sees patterns that fit with evolutionary theory. The mammals populating the Australasian continental landmass that included New Guinea and Tasmania as the ancient continent called Sahul were quite different from those elsewhere in the world. Prior to ancient man's arrival, the mammals populating that landmass were virtually all Marsupials; kangaroos, wombats, koalas, quolls, thylacenes, et al; found nowhere else in the world. So too, were the egg laying Monotremes (Platypus and Echidnas) also found nowhere else in the world. Indeed, prior to the coming of humans that brought the dingo, the only placental mammals were those that could swim there (seal) and those that could fly there (bats). It is very obvious that mammalian evolution took a quite different turn in that isolated landmass since placental mammals diverged from their non-placental forebears in the Early Cretaceous or Late Jurassic. It remained isolated from all other eutherian (placental) mammal migrations. . The almost universal absence of both native land mammals and amphibians on isolated islands argues against a creation event and those islands tell of a different evolutionary history. Alfred Russel Wallace, who had independently arrived at the same conclusion as Charles Darwin regarding natural selection being the engine of evolution, spent many years collecting biological specimens in the Amazon and later on the Indonesian archipelago and New Guinea. What he discovered was sometimes tremendous differences in the fauna of neighboring islands and he discovered a pattern to the distribution of species; those on the western side of a hypothetical dividing line were identical or similar to, mainland Asian species. Those on the eastern side of the divide were more similar to those of Australasia, Australia and New Guinea. This line, now known as the Wallace Line denotes an area of deep water channels that would have prevented migration when sea levels were lower as during Ice Ages, while other areas would have had dry land connections. The islands Bali and Lompok, separated by a mere 20 miles, have quite different fauna. Wallace's studies of species distribution and barriers to their migration has earned him the title "father of biogeography". Birds can fly from island to island, reptiles can swim or float on driftwood, plant seeds can be carried to different islands by wind, water or birds, but amphibians cannot survive in saltwater and most land mammals are limited by the distances they can swim. Those deep water channels restricted them to one side of that dividing line. New Zealand is another prime example. With no native mammals, except again for those able to fly (bats) or swim (seals) there, birds assumed the ecological roles filled by mammals elsewhere. In the absence of ground dwelling predators, many birds abandoned energy consuming flight, the Kakapo, Kiwi and Moa among them. The wing of the kiwi is a mere vestige, no bigger than your little finger, with an equally useless claw at its end. (There's that "half a wing" creationists talk about.) ;-) Other isolated islands also had their own unique flora and fauna, as did geologically recent islands such as the Galapagos and the Hawaiian Archipelago. The 13 or so species of Galapagos Finches, sometimes called "Darwin's Finches", are all relatively drab in color, varying in beak morphology and physical size. Despite their physical and genetic differences, creationists typically respond with "They are all still finches"; perpetuating their straw man version of evolution as "one animal turning into another." What they ignore is that the Theory of Evolution says no such thing. Evolution is the non-random selection of random mutations; it can only produce changes in existing body parts. Genetic changes (Genotype) take place constantly, Physiological changes (Phenotype) take place incrementally over thousands of generations, and not due to single mutations but accumulations of diverse mutations. On the Hawaiian Islands, the indigenous population came up with imaginative names for the colorful bird population. On the Galapagos however, there were no indigenous peoples to name these birds and they were given very prosaic names by the scientists studying them. Giving them names like Small Ground Finch, Medium Ground Finch and Large Ground Finch were descriptive but glossed over their genetic differences and gave credence to the creationist claim "They are still finches". Do a search on Galapagos Finches (aka Darwin's Finches) On the Hawaiian Islands, the science of comparative genomics shows that another species of finch, the Laysan Finch, underwent adaptive radiation into what was, at one time, 55 species of Honey creepers of which only 18 survive. Unlike the Galapagos Finches that were similarly drab in coloration, the various Honeycreepers exhibit wide differences in plumage coloration and had widely varying bill shapes. Some of the nectar feeders have co-evolved with a specific plant species, their uniquely shaped bills providing pollination. Extinction of one of those bird species usually results in the extinction of its co-evolutionary plant counterpart. Do a search on Hawaiian Honeycreepers. The same is true of many plants whose ancestral seeds found their way to these islands. The many species of the beautiful Hawaiian Silver Sword and their relatives, collectively known as the Hawaiian Silver Sword Alliance, are an example of adaptive radiation in plants over millions of years from an ancestral pacific coast tarweed. Nor is that an isolated example, fully 95% of Hawaii's endemic plant species are found nowhere else in the world. Mauritania had the Elephant Bird and the Dodo, neither one of which flew there, and they sure as hell didn't swim. Perhaps Noah dropped them off there while trying to find his way back to the Middle East, you think? Madagascar, the world's fourth largest island, was separated from other landmasses for 88 million years. During that time plants and animals on the island evolved in isolation; 80% of which exist nowhere else in the world. In each of these areas, evolution took separate paths that refute the creationist concept of a creation event. Since birds can fly and establish new and distant populations, they can establish diverse populations where genetic drift alone could result in new species and be further shaped by environmental and ecological factors. The fossil record shows that once birds were able to take to the air and migrate, there was rapid diversification. Again, when the asteroid impact that wiped out all the non-avian dinosaurs, it also resulted in the extinction of most avian dinosaur (bird) species. The plethora of new environmental niches again allowed birds to diversify rapidly. That expansion and diversification had been duplicated whenever the opportunity has presented itself. Yet birds are not the only examples of rapid diversification. Cichlid fishes in Africa's Rift valley have exhibited the same diversification whenever new lakes were formed and founder populations made their way into them. The same has occurred with Anole lizards on Caribbean Islands. Charles Darwin made remarkable observations 150 years ago and since then biologists, geneticists, geologists, biochemists and other related fields have continued to do so and in every case further evidence is accumulated in support of what is now called the Modern Synthesis of Evolution. Do a search on 'Explaining General Patterns in Species Abundance and Distributions' from Learn Science at Scitable. Search these subjects: *Anole lizard evolution* *Cichlid fishes evolution* Video: Evolution, Speciation, and Adaptation of Cichlid Fish

