Evolution from ape to man. From Proconsul to Homo heidelbergensis
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 сер 2019
- For Millions of years, our planet has been floating in space. Millions of creatures have lived on its surface. Many a quaint being was among them, but they affected only our, human imagination, for in the evolutionary struggle we are the only ones who have obtained the advantage of reason.
Evolution from ape to man
The animated movie made by Sergey Krivoplyasov and Antropogenez.ru in 2017
Why don’t apes evolve into humans? • Why don’t apes evolve ...
Subscribe to our channel: clck.ru/Jnmvo
Become a Patron: www.patreon.com/bePatron?c=19...
Сharacters (human ancestors):
- Proconsul heseloni
- Ardipithecus ramidus
- Australopithecus afarensis
- Homo habilis
- Homo ergaster
- Homo heidelbergensis
The following people took part in the creation of the cartoon:
- Alexander Sokolov - science consultant, project management;
- Stanislav Drobyshevskiy - science consultant, screenplay, Russian voiceover.
- Sergey Krivoplyasov - animation, characters set up, shaders, lighting, characters design, modeling, surrounding modeling, composing, edition, special effects. Optimization and rendering. Screenplay assistance, directing, producing and management. Everything was created and rendered with one computer :)
3D models by:
- Oleg Avramenko;
- Oleg Prosvirnin;
- Dmitriy Shilov;
- Vladimir Saenkov;
- Alexey Troshin.
Episode 3 and 4 motion capture by Vadim Garelin (Vataga Studio)
Russian voiceover: MARAKUJA Records;
English translation by Ilya Mukhanov;
English voiceover by Josh Bloomberg;
English voiceover support: Clarus Victoria
English voice processing: Ivan Pereligin
Spanish subtitles: Luca ML
Bulgarian subtitles: Viktoria Tsaryova
German subtitles: Yurii Erofeev
Serbian subtitles: Elizabeta Musić
Norwegian subtitles: Vladislav Panteleev
Ukranian subtitles: Vladislav Panteleev
Information Support: Sci-One Channel / @scione
Technological Support: XXII century web portal 22century.ru/
Skulls were provided by the State Biological Museum named after K.A. Timiryazev.
Crownfunding and information support - Dmitriy Puchkov and Studio "Polniy P" oper.ru
(c) ANTROPOGENEZ.RU
antropogenez_ru
/ antropogenez
Contact
E-mail: g_souris@mail.ru
Skype: ya-kudzo
![3. Dawn of the Stone Age - OUT OF THE CRADLE [人類誕生CG] / NHK Documentary](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xgd5Mt25koI/mqdefault.jpg)
The animated movie made by Sergey Krivoplyasov and Antropogenez.ru
Why don’t apes evolve into humans? ua-cam.com/video/cfqIpr_xWlE/v-deo.html
Subscribe to our channel: clck.ru/Jnmvo
Become a patron: www.patreon.com/join/antropogenez_world
I love hominis
Very helpful !!! Thank you..
Cool
In the begining of common era charles darvin formulated the natural selection theory but when he was about to die one man issac met him and said him the real mystery about the holy book bible and he said about jesus and his miracles and when darwin heard this he changed and followed the path of god and died and he cancelled his theory about the monkey to man and believed that god made man and a woman adam and eve and through there generation u and me had been created thank u for your interests
May the god bless you and keep you &MAKE HIS FACE SHINE ON YOU AMEN
Thanks to cameraman live from million years ago for the documentary
He didn’t go back it’s animated lmao
Edit: you guys didnt get my joke ig. My joke was that I didn’t get the joke which is obvious .
AdvancedL2 nice job not getting the joke
Glizzyjulian On iOS
Yh because I definitely thought the guy was being serious when he thanked a camera man millions of years ago for recording dinosaurs.
AdvancedL2 did anyone ask?
Glizzyjulian On iOS
Alr this is my last response/edit
this is an open comment section, literally made for public opinions. Nobody like actually needs to ask.
the whole “didn’t ask” thing was everyone’s response to an argument for like 6 months ago. So unless u actually got a reason to argue, saying “I didn’t ask” means literally nothing.
Also I’m not defending my “joke” bc it makes no sense now, but when I wrote that my name was “I didn’t get the joke”
human long ago: survival mode
human now: creative mode
Hardcore mode*
@@christbenitez8797 lol
This can be said only about small percentage, especially after the agricultural/pastoral revolution leading to ever increasing social stratification.
No, modern humans still have the instinct of the homo ergaster, it is called "fight ot flight response" modern words for it is Anxiety neourosis
@@Synthematix Agreed, it has been said that humans and chimpanzees have more pronounced proactive aggression which gets resolved with fight or flight response, while bonobos have more pronounced reactive aggression which gets resolved by sociosexuality.
Since humans are said to be generalist species then it probably depends on a specific environment and social attutudes (pan troglodytes like proactive political games over status and offspring compared to pan paniscus society based on reactive socially functional same sex bonding and playful group bonding for reconciliation regardless of age). Or human society after the agricultural/pastoral revolution based on competitive possessiveness over private property (marriage, amatonormativity), inheritance, virginity and maximization of birth rates according to antinatalism based on consent. Not sure about Melanesians, Trobrianders, !Kung, Bafia people, Mosuo and all the extinct undocumented egalitarian hunter-gatherer societies with partible paternity and alloparenting.
I feel people honestly don't appreciate or understand the vast amounts of time this all took place over. It's really mind-boggling. Generation after generation reproducing over endless time with little changes here and there eventually adding up to whole new species. It's crazy to think about, but totally makes sense.
All life on earth is dependent on the DNA molecule that regulates bodily functions and transmits hereditary information to progeny. That is very strong evidence for common ancestry in that there are about 1 million other molecules that could conceivably perform the same function.
*THE FACT THAT THE DNA MOLECULE IS BOTH HERITABLE AND MUTABLE MAKES EVOLUTION INEVITABLE.*
Here's one way to imagine vast amounts of time: Imagine that a meter stick represents 1000 years. 1 year would be a millimeter and 25 years would be an inch. 1 million years would be a kilometer. The age of the Earth would be about the width of the US.
Science writer Kenneth F. Weaver wrote of the Miocene epoch in National Geographic: "A gulf of mystery separates Aegyptopithecus at 33 million years and Australopithecus at four million. Candidates for intermediate ancestors that have been proposed at one time or another include two from Kenya known as Proconsul and Kenyapithecus; two from India, Pakistan, China, and Kenya called Ramapithecus and Sivapithecus; and two from Europe called Rudapithecus and Dryopithecus. These apelike creatures lived at various times between 8 and 20 million years ago."
"Despite much debate and speculation, none of these primates has been finally accepted as a human ancestor . . . the long geologic epoch known as the Miocene (24 million to 5 million years ago) will remain a largely veiled chapter in hominid evolution." Kenneth F. Weaver, The Search For Our Ancestors, National Geographic, November, 1985, pp.581-582.
*"We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."* - Carl Sagan
Doesn't get more elitist than that. I bet Sagan couldn't tend to a tomato plant.
