TLDR for students whose teachers are asking what the fingers represent: Pinky: Chance can happen, resetting the gene pool Ring: Non random mating can determine how often people with certain genes reproduce. If they’re unfavorable, the odds of them mating and passing on their genes are low Middle: Mutation can add a new gene that changes up the frequency of all other genes Index: Gene flow/movement can change the frequency of the gene pool if people with different genes come to a new area and other people leave, taking their genes with them. Thumb: Adaptation will change genes to adapt to the surrounding environment
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
*continues to search middle finger for the M* Can't find it.... must be.. EVOLUTION. Oh wait... no... it's the M in the name... not on the actual finger- carry on.
This guys from TED are great, they defenitely should spread their videos throughout the schools all over the world. I just think they should make a video on thermodynamics, its 4 laws formulas still don't drill well through my head. T_T.
The English word theory was derived from a technical term in philosophy in Ancient Greek. The word theoria, θεωρία, meant "a looking at, viewing, beholding", and referring to contemplation or speculation, as opposed to action.[1] Theory is especially often contrasted to "practice" (from Greek praxis, πρᾶξις) a Greek term for "doing", which is opposed to theory because theory involved no doing apart from itself.
Albert Vasquez we got that from our fishapod ancestors: all us chordate tetrapods (even horses & CHICKENS) have 5 digits...look into tiktalik or acanthostega for more details
Keep in mind this is a 5-minute high-level over view ostensibly designed for children and people not previously familiar (or perhaps even interested) in the subject matter. There are a lot of intricacies and interdependencies that have to be cut or glossed over. Mutation, as a process, is one of the mechanisms that drives evolution, even if specific, individual mutations must continue to be selected for and propagated to take hold in the population.
When Brazeau and Ahlberg measured this bone in Panderichthys, they discovered it was much shorter than in earlier fish. It also was not directly connected to the jaw joint. It appeared to be in the middle of moving to a different part of the skull where it would become an ear bone -- a migration that would take tens of millions of years to complete.
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
I am not trying to control other people's opinions, and your right, i DO have an unshakable opinion because the way I see it, the only reason people get worked up over opinion contrary to their own is because they know they might be wrong, therefore i am unshakable because i believe fully in what i think is true, unless overwhelming evidence says otherwise...
Hm. I didn't know red hair was an incomplete dominant gene - I wish my teachers covered genetic transference more deeply than "they're either dominant or recessive."
It is too difficult of a concept for highschool right now. I learned all these things and many more studying molecular genetics and biotechnology at uni and i doubt i would be prepared for the full picture back in highschool.
"... I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them. You suggest that an artist should be used to visualize such transformations, but where would he get the information from? I could not, honestly, provide it, and if I were to leave it to artistic license, would that not mislead the reader?"
This video is amazing,I'm totally suggesting this to my College Biology teacher. We just went over this and it was fairly boring, this video made up for all of that boredom in 5 minutes!
I don't mean the animals we see today. I'm not saying monkeys are not related to whales. I was more talking about the first organisms, the ones that combined to form more complicated cells.
jonas ferencz I'm no expert here, but a quick search seems to indicate that multiple origins is a known hypothesis, but that it's mostly refuted. Not sure if these answer your question 100%, but they're worth a read: whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2010/05/15/modern-life-had-a-single-origin/ news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100513-science-evolution-darwin-single-ancestor/
Uranium-lead dating contains most of the problematic features of other dating forms. 1) Lead 206 can be formed by processes other than decay (Neutron cross section) 2) Based on the assumption that no event or condition in the past has occured that could have altered decay rates (extremely unlikely) 3) Uranium 238 is water soluable, so water can carry this element, depleting or enhancing estimated dates 4) Error Margin for such dating can span hundreds of millions of years
Just depends how you define the word. As the speaker says, microevolution means shifting the existing genes around, like is done in breeding or domestication. This process alone cannot lead to macroevolution, and neither can natural selection alone.