*WHAT ARE CREATIONISTS?* Creationists are, by their own admission, people who hold to any one of the thousands of creation myths that arose in primitive societies. Their one common thread is a belief that one or more supernatural entity used magic to create humans and everything else. The fact that there is no evidence to support such belief does not register with them. Their religion dictates what they are to believe and those that fail to do so are threatened with eternal punishment, because the deity loves you. On the other hand, those who willingly parrot the dogma of their particular belief system are promised an afterlife of 24/7 eternal bliss. (perpetual use of hallucinogens, perhaps?) The one seemingly unifying concept of such supernatural belief systems is that the vast diversity of life on this planet could not possibly have come about by any NATURAL process, such as evolution. It is immaterial to creationists which supernatural entity (or entities) performed the miracle of creation, they are united in their opposition to evolution. To aide them in their denial, many adopt a "Statement of Faith" such as this from Answers in Genesis: *_"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record."_* This makes creationism the antithesis of science. Science is a search for truth and truth is established by evidence, not by what anyone says. By what means can rational discussion be conducted when evidence is rejected? Virtually none. Such an attitude sets creationism at odds with science, which is a search for truth based on evidence. How logical is it for someone to claim they accept the findings of science in some regards, but not others? Trying to reason with such people is like administering medicine to the dead. 'Cognitive Dissonance' is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who is confronted by information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas or values. Beliefs instilled in children are particularly resistant to change, since they tend to become part of that person's identity. Thus any information contradicting those beliefs will be seen as an attack on one's self, causing extreme mental stress and discomfort. There are but two means by which to resolve Cognitive Dissonance, to either change the belief or to deny and attack the information that contradicts that belief. "Belief is not an idea the mind possesses, belief is an idea that possesses the mind." (Robert Oxton Bolton) . Belief is so inextricably enmeshed in emotion that rational thought becomes impossible. “Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions.” - Albert Einstein Breaking free of such indoctrination creates its own set of problems. Not only is there inner conflict, but any attempt to do so will certainly meet with resistance from family or circles of acquaintances who have been similarly indoctrinated.