@@Rockhound6165 *_"WISE MEN SPEAK WHEN THEY HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY, FOOLS SPEAK BECAUSE THEY MUST SAY SOMETHING."_* Plato said that c. 300 BCE. You just confirmed your status as fool.
Truly a genius who walked amongst men.
@@Rockhound6165 "A wise man speaks when he has something to say. A fool speaks because he has to say something." - Plato (c. 400 BCE). Thanks for proving it is still true. You had best stick with rocks. Thinking is not something you are good at.
@@RandallWilkshurrrr durrrr look at me im soooooo smart i quoted Carl Sagan and Plato!!! I’m so much more intelligent than my inferior primate counterparts
6:34 me running from my responsibilities
Phly your hear bro im a big fan
didn’t expect you here holy fuk.
Phlopy wopy
Ha I don’t even know you and still subscribed
Hahhahhhhh
This is the proof, cameramen are immortal
If apes evolved to humans then how come there is still apes and monkeys in the zoo
@@mathias5980 hahahahahahah. bruh. 😂😂😂😂.
@@mathias5980 most people are blind
Cameraman is God after all
@@mathias5980 You can’t be serious…
FUN FACT: All chordates possess a tail and pharyngeal slits at some point in their lives, and humans are no exception. Early on in human development, the embryo has both a tail and pharyngeal slits, both of which are lost during the course of development. Pharyngeal slits are openings in the pharynx of a vertebrate embryo that develop into gill arches in the bony fishes and into the jaws and inner ear in the terrestrial vertebrates. Pharyngeal slits and tails are found in the embryos of all vertebrates because they share as common ancestors the fish in which these structures first evolved.
Every human embryo starts to develop a tail for a brief period during our embryonic development. At between 4 and 5 weeks of age, the normal human embryo has 10-12 developing tail vertebrae. It is most pronounced at around day 31 to 35 of gestation and then regresses into the four or five fused vertebrae becoming our coccyx.
A similar thing happens in the dolphin embryo. Hind limb buds form in early embryos, but just as with the human tail, they are usually resorbed prior to birth. Usually, but not always. On very rare occasions, cetaceans have been found with external hind limbs (flippers).
One such four finned dolphin with well-developed, symmetrical fins, later named Haruka, was captured by Japanese fishermen in 2006 in the cove at Taiji, Kujirakan province, Japan. (The location made infamous by the documentary "The Cove".) Initially it was one of 108 dolphins rounded up at one time for slaughter. Because of its unusual appendages it was spared and kept as the featured attraction in the aquarium of the Taiji Whale Museum. As with other dolphins at the aquarium it was trained to invert for regular physical examination. It died in 2014 and has been preserved for future study.
يبدو انك تعرف الكثير عن التطور اتسمح لي ان اسئلك بعض الأسئلة
Human Genome is a book, each chapter describing the description and recipe of a common ancestor.
From Zygote to birth, an individual completes the full evolution from a single-cell organism to a Human infant.
@@earth2k66Sorry, but that is wrong. What you stated is, in essence, the 19th century hypothesis put forth by German biologist Ernst Haeckel; "Ontogeny recapitulates Phylogeny". Despite similarities of early embryos, the hypothesis does not standup to closer examination.
@@user-yg1sh6jm7u Fire away.
Evolution from one variety of ape to another variety of ape.
why is no one talking about how beautiful the animation is.
@@malakaihernandez2235 sup
@@malakaihernandez2235 why you @ting me?
Cuz it's not
@@malakaihernandez2235 yep
@@malakaihernandez2235 true
Humans million years ago: Hunts various animals with ease
Humans now: Scared of flying cockroach
Edit: There’s a dumb conflict going on in my reply section
@@pureone8350 You know what’s sarcasm?
Lmao
☮
Evolution: create mechanism of fearing of the cockroaches, rats or other beings that spread disease so human can survive and spread his genes.
Human:Haha modern human fear bugs.
AAAA
Atheism is a non prophet world view that rejects magic as an explanation.
Denial is not refutation. There is a reason creationists keep attacking a man who has been dead for 130 years; it's a soft target, so much easier to attack a dead man than evolution itself which comes from the combined work of the millions of scientists in multiple fields of study.
Denial as you say is most commonly seen as = a reaction to what is not understood. Yet as you alluded to one can today avail themselves to information such that the argument of "not knowing" becomes a pitiful excuse as everything is out in the open and easily accessible.
Therefore "denialism" comes to be emblematic of what is really = _"ideological irrationality."_ People who have hitched their wagons as it were to what are usually dogmatic, static beliefs for which they are unable/willinging to let go - to say nothing of considering other possibilities.
Such a paradigm becomes little more than = _"willful ignorance."_ They attack via "abstracts" and as you say "soft targets" - which are merely "foils" they use to justify their denialism - because in the end they have no plausible counterpoint. Everything they claim to believe in represents subjective assumption of validity = which is impossible to quantify to others as it is only real for the individual contingent upon their desire to believe it. 🤨
@@varyolla435 Right on.
I believe in evolutionary creationion
@@varyolla435Actually adam had parents and he was not the first human, same as eve (he is the ancestor of homo sapiens/neanderthals), and he from earlier human race. Later jews aded Hypotheses and myths about him.
@@educationforblind6362 Nobody gives a shit what you choose to believe. Beliefs exist in the human mind and cannot be distinguished from delusions. TRUTH is determined by EVIDENCE.
"Reject humanity"
"Return to Monke"
I have ascended beyond you filthy mortals for I am now monke
@Bo Spoonson the way of monke has allowed me to answer the question: is water wet?
The answer is ......... yes’nt
Atheists be like: Grandpa! 😍
@Bo Spoonson cap
Hahahh why do you want to reject human?
Monke no wanted leave tree. Monke leave tree. Sad monke. Now human.
Monke became sus!!1!1!!!1😳😳
Bro you made my day
monke now human and human want go to monke
we didnt evolve from monke
@@ayyvibin6977 Let me guess.Hardvore Christian???
*FACT: No one is born with a language or religion.* A developing child is capable of learning any language, just as it is capable of learning any religion. The ability of a child to learn another language diminishes with age, as also happens with patterns of thought. As Albert Einstein noted "What passes for common sense is the collection of prejudices we acquire by age 18". He also said; "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."
In essence a child is imprinted by the family and society into which it is born. It takes concentrated effort to alter those learned behaviors and few are capable of doing so. Being confronted by new information that conflicts with those learned behaviors will likely result in the discomfort known as 'cognitive dissonance'. Ideas and attitudes absorbed by a child's mind were not reasoned there, and in most cases, cannot be reasoned out of them.
There is no evidence for ANY creation event. NONE, ZIP. NADA. It does not exist because there was no 'creator'. What anyone chooses to believe exists in their mind and cannot be distinguished from delusion. There are more than 3000 creation stories; they all originated in the imaginations of primitive peoples. They exist today as culturally sanctioned superstitions.
Yes. Children are born lacking a "preference" for sound creation if you will. They will "imprint" as you noted onto sounds they are exposed to in their environment - specifically certain languages those around them. This by the way is the concept behind certain baby videos which use visual imagery to keep the infant's attention as it is exposed to different languages being articulated.