Science is a whole different 'breed' of writing. Most people cannot grasp the dense, thought-driven concepts in long, drawn out science papers because when you are writing scientific research papers you are basically cramming all of your information into the best words you possibly can and you are writing it specifically towards people with a bachelors/masters degree. Its a lot rougher to get through than normal papers and is much more specific, which denotes it the term "scientific literacy."
movement of individuals into or out of an area? 1)Natural Selection 2)Non-random mating 3)Mutation 4)Gene flow 5)Adaption Imagine a gene mutation creates a new color of hair. 1)Change the frequency in the gene pool. 2)Create a new species because of the disruption in the food chain 3)Nothing will happen
towards the end he says that none of them lead to adaptation but doesn't the first example, where a small number survives an epidemic, mean that the entire population is now immune, or adapted.
+anywherein12seconds That's natural selection. Those with immunity survive and pass on their immunity to their offspring. I think he was more referring to an event that could cause a population bottleneck, reducing population size and therefore genetic variation in the population.
over a massive time frame, yes. It's simpler than you think. Genes have been discovered that control whole body segments at once. As vertebrates (and many invertebrates) all have a similar body plan (imagine a stick figure...) we're really not very far removed. A single mutation, and you could be drastically different.
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
Thank you guys so much for making this site and channel on youtube, I'll never have a full understanding of your video's I'm just not smart enough, but I can at least try so thanks for make the site and everything thank you.
Really you should look this up online. This subject goes into lots of stuff like laws, hypotheses, various types theories, theorems, models, etc. Theories can be much more useful than a simple law which is used in theories often called postulates.It is a series of postulates (laws) to provide an explanation of the observed laws-- useful in prediction making with variable conditions. A law can't cope with varying conditions or attempt to explain how the condition causes the observation.
Crossing over does not result in mutation. Mutation refers to the formation of new allele (different alleles are different forms of a gene, for example the hair gene can have red allele or green allele). Crossing over only causes new combinations of alleles but does not create new allele for the gene.
One of my favorite hobbies is searching for the comments of those religious nutcases. It's funny that other videos like this do not contain anti-scientific comments but as soon as evolution or the scientific time scale gets mentioned, all the religious lunatics rush to the comment section to advertise their ignorance.
Through the expression of certain genes found within the genome, these genes are selected through various means, Some are through simple dominant/ recessive interactions between marker strands of DNA which signal various proteins found within the nucleus to begin transcription, Transcription reverts DNA to RNA and eventually into Proteins, thee proteins then form structures which provide the phenotype which we see in one another, This is the emerging field of Proteomics.
The support you gave me is a video that cannot be addressed in only 250 words so I have sent you a mail addressing the main 7 points of the video you have provided.
What he says is "non-random" mating. Selective breeding in other words. When mates don't mate randomly, but select traits they want in a mate, they affect the frequency of the alleles for those traits, which is evolution and over enough time could affect the frequency to the degree that speciation occurs. Random mating would result in a sort of genetic equilibrium. NON-random mating does not.
Panderichthys, Elpistostege (mid-late Devonian, about 370 Ma) -- These "panderichthyids" are very tetrapod-like lobe-finned fish. Unlike Eusthenopteron, these fish actually look like tetrapods in overall proportions (flattened bodies, dorsally placed orbits, frontal bones! in the skull, straight tails, etc.) and have remarkably foot-like fins.
But now I have a question for you. If evolution is random and cannot add new genotypes or phenotypes to a gene pool, why is it that we see such change in the organisms between the Carboniferous period, which was 360mya and the Triasic period 250mya? The changes we see in the fossil record shows extensive changes in organismal anatomy and a diversification of species across the planet.
It is at this point which we realize that the differences which built up between the two populations over the many years has finally culminated in the emergence of a new species which is different enough to hold its own place in the world. Now it contends with interspecies disputes over resources or space, eventually one would gain the edge over the other, causing extinction for one. All this time each individual still competes with others in the same species in a never ending genetic arms race.
The genes for red hair and fair skin are linked. A little too complex to get into in 500 characters or less, but red hair is linked to the MCR1 gene on chromosome 16 and indicates a low concentration of eumelanin throughout the body WHICH allows for greater generation of vitamin D in low-UV light, which is the case in the north where daylight hours are shorter and the intensity of the rays lower due to the angle at which they enter the atmosphere compared to the equatorial regions.