Very valuable presentation. Thanks! So glad this one mentions Alfred Russel Wallace, who should be as celebrated as Darwin.

Great explanation that is very well explained and stated clearly.

Thanks for your clear explanations. Your work is very understandable and it is easy to piece up the pieces between genetics and evolution.

This is a very well put together video on evolution and the process behind it. Thanks for the upload.

But explain to me when we get Charizard?

This presentation made soooo much sense. It tells in simple manner that evolution is and relates the topic to a relatable subject. I love this presentation thumbs up!

I really enjoyed the topic. It was clearly explained

Alot of angry Christians in the comments it’s honestly funny looking at them quoting from their bronze age book saying it immediately debunks all of the evidence for evolution 😂😂

Science isn't about beliefs, it's about testable and falsifiable hypotheses and theories all of which must be backed by evidence. Science proceeds from evidence to a conclusion that is initially PROVISIONAL (a hypothesis). There are degrees of certainty in science and 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.

We watched this is class today and you helped me understand the theories of evolution so much! Thank you! Our class of 2020 loves you!

How has this got 1500 dislikes when he's only stating facts??? Guess some people don't like facts, can't change them though

*THE HUMAN BRAIN IS REMARKABLE* for its size and complexity in relation to body mass. Even more remarkable is the fact that at 2% of average body weight, it requires 20% of total caloric intake to function. Still more remarkable is that the human infant, born of necessity at a very early stage of development, utilizes 60% of available calories for neuronal development. That brain continues expansion through adolescence and even into early adulthood. Such a long childhood is also a unique human feature, but is a continuation of a trend that began with our primate ancestors. Our abilities to speak, make tools or fly to the moon are due to the increased cognitive abilities of a brain whose size and complexity increased incrementally over millions of years of evolution. Evolution is a PROCESS and not an EVENT. What we see over the course of evolution is incremental alterations of existing structures, not sudden changes. This is what we see in the evolution of the human brain. Humans are vertebrates, mammals, primates and apes and our genome reflects that ancestry. Early mammal survival in a world dominated by dinosaurs, depended on increased sensory perception (sight, smell and hearing) and the mammalian brain developed an expanded cortex to accommodate that demand. Primates and rodents separated from a common ancestor about 75 million years ago. The rodent evolutionary path to success lay in their reproductive ability, primates on the other hand, relied on increased cognitive ability for enhanced survival. Rather than relying on having large litters of young, primates invested more time and effort producing one or two offspring, nurturing them over longer periods of time during which offspring learned from their parents. Primates are generally limited to two mammary glands, although supernumerary mammaries are not unheard of, even in humans. They are regarded as atavistic traits. When ancestral primates took to the trees, it placed a premium on visual acuity, depth perception and hand-eye coordination. Again, the brain expanded to accommodate that demand. Individual primates lacking those characteristics would have been more likely to fall to their deaths. That is natural section at work, improving the gene pool through elimination of the least fit. Primate brains are, on an average, about double the size of other, similar sized mammals. Monkeys have larger cranial capacity and more complex brains than prosimians (Lemurs and Lorises). The brains of apes are still larger and more complex. The human brain is a continuation of the trend. It is a is a scaled up ape brain. This is consistent with evolutionary theory that, rather than creating new structures, evolution modifies what already exists. Each increase in brain size corresponds roughly to increased cognition. Whereas the brains of other mammals are smooth, primate brains have convolutions that effectively increase surface area and the number of neurons. The Neocortex is the part of the mammalian brain involved in higher-order brain functions such as sensory perception, cognition, generation of motor commands, spatial reasoning and (in humans) language. The Neocortex is a major part of the brain of all primates, especially so in humans where cerebral cortex occupies 80% of the brain mass and contains 16 billion neurons (Avzevedo et al., 2009). Thus far, we know of at least three uniquely human genes associated with greater human cerebral development: NOTCH2NL, ARHGAP11B and SRGAP2C. The latter two came about from partial duplications of the parent gene found in apes. In a related development, one mutation in our ancestors disabled the MYH16 gene making it a pseudo gene. That gene in apes gave them powerful jaw muscles which encircled the skull, possibly restricting encephalization. Other genes affecting human evolution are FOXP2 involved in the development of language and HACNS1 affecting limb and digit specialization.