Each language representing certain sounds inherent to that language has been shown to stimulate specific areas of the brain. So exposing the infant at an early age to "complex sounds" results in more "global stimulation" within their brains. In other words a child exposed to say English will after some months imprint upon that language and the sounds its pronunciation is based upon. Consequently its' brain will focus upon those areas impacted by that sound - to the potential detriment of other areas - as those areas are the ones being mostly used.
So the concept behind the science is to expose the infant to different languages - read a variety of complex sounds - which results in a more active brain = hopefully stimulating better intelligence as it grows. If you eat the same food day after day then that is all your taste buds know. If you however vary your diet you will come to develop a taste for other things. The more you use your brain as opposed to lapsing into "a rut" = the greater your potential thinking skills can be.
*SOME PEOPLE STILL ASK, "WHY ARE THERE STILL APES (OR MONKEYS)?"*
It should be obvious that such people lack an understanding of what evolution is and how it works. Apparently someone told such people that humans evolved from apes, and from that, due to their lack of education, they assumed that all apes were supposed to evolve into humans. That is not how evolution works, but creationists have no interest in learning anything other than creation mythology.
They might just as well have asked "If dogs are descended from wolves, why are there still wolves?" Or even "If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?" Just as dogs descended from a population of wolves, so too did humans evolve from one particular population of apes.
What we know is that the first apes evolved in Africa about 25 million years ago from a population of Old World Monkeys. Whereas monkeys run on all four feet across the TOPS of branches, apes evolved the ability to swing, arm over arm, from branch to branch. Evolution works to make each species best suited to their environment. For apes, that environment was the forest and they are well suited for it. At one time there were about 30 different species of apes in those forests.
Had environmental conditions remained the same, we would still see forests covering the whole African continent. However, conditions did not stay the same; the climate became drier. As a result, forested areas shrank in size and were replaced by grasslands, the African savanna, with just a few scattered trees. The shrinking forests put different ape species in competition with each other and many went extinct.
Then, about 6 or 7 million years ago, one population of apes split, with some of them opting for life on that open savanna. All apes are capable of walking upright, they are just not comfortable doing so for long periods of time. Recent experiments with trained chimps on a treadmill have shown that for them, walking upright was more efficient in terms of energy expended than quadrupedal walking. Chimps and other apes though must shift their weight from side to side while walking bipedaly.
That savanna environment favored skeletal changes that placed the knees directly under the center of gravity. by about 4 mya, our ancestral australopithecines had almost the same pelvis, femur, knees and feet as modern humans. That gave them a smooth stride that was efficient for long distance travel. They did however, retain long arms and curved fingers enabling them to climb a tree when danger threatened.
The apes that remained in a forest environment were under little pressure to change. They became the ancestors of today's chimps and bonobos. Those living in the open were presented challenges not experienced by woodland apes, and that required greater intelligence and cooperation to overcome them. It set their descendants on a different evolutionary trajectory that culminated in us.
I had trouble explaining this ! Thanks for the help 😅
@@Xithin87 That's my job. You're welcome.
It really annoys me when people don't take the time to understand evolution and just dismiss it as just a theory, one thing they can't really understand is the amount of time it takes for species to evolve (no one can really appreciate just how long 50 million years are and what can happen to things in that amount of time.. I use the dog wolf analogy sometimes but even then they argue and say man created dogs from cross breading 😊. Trying to explain about common ancestors helps. I just wish they would teach it more in schools.
The Blind Watchmaker and the Selfish Gene,
Books by Richard Dawkins are an excellent read.
@@paul9570 As Albert Eistein said, "Anyone can 'know', the point is to _understand._ Problem is, creationists have no desire to understand. They are told that it is 'against their religion' to do so. Many, if not all of those who self identify as , subscribe to some version of this infamous “Statement of Faith” from the creationist website 'Answers in Genesis'. It precludes any serious inquiry:
_"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information."_
That is not a search for truth. That statement makes it perfectly clear that YECs will not consider anything that conflicts with their preconceived assumptions, so whatever evidence is presented is disregarded. That is the very antithesis of science whose only mandate is to follow evidence wherever it leads. TRUTH is determined by EVIDENCE, not by what anyone says and not by words in an old book. The rules of evidence are this: *If you don't have any...YOU LOSE!*
There are mountains of evidence from multiple scientific fields of inquiry that all consistently arrive at the same conclusions in support of evolution. Nothing in science is ever considered 'proven'. However, when all evidence points in the same direction and none refutes it, that is as close to absolute certainty as it gets in science.
A Scientific Theory is an explanation for observed phenomena. That is true of Germ Theory, Atomic Theory, Heliocentric Theory, Theory of Evolution, Theories of Relativity; ALL SCIENTIFIC THEORIES. No Scientific Theory is considered 'proven'. If anyone can provide contrdictory evidence, please write it up and submit it to one of the science journals for peer review and publication. Should you succeed in refuting any scientific theory you would be assured instant fame and a certain A Scientific Theory is an explanation for observed phenomena. That is true of Germ Theory, Atomic Theory, Heliocentric Theory, Theory of Evolution, Theories of Relativity; ALL SCIENTIFIC THEORIES.
@@paul9570 I taught History and Science to advanced placement middle school students who were eager to learn. While I admire teachers, some I talked with revealed that they never took college classes that were not required for getting Teaching Credentials. I saw my task as educating teachers as well as students. When asked how they taught science subjects, they said they simply read ahead in the student textbooks. When I asked about how they taught evolution, some said they presented 'both sides' and let the students decide. I had to wonder if they taught astronomy/astrology that way.
" Man was now armed "
sounds more of a threat than a evolutionary level-up
Tier zoo reference?
@bleh fun fact:human are design to be omnivore
@bleh eating less meat won't help the planet idiot
fuck is going on
i just typed this comment because i thought its funny
i started a war without even knowing it
@bleh imagine being that vegan teacher fan
Animals : *kills human*
Ancestors of early human : makes sharp stick
Animals : "so thats when my time was up and i was told to leave"
this is accurate
Lol
Humans are animal too.
Lmao
@Madara Uchiha i hate my life
You can deny the value of the Theory of Evolution to Biology all you want, but it will gain you as much respect as denying the Spherical Earth.
Listen weetard your non-white skull can't comprehend anything but whatever the Eternal Kike shills to you. Silence your swarthoid noises.
The most powerful and epic story of all - is truth. Far more fascinating than any creation myth.
No sir...evolution is a myth. Creation is a true story. We are all made in the image of the Living God. Not in the image of an ape. Do not let satan blind your eyes 😢
@@Allaboutjesus237 ignorant idiot wants to talk about myths. Lol, lmao even.
@@Allaboutjesus237 That’s like saying sexual reproduction is a myth and babies coming from storks is a true story.
@@Allaboutjesus237nobody wants to hear your bullshit about god
@@Allaboutjesus237shut up
Back in my day's.....
Have you been friends with gorillas and orangutans? (I know ur gonna say no)
" Reject Humanity. Return to Monke. " 🤝🏽
Grandpa??!!
@@hhfbko 😂
@@xx_stqrxappie_xx9740 What question it's that of course yes but not with gorillas.....-___- don't ask why
My little brother walked in during the half human half monkey part and asked if I was watching monkey porn
Good times
Say yes
Guess he drank dad's angry juice huh?
wtf, monkey porn exists?