Many mutations don't yield a better outcome, but occasionally it does. Imagine a small organism without eyes. A small change in only a few cells to make them sensitive to light can be a huge advantage, so that mutation has a chance of sticking around in the gene pool. However, if a mutation happens that would, say, make it unable to breathe, it would just die and clear the bad mutation from the gene pool. It's random chance but it builds up from what's there but can be better, step by step.
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
I wholly stand by my statement. Evolution is not dependent on mutation. Evolution is a process in which organisms change over time. As the video clearly shows this is done in a few different ways. Mutations are one of them. Mutations aren't solely responsible for evolution, Genetic Drift and population mechanics, as well as biased mating or abiotic factors all go into the process of evolution, Remove mutations from the list and you still have a working system.
each correct number is like a beneficial mutation, something that happened in the coding that went wrong and caused it to have a better colour for its environment or what ever, and this is kept because it gives it a better chance of surviving. the bad mutations or incorrect numbers are tossed because they aren't favorable. this isn't permutation, permutation is when you grab the balls and jumble them and just keep jumbling all 10 balls hoping to get 1-10 in 1 go. this is completely different.
Evolution is such a central concept in biology. How can you say you like biology, the study of life, if you don't understand the concept of evolution, the process of how life has come to be what it is now.
Just because the fight is with random fighters it doesn't mean that there is bound to be a random outcome, If I were to pick two random people off the streets and had them fight to the death one would win. And the one that survives wouldn't have won off of chance. Randomness may have chosen the fighters, but it does not define the winner of the fight.
I agree with what you're saying, but it's not really what I was saying. For instance, when scientists say an animal without an eye suddenly gets an eye out of pure random mutation, that's just absurd. And not only is the eye perfectly made, but it fits perfectly inside the animals skull and completely connects to the brain allowing for each generation to have amazing vision due to the fact that a ton of the brain's memory is taken up by eye sight. Now how does that make sense?
1) We are related to every other animal, however distant they may be, but since you seem to be speaking about similar species and so does the article, Neanderthals and Denosivians also had 23 chromosomes. 2) The fusion of Chromosome 2 is a neutral mutation, so it's not a significant mutation, so it is possible it can become the genetic norm in a population. 3) About 70,000 years ago, human population hit about 1,000 so it is highly likely it became the genetic norm.
Before you read this sentence and think it out of context read the full original article or read The National Center for Science Education (NCSE)'s "What Did Karl Popper Really Say About Evolution?" It is quite interesting.
TLDR for students whose teachers are asking what the fingers represent:
Pinky: Chance can happen, resetting the gene pool
Ring: Non random mating can determine how often people with certain genes reproduce. If they’re unfavorable, the odds of them mating and passing on their genes are low
Middle: Mutation can add a new gene that changes up the frequency of all other genes
Index: Gene flow/movement can change the frequency of the gene pool if people with different genes come to a new area and other people leave, taking their genes with them.
Thumb: Adaptation will change genes to adapt to the surrounding environment
ur the real mvp
hero
damn i love you
i love you so much, you helped me out a lot!!
Not all heroes wear capes
This is brilliant! Students have responded so well to this method! I can't wait to use it in my Botany/Zoology class next semester!
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
EVERYONE LOVES MR ANDERSON...EVEN THOSE WHO HAVEN'T MET HIM haha. His videos have been so helpful.
ن
I love both Anderson (Addison Anderson and Paul Andersen)
Ted Ed is really the best UA-cam channel according to me.
"Sex: a reshuffling of the genetic deck." Love it.
Paul Anderson is the King! Hope your channels allow you to influence the world as you want. Thanks champion,
*i feel dumb i thought this vid was about how we got 5 fingers **-______-*
+Djumba F. I thought it was about the evolution of stealing
+Djumba F.Laughed out loud whrn I read this. Well, I'm glad I'm not the only one who taught that.
+Djumba F. nice cover photo
+Djumba F. So did I.