I have a dream: one day, I'll open a youtube video about evolution, and i will find just people with a degree in biology and same nerds posting underneath it. Really, just leave us alone! It is time you go bother astrophysicist about dark energy for Christ's sake!

There is one phrase from indian ideology.. which says "Vasudev kutumbakam" means the whole world is one family..

Amazingly clear explanation!

Thanks actually it does make sense absolutely simple non complex advanced review for evolution good job

Evolution is NEVER about "one animal turning into another" as creationists love to characterize it. Offspring will always differ slightly from their parents genetically. Errors (mutations) always occur during cell division because replication is an imperfect process. Evolution takes place within populations as mutations are subjected to the natural selection process and survivors pass their genes to successive generations via the gene pool. When segments of a population become genetically isolated from each other their separate gene pools diversify due to mutations that are now unique to different gene pools. As those differing mutations accumulate, chance interbreeding between the now separate gene pools become increasingly problematical and speciation has occurred. It is no more possible to determine the exact point where speciation occurred, any more than it is possible to determine the point on the electromagnetic spectrum where red turns to orange. This is why it is so ludicrous for creationists to claim that there should be fossils of one species in the process of becoming another. When speciation occurs, the two populations will initially be quite similar genetically and physiologically. Mutations unique to each population are continuous and lead to greater and greater differences between them. There is no point at which mutations stop. Many species with recent common ancestors can still interbreed but offspring are quite often sterile. For example, horses, donkeys and zebras can all interbreed and offspring are usually, but not always sterile. Dromedary (one hump) and Bactrian (two hump) camels can produce fertile hybrids of superior size and strength.Such hybrids are thought to be one factor in diversification of species. On the larger scale, evolution results in incremental alterations to what is already there. As an analogy, imagine a robot gardener dragging a hose around various obstacles it encounters until it runs out of hose. Now an intelligent gardener could simply retrace his steps and take a different path. The robot gardener (evolution) cannot do that. With a limited tool kit, it can only (figuratively) add more hose. We see this throughout nature. One example being the Panda's "thumb". Now the Panda is a bear with a bear's paw. Their diet is bamboo leaves which they spend many hours per day stripping from their stalks and eating. A thumb would be quite useful in that activity, but evolution cannot rewind to produce one. Instead, it has taken "a piece of hose' (a wrist bone) and enlarged it to act as a stand in for a thumb. That is not an elegant solution and not a perfect one, but it gets the job done. Evolution is does not produce perfect solutions, but tweaks here and there to "get the job done". In much the same way, the Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve in fish (yes fish have one). The larynx serves multiple functions, including control of respiration, airway protection, coordination of swallowing, and phonation. It is a branch of the Vagus nerve responsible for hiccups (another vestige). The nerve in fish travels from the brain to the larynx past the heart. This is a direct route and would be consistent with 'intelligent design'. Through successive stages of evolution these organs moved further apart, yet the nerve still looped around heart arteries, in effect "adding more hose" to get the job done. In the giraffe, that amounts to about 15 feet of "extra hose". There is a similar situation in the leg bones of the horse. In the course of evolution, running over hard baked plains favored the fusing of leg bones (Fibula and tibia) for a stronger bone. As in other mammals, there is an artery that passes between these bones. Had an "intelligent designer" been involved, the artery would have simply been rerouted a couple of centimeters and the bone totally fused. Again, the 'robot gardener' of evolution cannot backtrack to do this and a gap remains between the two bones the only function of which is to allow passage of that artery. One often hears creationists claim that life is "perfectly designed", yet the various adaptations we see in the natural world are quite often just good enough to get the job done. Weak backs and knees are characteristics of humans; we have a common windpipe and trachea which results in many deaths each year from choking; we have a vestigial appendix that, while any remaining function is debatable, an inflamed one can be fatal. We have 3 sets of muscles attached to our ears that would move them toward the source of sound that are now totally useless unless one considers wiggling ones ears to be a form of sexual attraction. We all have a semi-lunar fold in the inner corners of our eyes with attached muscles that are vestiges of nictitating membranes many animals have as a "third eyelid". Then there is the Plantaris Muscle, which in other primates facilitates arboreal lifestyle, allowing the feet to function much the same as hands in gripping branches. The human foot has lost this ability in the process of becoming bipedal, but the muscle is still there. It is a long pencil thin muscle and tendons running down the back of the calf, that are extremely painful when ruptured and often misdiagnosed as a more serious injury. This injury, often called "Tennis Leg" occurs most frequently in athletes over 40 due to the tendon and attachments becoming more brittle. With or without treatment, the two ends of the rupture will shrivel and disappear within weeks with no loss of function in the leg. It is indeed one of evolution's leftovers. It is often harvested for reconstructive surgery elsewhere in the body. We see vestigial structures all through nature. They remain in some cases because they have been adapted for other purposes, in others they remain simply because there has been no evolutionary advantage to eliminating them. Similarly, pseudo-genes are vestiges of previously active genes. They certainly do not support the idea of "intelligent design". They are however, completely consistent with the Theory of Evolution