Rule 34, if it exists there is porn of it
@@godzillaglasses3629 oof I dont get it
*WHAT DARWIN KNEW* In 1830, at age 21, Charles Darwin graduated Cambridge University with a degree in theology. Had it not been for one of his theology professors, Reverend Professor John Stevens Henslow who was also a biologist, Darwin would surely have faded into obscurity as an ordinary Anglican (Church of England) minister.
At that time, theology professors were also expected to teach other subjects and young Charles Darwin eagerly sought out such teachers, one of which was Henslow. In his eagerness to learn about the natural world, Darwin would often question his tutor between classes. This was noted so often that Darwin became known as "The man who walks with Henslow". Even after graduation, Henslow encouraged his young protege to study geology with Reverend Professor Adam Sedgwick.
It was Henslow to whom the position of ship's naturalist was first offered by Captain Robert FitzRoy of the HMS Beagle. At the time, FitzRoy and the Beagle were preparing for an extended voyage of discovery, charting the waters of South America. Henslow declined that offer due to his wife's opposition, but recommended his young student in his stead. Darwin's social status also made him a suitable traveling companion for a ship's captain who is, for reasons of discipline, denied familiarity with his crew.
Despite young Darwin's fascination with the natural world he was not yet a scientist. During the voyage however, Darwin was shipping fossils and plant and animal specimens back to Henslow and others who eagerly awaited them. He learned much in the process due to his powers of observation. He published his account of the expedition as 'The Voyage of the Beagle'. Two years later he was nominated and elected a member (Fellow) of the British "Royal Society", which conferred upon him the right to use the letters FRS (Fellow of the Royal Society) as part of his name.* At that point, Charles Darwin was a recognized scientist.
Darwin's knowledge of geology had served him well during the voyage, during which he furthered that knowledge by reading Charles Lyell's 'Principles of Geology'. Lyell is famous for the principle of "Uniformitarianism"; that the earth has been altered by physical, chemical, and biological processes that are uniform through time. Darwin himself later authored books on geology, resulting in his being elected a Fellow (member) of the Royal geographical Society (FRGS), permitting his use of those letters in his name. Those books:
The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs (1842.
Geological Observations on the Volcanic Islands (1844),
Geological observations on the volcanic islands and parts of South America visited during the voyage of H.M.S. Beagle (1877)
Darwin's curiosity and search for knowledge lead him to do research and write books on such diverse subjects as barnacles, orchids, earthworms, carnivorous plants, et al, In total 19 books, and thousands of letters to family and colleagues, all available on-line.
His seminal work of course was his "On the Origin of species by Means of Natural Selection" published in 1859 when he was 50. It was the culmination of almost 30 years of work.
That was followed 12 years later by "The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex" which reignited a firestorm of protests from fundamentalist creationists.
By any measure, the life of Charles Robert Darwin FRS FRGS FLS FZS was one of great accomplishment.He was honored in life by those fellowships, not only the Royal Society and Royal geographical Society, but also the Linnaean Society and Zoological Society.
Today there are those who fear his revelations weaken religious belief, and so will attempt to vilify him with slander and lies at any opportunity. Of what value is such a religion?
*The Royal Society of the U.K, is, like the U.S. National Academy of Sciences that was patterned after it, an organization of the top scientific minds of the nation. Fellowship is by invitation only; new members are nominated and voted upon by current members. Those so chosen are entitled to use the letters FRS. (Fellow of the Royal Society) as part of their name. Charles Darwin was one of those so honored.
To be continued.
This is how documentaries and video should be made on science
The cameraman needs to get paid more ngl.
such a hard work to keep filming on and on for all those years 🙏🙏🙏
@@chazzywaz I agree.
@@esrauzuner3757 🙏🙏🙏
I might get the joke but its still animated
I heard he used TVA portals
F for that one ancestor who killed by the bear
@Bo Spoonson wait but how did those apes evolve but our "cousins" didn't?
@Bo Spoonson Nope. I aint related to all creature in the whole world. No animal has a black man dna! Maybe your race is related to canines but we're not
@@calvindike8402 dude, you're dna is almost the same as any other person on earth you doughnut
@@Rebelconformist82 that is one rare insult
@@xmimagma4630 yeah, I can safely say I've never used it before in my life. lol
It's really not that long ago in geological terms that we became us and historical humans are less than the blink of an eye and yet the development has been incredible.
Punctuated equilibrium can do that in matters of evolution. When a grouping finds itself in a favorable environment where there is not a lot of competition it favors new adaptation occurring as well as the passing on of those new traits. If however you have a stable environment with loads of others you tend to see "more of the same" as the occasional new adaptation has more competition before it can be passed on.
Also it is important to take physiology into account. More than anything else probably it was the harnessing of fire which amplified our evolution. Think herbivores which constitute most mammalian species. They spend most of their waking time = eating. Because they consume plant matter which is not highly nutritious they derive little value from it necessitating large quantities to survive.
We however cook our food. That breaks down the molecular structure of the food allowing us to absorb more nutrients = which gives our bodies more energy and facilitates a higher level of metabolic functioning. So harnessing fire and cooking our food as well as our eating a diverse diet meant our brain functioning could grow and our bodies could also accommodate additional evolution. This is why coincidentally people who suffer from chronic malnutrition can suffer cognitive and physiological impairments as their bodies are not getting enough energy/nutrition to grow and function properly.
I now believe that my dad did in fact crossed jungles and saharas just to go to school. I'm honestly suprised to see him here
Knowing they roamed an empty earth where there’s now cities and houses musta been surreal
Maybe because it is surreal when you actually think about it
@@crypto2633 every day is an existential crisis
I always think the same. Like just imagine running around haveing the time of your life and a fucking 19 foot spider swallows you whole
@@lawrencehile9902 no.
@@lawrencehile9902 No.
Humans billions of years ago: killing elephants with ease
Humans now: *scared of barking dog*
Bruh lol yeah
Croner God r/wooooosh it’s a fucking joke you don’t have to ruin it with your smart ass
Elijah Mathews Henry elephants can tusk you or stomp you
you mean scared of a little rat
im not scared wen i have my spear with me :P
*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. WITH mutations, evolution is inevitable.
[NOTE: My original essay had links to applicable illustrations and scientific studies, but UA-cam keeps deleting it. My apologies for their absence here.]
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 grasping 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 descent with modification 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 thousands of generations of holding things, is clearly an enlarged bone (the “radial sesamoid”) in the the paw of a bear.
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 only scattered 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 homologous 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.
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 them 4 expeditions over 4 years, searching during the short summers of that hostile environment but finally succeeded in 2004, returning with 9 specimens of the fish they named Tiktaalik (an Inuit word meaning large freshwater fish).
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.
God created everything how dare you reject God
@@YoItsmike171 GOD WAS A TREMENDOUS INVENTION AND A GREAT BENEFIT TO MANKIND. Before man created God, they felt really stupid. Confronted with any question, all they could say was "Gee, I don't know" and no matter how hard they thought, they couldn't think of a better answer.