Accent Tué 😂 WOW
holy crap, wish this video existed when I was in school
or the people who thought the video was about how we got 5 fingers
or the people who searched for M on their finger and felt dumb lol xD
hahaha!!!, sorry mate
One of the best informational videos, it really helped me understand (i'm a very visual person)!
Thank you for making it!!
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
Thank you for this nice and concise recap of the five general mechanisms of evolution!
Yes, I am studying for a final exam in introductory ecology.
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
"Redheads can make a whole family of redheads..."
THE WEASLEYS
*continues to search middle finger for the M*
Can't find it.... must be.. EVOLUTION.
Oh wait... no... it's the M in the name... not on the actual finger- carry on.
Hi N.C, didn't think I would find you here
*I did the same thing* lol
Same XD
Same. Hard same.
It has been 3 years people say he is still searching
This guys from TED are great, they defenitely should spread their videos throughout the schools all over the world. I just think they should make a video on thermodynamics, its 4 laws formulas still don't drill well through my head. T_T.
Anyone else recoginse his voice before looking at the title for his name? Mr. Andersen!!!
Great and clear explanation. Thumbs up!
Ohh. How much I love Paul Andersen
It feels weird watching my teacher on ted.
lol
The English word theory was derived from a technical term in philosophy in Ancient Greek. The word theoria, θεωρία, meant "a looking at, viewing, beholding", and referring to contemplation or speculation, as opposed to action.[1] Theory is especially often contrasted to "practice" (from Greek praxis, πρᾶξις) a Greek term for "doing", which is opposed to theory because theory involved no doing apart from itself.
1. Si la poblacion disminuye
2. Emparejamiento
3. Mutación
4. Movimiento
5. Adaptación a los entornos
These videos are extremely professional.
Let's reshuffle the genetic deck - if u know wat i mean ;)
I'll keep that line in mind if i ever have to woo an evolutionary biologist. xD
Sajal Rastogi grow up
Nikunj Majithia mature sexually?
Netflix and shuffle?
@@tothesciencemobile4707 mass genocide and restart?
This really helped to study for my evolution test tomorrow this is one of the essay questions on there so this really helped i liked it
i feel dumb i thought this vid was about how we got 5 fingers -______-
Albert Vasquez we got that from our fishapod ancestors: all us chordate tetrapods (even horses & CHICKENS) have 5 digits...look into tiktalik or acanthostega for more details
I'm definitely addicted to these videos.
"Can" and "can't" sound too alike in American English.
(If you can't... sounds the same as If you can)
What do you speak?
Keep in mind this is a 5-minute high-level over view ostensibly designed for children and people not previously familiar (or perhaps even interested) in the subject matter. There are a lot of intricacies and interdependencies that have to be cut or glossed over. Mutation, as a process, is one of the mechanisms that drives evolution, even if specific, individual mutations must continue to be selected for and propagated to take hold in the population.
I can think of another process that uses 5 fingers (and sometimes the rest of the palm) and does not result in evolution
Adrian-Cornel Borină Stealing?
@@ratoim I think he means stangling someone. If so, this lad got huge fingers
Great video. I show it every year.
Studying for finals anyone?
me !
good luck ! :)
CasquencH test Monday 😭
I am in seventh grade and we are learning the same stuff, lol
Jake-got-fire Donohue me too!!
I loved the presentation. It was clear and adorable!
Mr. Bozeman?! Is that really you ?
Bulidrians was thinking the same thing
It is indeed the myth the legend Ryan Anderson of Bozeman science.
When Brazeau and Ahlberg measured this bone in Panderichthys, they discovered it was much shorter than in earlier fish. It also was not directly connected to the jaw joint. It appeared to be in the middle of moving to a different part of the skull where it would become an ear bone -- a migration that would take tens of millions of years to complete.
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
2:49 Those Muggle lovers, the Weasley!
I am not trying to control other people's opinions, and your right, i DO have an unshakable opinion because the way I see it, the only reason people get worked up over opinion contrary to their own is because they know they might be wrong, therefore i am unshakable because i believe fully in what i think is true, unless overwhelming evidence says otherwise...