Imagine if people denied mathematics or language. That’s the same as science deniers like creationists

The following statements are what scientists say. The creationist answer: "Nuh-uh", "Nuh-uh", "Nuh-uh", ad infinitum

Awesome we learnt a lot!!!!! I like how it was cartoonic that children can understand! Wonderful! A child or adult WILL like it mostly !!!! KEEP IT UP!!!!!

Scroll down for the Festival of Ignorance. Enjoy!

*EVIDENCE FOR EVOLUTION - THE HUMAN BRAIN* (part 1) - is remarkable for its size and complexity in relation to body mass. Even more remarkable is the fact that at 2% of average body weight, it requires 20% of total caloric intake to function. Still more remarkable is that the human infant, born of necessity at a very early stage of development, utilizes 60% of available calories for neuronal development. That brain continues expansion through adolescence and even into early adulthood. Such a long childhood is also a unique human feature, but is a continuation of a trend that began with our primate ancestors.. Our abilities to speak, make tools or fly to the moon are due to the increased cognitive abilities of a brain whose size and complexity increased incrementally over millions of years of evolution. Evolution is a PROCESS and not an EVENT. What we see over the course of evolution is incremental alterations of existing structures, not sudden changes. This is what we see in the evolution of the human brain. Humans are vertebrates, mammals, primates and apes and our genome reflects that ancestry. Early mammal survival in a world dominated by dinosaurs, depended on increased sensory perception (sight, smell and hearing) and the mammalian brain developed an expanded cortex to accommodate that demand. Primates and rodents separated from a common ancestor about 75 million years ago. The rodent evolutionary path to success lay in their reproductive ability, primates on the other hand, relied on increased cognitive ability for enhanced survival. Rather than relying on having large litters of young, primates invested more time and effort producing one or two offspring, nurturing them over longer periods of time during which offspring learned from their parents. Primates are generally limited to two mammary glands, although supernumerary mammaries are not unheard of, even in humans. They are regarded as atavistic traits.