Then someone came up with the brilliant idea of God. It was wonderful, it obviated the need to think about anything. The answer could always be "Gee, I don't know, it must be God." Problem solved. The "God concept" alleviated the need to think about mundane things and they could concentrate on serious questions, like "How many bibles can we sell?" There was no incentive for human intellect to advance beyond that of ancient goat herders. Religions need to perpetuate ignorance in order to preserve their influence.
It is quite likely that the "god concept" originated with Homo erectus as an explanation for thunder.
*FACTS ABOUT THE BIBLE* People reading the bible should realize that every single supposed incident took place within an extremely small radius of the middle east. According to Barnes' Notes on the Bible, the direct distance of Babylon from Jerusalem is about 520 miles (as the crow flies); the more circuitous route used by caravans or armies went via Carchemish and the Orontes valley, is about 900 miles. The shorter route was through the Syrian Desert and few survived that trip.
Virtually every other event in the bible took place in a much smaller radius of Jerusalem, the capitol of the Kingdom of Judah. The Judahites (the original Jews), were genetically identical to Canaanites, their alphabet and language both derived from Canaanite precursors, as was their religion. Genetically, the 'Israelites' were Canaanites, as were the Edomites, Ammonites, Phoenecians and other peoples of the Levant. The Philistines however, were foreign invaders that took over 5 coastal cities. The "Israelites" were pastoral Canaanites that left coastal areas for the hill country and established a separate identity.
According to Bible Odyssey, Egypt is mentioned in the Hebrew Bible almost seven hundred times, and it is referred to another 25 times in the New Testament, making it the most frequently mentioned place name outside Canaan in the Bible. Egypt during biblical times, was already an ancient civilization and the pyramids were thousands of years old.
For all the times Egypt is mentioned in the bible, never once was there any reference either the pyramids or the Great Sphinx, most likely because those who wrote the bible were never there.
For instance, there is no mention in any Egyptian writing of any of the biblical patriarches who supposedly vistited there; not Abraham and Sarah; not of Joseph who supposedly attained high rank in Pharaoh's court; nor any mention of his supposed progeny, the Israelites, that supposedly spent 400 years in slavery there. Not once is there any mention of a man named Moses, nor anyone like him. According to the bible, Moses also supposedly had high rank in a later pharaoh's court yet there is no mention of him in Egyptian records. According to the bible, Moses was saved as an infant by his mother floating him down the Nile in a reed boat.
That story is virtually identical to the that of Sargon II (aka 'Sargon the Great'), a real person, known to history as ruler of the Neo Assyrian Empire who in 721 BCE defeated and destroyed the ancient Kingdom of Israel, making it the Assyrian province Samaria. The legend of Sargon II as a baby being saved by his mother by floating him in a reed boat down the Euphrates River was well known throughout Mesopotamia. It would have also been known by the Judean peoples, including the priests and scribes who were writing the Tanakh during the Babylonian Exile of the those peoples, 597 BCE to 538 BCE . Almost 700 years later, the Hebrew Tanakh was adopted by Christianity as the "Old Testament".
Also absent from Egyptian records is any mention of deaths of all first born children in Egypt, something that would have been noted everywhere in Egypt. Nor any mention of sticks turning into snakes. No mention or even evidence of a significant loss of population and the economic impact it would have had, and no mention of the loss of a pharaoh, let alone loss of an army with 500 chariots that would have weakened Egypt militarily for decades to come.
TRUTH is determined by EVIDENCE, not by what anyone says and not by words in an old book. The rules of evidence are this: *If you don't have any...YOU LOSE!*
There are however, unscrupulous people, motivated by religious fervor, that would go so far as to manufacture bogus evidence they hope would support a story they really wish to be true. Such a person was Ron Wyatt, a con man whose only legitimate occupation was as nurse-anesthetist in a hospital in Madison, Tennessee. When he found he could make money 'gaslighting' religious fanatics his financial situation improved immensely. This 'Indiana Jones wannabe' has no archeological qualifications whatsoever, yet has claimed almost 100 Bible-related discoveries. He has been criticized by scientists, historians, biblical scholars, as well as some creationists. He ranks among the great con artists who find fertile ground among people who have a compulsive need to believe.
Now there are many people who have been taught since childhood that the bible is the absolute word of god, that everything in it is the literal truth and if they don't believe it, they will burn in Hell forever and ever, because god loves you. You were told that by the people who raised you, fed you, cared for you and probably loved you. They told you that, because that is what THEIR parents told THEM. THAT is indoctrination.
A belief is an idea that neither seeks nor requires verifiable evidence. Beliefs exist in the human mind. Those who seek answers based on opinions or beliefs are most likely to fall prey to self deception and seek confirmation of their bias. Truth is determined by EVIDENCE, not by what anyone says and not by words in some old book.
FUN FACT. RandallWilks just gave you a dose of evolutionist, pseudo academic flimflam.
REAL FACT: A transitional form struggling to survive over a long period of time with a half formed wing, or partially formed leg would perish in Darwin's struggle for existence over the course of a few generations. We need fully formed species with well adapted organs and habits to survive in earth's ecosystem. Most species are already perfectly adapted to their surroundings and have no need to 'evolve". 2) Evolution supposedly proceeds through genetic innovation, whereby new chromosomal changes take place, to produce a new organ for better survival value. This would involve either an instantaneous transformation or origination of a novel body structure, or as you claim, a slow, gradual process. An instantaneous transformation would involve thousands of genes all changing at once, like a miracle from the Bible, i.e. water turning into wine. I have no problem with that. But if it is the latter, then there would need to be a sequential series of changes all beneficial. Think of the extreme improbability of rolling double sixes just 100 times in a row, then 101 times, 102 times, each time you got it wrong you would have to start all over again, until by some fantastic coincidence (statisticians have proven that it couldn't happen) you made it to 30,000 times in a row. According to some calculations, the probability for this is greater than ten to the eightieth power, which is ten followed by eighty zeroes, which means, according to statistical analysis, that it would never happen. Some have compared this to the entire United States of America being filled with nickels two feet high, and a blind man with a cane walking through and picking up the one nickel with a dab of paint on it.