Hm. I didn't know red hair was an incomplete dominant gene - I wish my teachers covered genetic transference more deeply than "they're either dominant or recessive."
It is too difficult of a concept for highschool right now. I learned all these things and many more studying molecular genetics and biotechnology at uni and i doubt i would be prepared for the full picture back in highschool.
"... I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them. You suggest that an artist should be used to visualize such transformations, but where would he get the information from? I could not, honestly, provide it, and if I were to leave it to artistic license, would that not mislead the reader?"
Thanks to this video, I failed my biology test :)
I enjoyed the "rule of thumb" to help us remember the processes!
Man, our Biology teacher taught us this method
This video is amazing,I'm totally suggesting this to my College Biology teacher. We just went over this and it was fairly boring, this video made up for all of that boredom in 5 minutes!
I don't think it's right to say all animals share a common ancestor. Is it not possible that life started in more than one place?
+jonas ferencz I think the genetic pattern of the species contradicts that notion.
I don't mean the animals we see today. I'm not saying monkeys are not related to whales. I was more talking about the first organisms, the ones that combined to form more complicated cells.
jonas ferencz
I'm no expert here, but a quick search seems to indicate that multiple origins is a known hypothesis, but that it's mostly refuted. Not sure if these answer your question 100%, but they're worth a read: whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2010/05/15/modern-life-had-a-single-origin/ news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100513-science-evolution-darwin-single-ancestor/
+jonas ferencz Our genes are too similar for that to be possible I believe
+GamingEchelon the first life didn't even have DNA, just RNA.
Uranium-lead dating contains most of the problematic features of other dating forms.
1) Lead 206 can be formed by processes other than decay (Neutron cross section)
2) Based on the assumption that no event or condition in the past has occured that could have altered decay rates (extremely unlikely)
3) Uranium 238 is water soluable, so water can carry this element, depleting or enhancing estimated dates
4) Error Margin for such dating can span hundreds of millions of years
where is the "m" on the middle finger i can't see it i am triggered
Fresh Fishyy mmmm. In Middle...MMMMiddle...oh! Right there!
Excellent presentation on the observable facts of evolution.
Biology class ?
Just depends how you define the word. As the speaker says, microevolution means shifting the existing genes around, like is done in breeding or domestication. This process alone cannot lead to macroevolution, and neither can natural selection alone.
Shuffle me, baby.
lmao thx i rlly needed that laugh
Bro that was amazing lmfao
Science is a whole different 'breed' of writing. Most people cannot grasp the dense, thought-driven concepts in long, drawn out science papers because when you are writing scientific research papers you are basically cramming all of your information into the best words you possibly can and you are writing it specifically towards people with a bachelors/masters degree. Its a lot rougher to get through than normal papers and is much more specific, which denotes it the term "scientific literacy."
POV: You were here during school!
Lol
best learning video that i've ever seen!
Who else is here because of "biology class"
M here cause of ess class
Great video, congratulations this is a incredible form of explain the evolution with a simple hand.
MR. ANDERSON!!!!!
movement of individuals into or out of an area? 1)Natural Selection 2)Non-random mating 3)Mutation 4)Gene flow 5)Adaption
Imagine a gene mutation creates a new color of hair. 1)Change the frequency in the gene pool. 2)Create a new species because of the disruption in the food chain 3)Nothing will happen
Anyone else here for biology class
Tony Klaer yessir
187 people saw this video literally prove evolution as an unavoidable outcome of existence and still disliked it. Seriously stubborn.
4 fingered people punching the air rn
You are the type of person that is holding society back.
Bozeman Science!
towards the end he says that none of them lead to adaptation but doesn't the first example, where a small number survives an epidemic, mean that the entire population is now immune, or adapted.
+anywherein12seconds
That's natural selection. Those with immunity survive and pass on their immunity to their offspring. I think he was more referring to an event that could cause a population bottleneck, reducing population size and therefore genetic variation in the population.
Evolution is a CHOICE. God said Adam and Eve, not Adam and Harambe
Asi Mailau Harambe created us all in his image through Harambelution. Wake Up people.