Damn man you just cleared my 2 year old doubt in a couple of minutes. Thanks a lottttt.....

"Evolution is fake because MY magical book, that consists of MY magical beliefs says otherwise" This pretty much sums up every fundamentalist religious clown in this comment section. Evolution is fact, regardless if you believe it or not is irrelevant. Evolution will always happen even if you don't believe in it, just like gravity will always happen even if you don't believe in it.

The best part about evolution is that it’s true whether you believe in it or not.

*Does every scientific organization in the world endorse evolution as a fact? YES.* *Do all science organizations in the world regard evolution as a branch of science? YES.* *DO Biology departments of every secular university in the world back evolution? YES.* *Does the Biology department of Baptist Baylor University teach evolution? YES it does.* *DO the Geology departments of every secular university in the world endorse evolution? YES.* *Does the Geology department of Baptist Baylor University endorse evolution? YES it does.* *Does the Episcopalian church endorse evolution? YES it does.* *Does the Catholic Church endorse evolution? YES it does.* *Does the United Methodist Church? YES it does.* *Does the Presbyterian Church? YES it does.* Do creationists accept the evidence for evolution? NO, because their belief system requires them to reject any evidence that does not support their biblical interpretation. They grew up with that belief. It was not reasoned into them, and most likely cannot be reasoned out of them. One cannot reason with those who reject its use. That would be like giving medicine to a dead man..

Very easy to understand and so helpful Thank u.

This was very informative! Amazing job! Subscribed!

Great video!! Really helped me with my biology study, thank you :))

We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology. - Carl Sagan

I wasn't allowed to learn about this in school, so I thought I would try learning now.

Why is it that KZfaq seems to be the only place where people are suddenly experts on evolution and can disprove a topic that has been researched for 200+ years? And even then they're going on about abiogenesis, of which evolution doesn't try to explain :|

That was really well done and explained so much with nice simple examples and terms.

"In everyday speech, people tend to use the word 'theory' to mean an untested hypothesis, or even a guess. But the term 'evolutionary theory' does not refer to any single hypothesis, and it certainly is not guesswork. As used in science, 'theory' refers to the entire body of work on the understanding and application of a field of knowledge. When we refer to evolutionary theory, we are referring to our understanding of the mechanisms that result in biological changes in populations over time, and the use of that understanding to interpret changes and interactions of biological organisms." -Life (the science of biology) Ninth Edition Sadava, Hillis, Heller, Berenbaum

Thanks for helping me with the test I’ll have tomorrow. Maybe I’ll do a little better now thanks to you:)

Informative, slick and to the point. Great video and the first I have seen on your channel. I will definitely be watching more!

10/10-IGN "good animation"

I was 5 when this came out and this saved my grades in biology. Thank you🤝

shout out to that single-celled organism for making humans possible

That information contained in the DNA is interesting.