The estimated time for this to happen would be after the entire galaxy had turned cold and dead. To illustrate this, a cell has at least 30,000 different types of protein molecules that have to be functioning perfectly and in harmony with the rest of the cell for life to function, and they have to be active from the very start. Genes create these proteins. It just takes one gene to be out of order in a cells DNA for any one of literally thousands of fatal diseases to develop. Now let us say for the sake of simplicity that we only have two types of genes that exist, and they have to be in the right order of relationship in two different places of the genetic code. Let us call them 1 and 2. Here are the number of possibilities: 1,1; 1,2; 2,1: 2,2. So we would have one chance in four of obtaining the right sequence for life to exist. Now, lets add just one more number, and one more place to be filled. How many possibilities do we have with three numbers? 1,1,1; 1,1,2; 1,1,3; 1,2,1; 1,2,2; 1,2,3; 1,3,1; 1,3,2; 1,3,3; 2,1,1; 2,1,2; 2,1,3; 2,2,1; 2,2,2; 2,2,3; 2,3,1; 2,3,2; 2,3,3; 3,1,1; 3,1,2; 3,1,3; 3,2,1; 3,2,2; 3,2,3; 3,3,1; 3,3,2; 3,3,3;. In adding just one more unit we go from four possibilities to twenty seven possibilities. How many possibilities do we have if we raise the amount from three to four different types of genes? Two hundred and fifty four possibilities; With five different types of genes we would have one chance in three thousand one hundred and twenty five; For six, one chance in forty six thousand six hundred and fifty six possibilities; Seven, one chance in eight hundred and twenty three thousand five hundred and forty three; Eight, sixteen million seven hundred and seventy seven thousand two hundred and sixteen; Nine, three hundred and eighty seven million, four hundred and twenty thousand four hundred and eighty nine; with ten different types of genes, the chance for them to all be correctly associated in the right order would be one in ten billion. That’s one followed by ten zeroes. For twenty different genes to be in the right order of relationship the possible combinations are greater than one followed by twenty-six zeroes, and we haven’t even begun to approach what the odds are for many thousands of genes to get into the right order by chance for even a minute part of a living cell to function.
Highlighted reply
@jimfoard5671
FUN FACT. RandallWilks just gave you a dose of evolutionist, pseudo academic flimflam.
REAL FACT: A transitional form struggling to survive over a long period of time with a half formed wing, or partially formed leg would perish in Darwin's struggle for existence over the course of a few generations. We need fully formed species with well adapted organs and habits to survive in earth's ecosystem. Most species are already perfectly adapted to their surroundings and have no need to 'evolve". 2) Evolution supposedly proceeds through genetic innovation, whereby new chromosomal changes take place, to produce a new organ for better survival value. This would involve either an instantaneous transformation or origination of a novel body structure, or as you claim, a slow, gradual process. An instantaneous transformation would involve thousands of genes all changing at once, like a miracle from the Bible, i.e. water turning into wine. I have no problem with that. But if it is the latter, then there would need to be a sequential series of changes all beneficial. Think of the extreme improbability of rolling double sixes just 100 times in a row, then 101 times, 102 times, each time you got it wrong you would have to start all over again, until by some fantastic coincidence (statisticians have proven that it couldn't happen) you made it to 30,000 times in a row. According to some calculations, the probability for this is greater than ten to the eightieth power, which is ten followed by eighty zeroes, which means, according to statistical analysis, that it would never happen. Some have compared this to the entire United States of America being filled with nickels two feet high, and a blind man with a cane walking through and picking up the one nickel with a dab of paint on it.
The estimated time for this to happen would be after the entire galaxy had turned cold and dead. To illustrate this, a cell has at least 30,000 different types of protein molecules that have to be functioning perfectly and in harmony with the rest of the cell for life to function, and they have to be active from the very start. Genes create these proteins. It just takes one gene to be out of order in a cells DNA for any one of literally thousands of fatal diseases to develop. Now let us say for the sake of simplicity that we only have two types of genes that exist, and they have to be in the right order of relationship in two different places of the genetic code. Let us call them 1 and 2. Here are the number of possibilities: 1,1; 1,2; 2,1: 2,2. So we would have one chance in four of obtaining the right sequence for life to exist. Now, lets add just one more number, and one more place to be filled. How many possibilities do we have with three numbers? 1,1,1; 1,1,2; 1,1,3; 1,2,1; 1,2,2; 1,2,3; 1,3,1; 1,3,2; 1,3,3; 2,1,1; 2,1,2; 2,1,3; 2,2,1; 2,2,2; 2,2,3; 2,3,1; 2,3,2; 2,3,3; 3,1,1; 3,1,2; 3,1,3; 3,2,1; 3,2,2; 3,2,3; 3,3,1; 3,3,2; 3,3,3;. In adding just one more unit we go from four possibilities to twenty seven possibilities. How many possibilities do we have if we raise the amount from three to four different types of genes? Two hundred and fifty four possibilities; With five different types of genes we would have one chance in three thousand one hundred and twenty five; For six, one chance in forty six thousand six hundred and fifty six possibilities; Seven, one chance in eight hundred and twenty three thousand five hundred and forty three; Eight, sixteen million seven hundred and seventy seven thousand two hundred and sixteen; Nine, three hundred and eighty seven million, four hundred and twenty thousand four hundred and eighty nine; with ten different types of genes, the chance for them to all be correctly associated in the right order would be one in ten billion. That’s one followed by ten zeroes. For twenty different genes to be in the right order of relationship the possible combinations are greater than one followed by twenty-six zeroes, and we haven’t even begun to approach what the odds are for many thousands of genes to get into the right order by chance for even a minute part of a living cell to function.
What is a creationist's favorite button in pokemon?
B to cancel evolution
What blows my mind is that out of all the generations of hominids born before me stretching back millions of years; I was lucky enough to be born now, in the only time it's been possible to know about our hominid ancestors! *hits bong again*
Some of these 'ancestors' hang around the city bus transfer plaza I use. I guess that's where they got the models.
even our dinosaur ancestors
What if carnation is real
@@versedxxx8805 They are real. I have some in my garden.
@@kaks14 hahaha
Imagine million of years later they making video how humans todays looked like
That would actually be possible
I am just hoping that in the future, there would be no racism, homophobia, hypocrites, irrational beliefs, anymore, and various diverse people and different expressions exist even if I am already dead.
There’d be no need. They’d have pictures of us.
And that is true
that is like saying...what will be coolest killing spear look like in a million years from now from a caveman perspective. I promise you we will not be making videos a million years from now.
The difference between faith and insanity is that insanity is the ability to hold firmly to a conclusion that is incompatible with the evidence, whereas faith is the ability to hold firmly to a conclusion that is incompatible with the evidence.
in science you learn not to say we have proof its not even observed evolution lol
inductive reasonings for pokemons
@@amosamwig8394 Thanks for once again demonstrating your abysmal ignorance of anything related to science. Get a brain.
@@amosamwig8394 Meh.
@@amosamwig8394everyone observes evolution. You are evolving.
Thank you for your work Randall
Creationism and poor education go hand in hand.
Ong bro
wish i had a time machine so i could know wtf happened back then
They're on sale at Costco, so better hurry.
The day consists of Waking up when light out(since they didnt know about time they only knew that dark means sleep liggt means hunt) go out and hunt animals(took them about 3-9 hours) than bringing the food back and cooking it thats basically what they did
I agree with you the world is so mysterious it always make us curious!!! Most of the scientific explanation are just hypothetical and based on what they observe around but no clear evidences!!! If the human came from apes!!! Why the monkeys nowadays doesn't evolve? They're still a monkey!!! And if you guys say that those monkeys like Australopithecus, homo erectus, and etc: evolves to human being!!! But what's the origination too of those monkeys? Where did they came from? And how it diversified into different races?
@@honeybadger469 The evidence is in the DNA and how these animals - birds, giraffes, snakes etc. - have adapted to their environments.
How do you know monkeys are NOT EVOLVING into something akin to humans, after all they've come from the same evolutionary branch? No one knows. Evolution is not quiescent. But then again why should they evolve into humans? They've stayed pretty much a monkey over the millennia, albeit with certain adaptations. They found their niche, i.e, jungle/rainforests, and their environment didn't demand that they become anything more than a monkey, nor did they have a desire to step outside that environment, unlike man.