Evolution is very real. But that doesn't mean god doesn't exist or make god's teachings invalid. I say this as a Christian who believes in evolution
It was a joke, are you shitting me
I literally mention Harambe, it's a fucking joke.
Asi Lou Mailau it was a little hard to tell LOL! >~<
I thought you were joking but then I thought maybe not
over a massive time frame, yes. It's simpler than you think. Genes have been discovered that control whole body segments at once. As vertebrates (and many invertebrates) all have a similar body plan (imagine a stick figure...) we're really not very far removed. A single mutation, and you could be drastically different.
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
*creationists have left the chat*
Thank you guys so much for making this site and channel on youtube, I'll never have a full understanding of your video's I'm just not smart enough, but I can at least try so thanks for make the site and everything thank you.
funny i was born with six fingers instead of one yet the doctor cut it off and everybody except m\y mom dad and sister have this
you're an X-man!
Natasel Why?!?
Stop saying that!
-Count Rugen to Inigo Montoya
Really you should look this up online.
This subject goes into lots of stuff like laws, hypotheses, various types theories, theorems, models, etc. Theories can be much more useful than a simple law which is used in theories often called postulates.It is a series of postulates (laws) to provide an explanation of the observed laws-- useful in prediction making with variable conditions. A law can't cope with varying conditions or attempt to explain how the condition causes the observation.
'jean' pool XD
Crossing over does not result in mutation. Mutation refers to the formation of new allele (different alleles are different forms of a gene, for example the hair gene can have red allele or green allele). Crossing over only causes new combinations of alleles but does not create new allele for the gene.
christians only have one finger, its the middle finger and its "god"
One of my favorite hobbies is searching for the comments of those religious nutcases. It's funny that other videos like this do not contain anti-scientific comments but as soon as evolution or the scientific time scale gets mentioned, all the religious lunatics rush to the comment section to advertise their ignorance.
@@late8641it has also now become my favourite hooby, thank you!
This is awesome, I will forever remember the 5 causes now.
Through the expression of certain genes found within the genome, these genes are selected through various means, Some are through simple dominant/ recessive interactions between marker strands of DNA which signal various proteins found within the nucleus to begin transcription, Transcription reverts DNA to RNA and eventually into Proteins, thee proteins then form structures which provide the phenotype which we see in one another, This is the emerging field of Proteomics.
Thanks. It's easy to understand
You are right,but again how does it know what color it needs to evolve to?To say it knows on its own is like saying a car or a plane built itself.
I was almost certain you were gonna say “give your neighbor a five finger death punch”
thanks so much for doing this this made me get an A on a science test
Congrats!
i knew it was paul andersen narrating! i love his channel: bozeman science!!
the point is that if you have a lot of pigment in your skin, the light can't reach the protein synthesizers even through more light is absorbed
Thanks Fr. Casey for sending me here
The support you gave me is a video that cannot be addressed in only 250 words so I have sent you a mail addressing the main 7 points of the video you have provided.
Whoa, I remembered the five parts after just one viewing...well done
What he says is "non-random" mating. Selective breeding in other words. When mates don't mate randomly, but select traits they want in a mate, they affect the frequency of the alleles for those traits, which is evolution and over enough time could affect the frequency to the degree that speciation occurs. Random mating would result in a sort of genetic equilibrium. NON-random mating does not.
Panderichthys, Elpistostege (mid-late Devonian, about 370 Ma) -- These "panderichthyids" are very tetrapod-like lobe-finned fish. Unlike Eusthenopteron, these fish actually look like tetrapods in overall proportions (flattened bodies, dorsally placed orbits, frontal bones! in the skull, straight tails, etc.) and have remarkably foot-like fins.
alright im gonna send you a PM, as the 500 characters is very restricting and replies are confusing.
But now I have a question for you. If evolution is random and cannot add new genotypes or phenotypes to a gene pool, why is it that we see such change in the organisms between the Carboniferous period, which was 360mya and the Triasic period 250mya? The changes we see in the fossil record shows extensive changes in organismal anatomy and a diversification of species across the planet.