*HERE IS WHAT THE BIBLE TELLS US - About Morality.* Please cite the passages that promote morality. Don't forget the quiz at the end. 1. You can own slaves. You can buy and sell slaves. You can even sell your own daughter (Exodus 21:7-10). If she fails to please her master, you must refund him the purchase price. 2. You can beat the living shit out of your slaves without being punished, as long as they do not die within two days (Exodus 20:20-21). Under what standards of morality is it ever okay to beat another human being like that and not suffer any consequences? It is reassuring the bible endorses property rights, but a source of morality it is not. 3. The bible not only condones slavery but sets prices for them (Leviticus 27:3-7). The bible obviously was concerned about human traffickers getting a fair price for their goods. 4. Surely Jesus had compassion towards slaves. He tells slaves to be obedient and subservient. That is why slave owners in the Americas pushed Christianity onto their slaves and punished those caught practicing their ancient religions.. Very reassuring. According to Jesus, it was okay to beat slaves, those who unwittingly made mistakes were to be given few lashes, those who knowingly violated rules were to be given many lashes. Ownership rights, you know. 5. Thou shalt not kill. Now THERE is a good one. However, it seems there are exceptions: No sooner had Moses returned from his first trip up the mountains to find a party to which he had not been invited, in a fit of rage he orders his Levite goon squad to kill "every man his brother, and every man his friend and every man his neighbor." Exodus 32:28 "The Levites did as Moses commanded and that day about 3000 of the people died." 'Tough Love' maybe? 6. But there are others. The bible requires the faithful to put to death by stoning; Adulterers (Deuteronomy 22:23-24, Leviticus 20:10); Homosexuals (Leviticus 20:13), Non virgins (Deuteronomy 22:20-21), any of your neighbors foolish enough to mow their lawn on the Sabbath (Exodus 31:12-15,Exodus 35:1-3,Numbers 15:32-36). 7. Oh, and speaking of rape, surely that ranks high on the ‘Thou shalt nots’ of the ten commandments. *NO???* It is not even mentioned??? An oversight perhaps? But then it was so important to forbid mixing fabrics or cooking a kid in its mother's milk (so important that it needed to be repeated three times) and such. Take a look at these REALLY important commandments (there are different versions within the bible). Thou shalt not: Worship other gods Work on the Sabbath (death penalty crime) Take the name of the lord in vain (OMG, ANOTHER capital crime) Make graven images Covet thy neighbor’s wife or house or ass And, oh yes, ‘thou shalt not kill’ and ‘thou shalt not steal’ are in there somewhere near the bottom. *But rape? Not one word!!!* How about elsewhere in the bible? Surely somewhere the bible must condemn rape, no? Oh, yes, here; Deuteronomy 22:28-29 28 "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her *and they are discovered,* 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives" *YESSS! There it is. Rape is a PROPERTY crime*. The rapist has damaged the father’s PROPERTY and it is he that must be compensated. What justice for the victim of the rape? She has to marry her rapist. Surely she lived happily ever after, no? And what if they were not discovered and the girl kept quiet out of fear? The bible is quite clear about the fate of girls who are not virgins on their wedding day. Here, as elsewhere in the bible, women are chattel and have no say in their future. It is interesting to note that, while the bible mandates death by stoning for adulterers and non virgin brides, raping an 'unbethrothed' virgin incurred only a monetary penalty. This is biblical justice? In any case, it begs the question; what is the penalty for raping a 'betrothed' virgin? Is compensation to be paid to her intended husband? 8. The bible endorses mass murder and sex slavery. Numbers 31:14-18 "14 Moses was angry with the officers of the army-the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds-who returned from the battle. 15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. *17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."* Numbers 31:35 - "And thirty and two thousand persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him." *THIRTY TWO THOUSAND VIRGINS* being divided up to be used by “god’s chosen people” at the same time their mothers and brothers by the tens of thousands were being slaughtered like animals. Many of those women would have been pregnant, their unborn fetus dying inside them. And what would have been the crime of young boys of whatever age? 2? 4? 10? There was no distinction about age. This is GENOCIDE, condemned by civilized nations of the world. If you fail to feel a deep sense of moral outrage at this, how do you condemn ISIS for doing far less? Genocide in whatever form is an ugly stain on humanity. To claim it to be a moral act is the ultimate evil. Why then, should you regard the bible as a moral guide? Is ISIS any less evil? So what response do we hear from zealots? Shock? Horror? No! Their predicable response is indifference and a callous “They had it coming to them.” We have heard those words echoed by unrepentant Nazis and the barbaric ISIS. And how does that equate to morality? Are not empathy and compassion the cornerstones of morality? Where then is there any morality here? Perhaps it was just an oversight that the bible nowhere condemns slavery, or rape or molesting children, but yet it was so important to forbid mixing fabrics or cooking a kid in its mother's milk (so important that it needed to be repeated three times). What does that say about biblical priorities? If the bible is the source of your 'morality', call a mental health hotline, NOW.. God sends Abraham to murder his own son, clearly an immoral act. Abraham is perfectly willing to do so. And for this, the bible praises Abraham. To a rational person, morality is doing what's right, no matter what one is told. Biblical morality is doing what you are told no matter what. Although an angel was sent to 'stay Abraham's hand', no such courtesy was given Jephthah's daughter made into a burnt offering to the lord (Judges 11:29-40). That should be enough to turn anyone's stomach. And what of Jephthah? Was this murderer of an innocent child punished in any way? *Was he condemned? NO. He is PRAISED. THE BIBLE TACITLY APPROVES OF HUMAN SACRIFICE.* To suggest that morality stems from religion is not only wrong, it is frightening. You don't need religion to have morals. If you can't determine right from wrong, you lack empathy, not religion. And the bible has a special message for women: "STFU". We see at every turn they are denied the rights afforded to men; they were regarded as property, either of their father or their husband. It can be a source of pride for women that apparently not a single one of them participated in the writing of the bible. The rights that women have today were not granted them by the bible, they had to fight for them. The bible endorses misogyny. Some of the rules in the bible are downright strange. Take Leviticus 15:19- 24 for instance that forbids contact with a woman while she is "unclean" (during her period). I mean how is a guy to know? Surely it is impolite to ask. Donald Trump has a way of finding out, but I doubt the average guy could get away with it. Atheists have greater claim to morality than those who espouse religion. They are moral because it is the intelligent way to behave towards our fellow man, not out of expectation of reward or fear of punishment. If you are "moral" because of those constraints, you are a very dangerous person. Slavery still exists, but it has been made illegal in virtually every part of the world, NOT because of guidance from the bible, but because it was the right thing to do. Morality stems from empathy and concern for our fellow man. Good people will do good things, bad people will do bad things; but for good people to do bad things, that takes religion. Dictators take control of a populace by instilling fear of punishment, how is religion any different than that? “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire Mark Twain once said _"It ain't the parts of the bible I don't understand that bother me, it's the parts I DO understand."_ Now the question: Do YOU understand why the bible is said to be the source of morality? Because I sure don't..