What's the origin of monkeys? Man and chimp shared a common ancestor about 6 million years ago, at which point there was a divergence in the evolutionary branch. The origin of all mammals come from those small ground dwelling animals that existed at the time of the dinosaurs. When that meteorite hit the earth some 66 million years ago and wiped out the dinosaurs as well as the majority of animal species on earth, those ground dwelling animals began their ascent to become the dominant species on earth.
@@jamesanthony5681 @James Anthony 😂😂😂😂oh really? They just jumped into this conclusions only on their own analytical observations in the environment!!! But these are still questionable: the question is where did the man and chimp that shared common ancestors came from? What's the origin of these creatures? Also the animals that dwelling on small ground? They must also have an origin! What is this? Did they just grow like a plant? 😂😂and aside from that how did they know that? Are they already alive that time? And take note they know the exact year 6 million years ago!!!
“they gathered and ate everything” ah i see so thats where i got it
Lol wtf
Do you eat durians though?
"oh,i found shit, lets taste it"
@@oreo_249 lololololol
LOL I get it
THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS ARE WHAT REAL SCIENTISTS SAY.
The creationist answer: "Nuh-uh", "Nuh-uh", "Nuh-uh", ad nauseum
They think it is a really powerful argument.
Clueless creatard cliche number 67: Evolution is just a theory.
Reality: Germs. gravity and DNA are also “just a theory”. In science, a theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts. Intelligence design on the other hand is an example of the everyday use of the word “theory”, as it has no proof. Even theistic scientists know this.
go back I want to be monke
Your comment reminded me of the "upgrade., fuck go back!" meme 😂
Me too🐵🐒🦍🦍🦧🦧
We were never monkeys
We are made of dust
@@toastmaker5696 don't reject truth
It's amazing that the skulls remain in the soil for millions of years for us to do such detailed scientific researches on. Without them, we never knew what they looked like or how they evolved. Fossils really are precious legacy of our ancestors.
Keep in mind that the conditions for preservation of the remains of plants and animals are rare and depend on the geologic processes of erosion and deposition. To be preserved as a fossil, the remains of an animal must be covered over, (deposition) soon after death; otherwise scavengers, bacteria, fungi and UV light will reduce them to dust. They can remain in that preserved state so long as they remain in subsurface deposits. Erosion can expose them and once again they will be acted upon by the destructive forces of nature. Some will be the consistency of chalk. They will become known to science only if a paleontologist or other knowledgeable person happens by and recognizes them for want they are.
Very seldom are fossils preserved anywhere near intact as were fossils of Archeopteryx. Those fossils were preserved in exquisite detail because they fell into oxygen depleted lagoons and were slowly covered with fine silt. That silt formed layers that hardened into lithographic limestone, a dense fine grained sedimentary rock forming thin layers that separate easily to form a very smooth surface. It was for that reason that this form of limestone was used for a printing process called lithography.
Those layers could often be opened like a book exposing a fossil and its mirror image, referred to a 'slab' and 'counter slab'. The name Archeopteryx lithographica, originally assigned to a single feather and so named due to being discovered in such deposits.The first body fossil was discovered in Germany in 1861 and secured for the British Museum by the famous anatomist Sir Richard Owen, now known as the 'London Specimen'. A later (1881), more complete fossil, now referred to as the 'Berlin Specimen' had the head with teeth and a snout rather than a beak. To date, there have been a total of 12 archaeopteryx fossils discovered.
and every single such relic that gets destroyed is a loss of information that we can never learn
@@RandallWilks I tried to read your comment, but got exhausted! Why don't you write briefly? That would be useful.
@@404epnf7 You apparently suffer from dyslexia. How sad. I understand treatment is available. Have you sought help? ;-)
@@404epnf7 Bwahahahahahaha!!!! Wow. I had no idea dyslexics were so sensitive about their condition. It seems you also have anger issues and fortunately for you, there is treatment is available for that.
I'm relieved to see that my moobs are just a vestigial remnant of evolution, and not just the result of Cheetos.
I know. Not all of the examples in the animation were male. But let me have my dumb joke. Great post, btw.
The 10 y/o in me laughed at the swinging boobs lol. Thank you for the educational video
Humans then: finally i can make tools
Humans now: go back i want to be monke
*STOP EVELUTION RETURN TO MONKE*
@@NAYEONiZ SHut up the jokes over used find something original
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Hmmm MONKE
@@piglin469 you dont want to let us become monke?
*Then you must suffer*
@@willowgoober I have a gun in my poket its ever be the same like us or die. or go to robot hell
Damn the ardipithicus swinging in the tree part is cursed lol so uncanny
I was looking for a comment abt that 🤣🤣
Ha
Thank god for evolution you are gorgeous
@GRAPHENE IS IN THE MASKS, SWABS and PCR TESTS!!! bruh
Ikr wtf
I subscribed just because I like "scientists against myths" quote
Humans 10000 B.C.E:
" The future is going to be amazing. Endless opportunities for the human kind"
Humans 2021 C.E:
"I'm depressed. I don't want to be human anymore, all I want to be is monke"
Said no one
@@portillamail said reddit
@Supreme Chancellor I know, just stating the group of weirdos that chant this stuff
@@omegamyee5592 Return to monke
@Supreme Chancellor you are basiclly describing r/Opinion XD
The fact that we’re on the same planet where all this happened so many millions of years ago is incredible
what if the place you are living at is the exact same place they stepped on
God created earth and we were never apes
@@grady2744 shut
@@grady2744 talking like you have proof shut up
@@grady2744 dont think god created everything like poop
*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.
Clueless creatard cliche number 96: Evolution means modern animals should be turning into humans.
Reality: Evolution is about promoting the survival of the species. That does not mean becoming human. Wolves evolving into dogs is an example.
Human in the future:
A N I M E E Y E S
What I mean is big eyes but y'know
@@kalvon only a weeb would say that
@@aizn7147 stop the cap
@@aizn7147 that's impossible I highly doubt humans will continue evolving with the stuff we have
@@aizn7147 how am I worrying?
One thing I learned.... we evolved into scared humans from fearless animals
Hell no
better to be a smart coward rather than an ignorant brave person.
A living coward? Or a dead hero?
No, I’m a chicken.
Fearless? I really don't think so. Fear is one of the biggest factor that motives our behavior and make us vulnerable to manipulation
Clueless creatard cliche number 56: Micro evolution is proven but macro evolution isn’t.
Reality: First of all, this is cherry-picking. It’s like saying that “2+2=4 but 2 million + 2 million doesn’t = 4 million.” Secondly, macro evolution is speciation, which has been observable in American Goatsbeard flowers since the 1950s.
FUN NON-FACT! hapillysecular wrote "Clueless creatard cliche number 56: Micro evolution is proven but macro evolution isn’t. Reality: First of all, this is cherry-picking. It’s like saying that “2+2=4 but 2 million + 2 million doesn’t = 4 million.” Secondly, macro evolution is speciation, which has been observable in American Goatsbeard flowers since the 1950s.|
"Secondly, macro evolution is speciation, which has been observable in American Goatsbeard flowers since the 1950s."