It is at this point which we realize that the differences which built up between the two populations over the many years has finally culminated in the emergence of a new species which is different enough to hold its own place in the world. Now it contends with interspecies disputes over resources or space, eventually one would gain the edge over the other, causing extinction for one. All this time each individual still competes with others in the same species in a never ending genetic arms race.
The genes for red hair and fair skin are linked. A little too complex to get into in 500 characters or less, but red hair is linked to the MCR1 gene on chromosome 16 and indicates a low concentration of eumelanin throughout the body WHICH allows for greater generation of vitamin D in low-UV light, which is the case in the north where daylight hours are shorter and the intensity of the rays lower due to the angle at which they enter the atmosphere compared to the equatorial regions.
Many mutations don't yield a better outcome, but occasionally it does. Imagine a small organism without eyes. A small change in only a few cells to make them sensitive to light can be a huge advantage, so that mutation has a chance of sticking around in the gene pool. However, if a mutation happens that would, say, make it unable to breathe, it would just die and clear the bad mutation from the gene pool. It's random chance but it builds up from what's there but can be better, step by step.
The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific evidence. It was introduced not for scientific reasons but for ideological reasons. There are no fossils that prove evolution. Millions of fossils prove no evolution. Living things did not appear by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. And traces have been found that prove that people from the times when Darwinists claimed that people were half animals were fully human. There was no such thing as evolution. And countless studies in laboratories have failed to turn up any examples of beneficial mutations. Almighty Allah created living things not by evolution but by the Cambrian explosion. The functions of all organs, which Darwinists call obsolete organs in living things, have been revealed. In other words, there is no such thing as an expired organ in humans or other living things.
"Hey, wanna go back to my place and shuffle my deck?"
I wholly stand by my statement. Evolution is not dependent on mutation. Evolution is a process in which organisms change over time. As the video clearly shows this is done in a few different ways. Mutations are one of them. Mutations aren't solely responsible for evolution, Genetic Drift and population mechanics, as well as biased mating or abiotic factors all go into the process of evolution, Remove mutations from the list and you still have a working system.
each correct number is like a beneficial mutation, something that happened in the coding that went wrong and caused it to have a better colour for its environment or what ever, and this is kept because it gives it a better chance of surviving. the bad mutations or incorrect numbers are tossed because they aren't favorable. this isn't permutation, permutation is when you grab the balls and jumble them and just keep jumbling all 10 balls hoping to get 1-10 in 1 go. this is completely different.
Evolution is such a central concept in biology. How can you say you like biology, the study of life, if you don't understand the concept of evolution, the process of how life has come to be what it is now.
Just because the fight is with random fighters it doesn't mean that there is bound to be a random outcome, If I were to pick two random people off the streets and had them fight to the death one would win. And the one that survives wouldn't have won off of chance. Randomness may have chosen the fighters, but it does not define the winner of the fight.
Nice job, Paul!
I agree with what you're saying, but it's not really what I was saying. For instance, when scientists say an animal without an eye suddenly gets an eye out of pure random mutation, that's just absurd. And not only is the eye perfectly made, but it fits perfectly inside the animals skull and completely connects to the brain allowing for each generation to have amazing vision due to the fact that a ton of the brain's memory is taken up by eye sight. Now how does that make sense?
your videos never cease to amaze me...well done sir.. "")
1) We are related to every other animal, however distant they may be, but since you seem to be speaking about similar species and so does the article, Neanderthals and Denosivians also had 23 chromosomes.
2) The fusion of Chromosome 2 is a neutral mutation, so it's not a significant mutation, so it is possible it can become the genetic norm in a population.
3) About 70,000 years ago, human population hit about 1,000 so it is highly likely it became the genetic norm.
I was hoping for a video about the evolution of the hand, still cool though.
Before you read this sentence and think it out of context read the full original article or read The National Center for Science Education (NCSE)'s "What Did Karl Popper Really Say About Evolution?"
It is quite interesting.
When it’s the night before your AP exam and your studying
What an awesome video!