amazing video love the artstyle

thank you so much for the perfect introduction to evolution

Creationism in a nutshell: "I have never engaged in any activity that could remotely be confused with homework on this subject, nor would I recognize actual homework on it, nor do I understand or appreciate the homework that others have invested on the topic. However, I browsed a web page, talked it over with a minister and an MBA, and consulted a few like-minded and equally ill-informed people, so I feel confident in saying that scientists are full of cr@p."

sometimes I wanna go to the beach but I can't because of the quarantine so I grab grandma and pour her all over the floor and build sand castles

So I'm watching this for class, but at the badger part I realized I've watched this before on my own time.

Shoutout to all my Christians out there, they’re faith in iron age literature is stronger than the literal evidence for evolution.

“The living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing at all . . . Whatever your hand finds to do, do with all your might, for there is no work nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom in the Grave, where you are going.” Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10

One of the best videos I have watched over time. Clearly describes the topic.Well done/

Tiktaalik Looking all the way back 375 million years ago, there is an intermediate fossil that represents the transition of vertebrate life from water to land. Tiktaalik roseae, discovered in Nunavut in 2004, is an ancient fish called a sarcopteryigian, or lobe-finned fish. Although it bears many similarities to fish like gills, scales, and fins, other key characteristics link Tiktaalik to land animals. While it did have fins, the bones inside the fins are homologous to the bones of the human hand and wrist, indicating it may have been able to bear weight. The animal also had a mobile neck and a strong ribcage, two critical traits that allowed four-legged (tetrapod) creatures to move onto land. Tiktaalik makes sense evolutionarily in the progression of other early tetrapods like the more aquatic Panderichthys and the clearly amphibious Acanthostega.

thanks so much to the Stated Clearly team for making this video. This video make me understand about the concept of the evolution😁😁😁

Iam hussien from iraq...thank you very much