Reality check for hapillysecular: First of all, hapillysecular hasn't a clue.
FUN NON-FACT from hapillysecular: " Secondly, macro evolution is speciation, which has been observable in American Goatsbeard flowers since the 1950s."
So what did Goatsbeard Aruncus dioicus "evolve" from except other Aruncus dioicus , and what are they evolving into, except more Aruncus dioicus?
Chester A. Arnold, Professor of botany and the Curator of Fossil Plants at the University of Michigan said,
"As yet we have not been able to trace the phylogenetic history of a single group of modern plants from its beginning to the present." Chester A. Arnold, Botany, pp. 7, An Introduction to Paleobotany, Mcgraw-Hill, New York, 1947.
Of the origin of flowering plants, Michael Neushul wrote:
"The flowers, fruits, and seeds of living plants represent endpoints of past and present environmental influence. Unfortunately, speculation as to how these flowering-plant structures evolved is limited by the absence of a fossil record. Several attempts have been made to fill this gap, and various fossil organisms have been suggested as (possible) intermediate between gymnosperms and angiosperms. . . A clear and undisputable fossil record of early flowering- plant evolution has not been found." Michael Neushul, Botany, pp. 148, Hamilton Publishing Company, Santa Barbara, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1974.
As far as any living intermediate links among plants, Neushul wrote that trying to use an evolutionary system in classifying plants was no help at all, since all plants are quite distinct, and belong to well formed families, orders, etc. with no hint of any evolutionary relationship:
"There is no need to stress the practical importance to humanity of an organized body of knowledge about plants. One of the first steps in organizing botanical information is the development of a system of classification. In the specific case of the flowering plants, various systems of classification have been proposed. Nearly all are attempts to represent evolutionary relationships within the division. The names of classes and subclasses have been frequently modified and their relationship reassessed [i.e. evolutionary systems lead to chaos]. Plant families, on the other hand, are well defined and have remained relatively stable for many years." (Ibid, pp.365)
That, in a nutshell, represents all the evidence that we have for plant evolution. Nothing.
*ALL LIFE ON EARTH IS DEPENDENT ON THE DNA MOLECULE THAT REGULATES BODILY FUNCTIONS AND TRANSMITS HEREDITARY INFORMATION TO PROGENY.* That is very strong evidence for common ancestry in that there are about 1 million other molecules that could conceivably perform the same function.
*THE FACT THAT THE DNA MOLECULE IS BOTH HERITABLE AND MUTABLE MAKES EVOLUTION INEVITABLE.*
Damn, my ancestors were ripped af. And I am here watching this video while eating fries all day.
Yea and thats black ppl that were the first origin people...have to show respect that they still look the same to day.And some changed due to their surroundings :)
@@saffaanuman3885 what?
@@saffaanuman3885 you say WHAAAAAT? No black man I know revolve like this. They as all other homosapiens were created human.
@@saffaanuman3885 lmaaoo, wtf??
@@saffaanuman3885 dude wtf???
0:31 "wait, its all mango?" "always has been"
You got minecraft java edition
@@lucamcardle729 what?
@@boi_johnson do u play minecraft?
@@lucamcardle729 yea why
@@boi_johnson what edition? I have java edition and i wanna play on a realm with someone
Q: Why did the creatard jump off the building?
A: He thought gravity was "just a theory"
Q: Why do creatards pretend that evolution means we came from rocks?
A: Because they themselves made it no further than brainless rocks.
Q: Why do creatards so badly want to believe they’re intelligently designed?
A: When else do they get the chance to say “intelligent” while describing themselves?
It’s crazy cause humans are intelligent but that doesn’t necessarily mean out cause is
Ad hominems are so effective nice argument!
Questions creatards can never answer:
Why do endogenous retroviruses and syncityn exist? Why do antibiotics need to kept up do date with micro organisms if they don’t evolve? How do you explain ring species? Where can I find a single example of a non-transitional fossil? Why does DNA show that some species are more distantly related than others? Why have there been three new variations of American Goatsbeard flowers if macro evolution doesn’t happen? Why do you pretend that you’re qualified to separate micro evolution from macro evolution when you can’t even tell the difference between evolution, abiogenesis and atheism? Why do we have vomeronasal organs despite not using pheromones? Where did we get chromosome 2 and cytochrome B from? Why do we have pseudogenes, appendixes, wisdom teeth, Plica semilunaris and Nictitating membranes? Why are there stars farther than millions of lightyears away if the earth is only 6,000 years old? Why do tree rings say the earth is older than 6,000 years old? Why were stone tools older than 790,000 years found in Gesher Benot Ya'akov? Why were stone tools older than 400,000 years found at the Revadim Quarry in Israel? When has a creatard used electron spin resonance and thermoluminescence to prove the earth is only 6,000 years old? What is the flat earth method for predicting an eclipse? Where can I find a map of your space frisbee that makes geometrically accurate flight patterns? What is the flerfer explanation for the phases of the moon? Why is there continental distribution when Noah’s Arc says different? What proof do you have that a bunch of dust can turn into a man? What proof do you have that a bone can turn into a woman? Why should I believe in your god instead of Zeus, Thor, Krishna or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
"just have faith and stop asking satanic questions or you will be tortured for eternity by my all loving genocidal God 😇" - every religious person I've known
That was a key stage, when they started to bury the dead, showed care and respect for other individuals plus the thinking process to prevent the body from being consumed by other preditory animals.
Good though, but don't you think another spieces don't respect other individuals
Uh good
The birth of morals and ethics!
Rats don't care if you're a king or a peasant.
Sorry buddy, humans actually devolved over time, we were stronger taller and had much more knowledge than we do now.. darwinism explained away slavery. God bless you all.
5:57 : "Last step was to colonize the planet"
britishers in 18th century : let's do the last step again
Britishers isn’t a word
GRAMMER
@@richardmanalac2305”grammer”
*EVOLUTION is a BIOLOGICAL PROCESS, NOT AN EVENT.* Evolution proceeds by incremental modification of existing structures. That is what we see, for instance, in the evolution of the heart, from simple muscular contraction of a blood vessel, to the two chambered heart of fish that is basically a thickening of a section of the circulatory system. Higher order vertebrates, like amphibians and reptiles, evolved a 3 chamber heart with two atria(inflow) and one ventricle (out flow). Warm blooded animals, birds and mammals, required the greater oxygenation provided by a 4 chamber heart.
Our brain evolved in a similar manner; it did not just "pop into existence".
Nobody said it just popped into existence. Obviously there are dna, genealogical, and environmental changes that caused changes in organs to create Homo sapiens we are today. Evolution IS that long process of changes 🤦🏻♀️ Nobody claimed evolution was a quick, one-time occurrence 🙄
What anyone _believes_ exists in the human mind. Religions are _OPINIONS,_
*TRUTH* is determined by *EVIDENCE.*
The rules of evidence are this: *IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY...YOU LOSE!*
6:35 bro why didn’t the cameraman do anything
nice one
LOL
@Whisperr Art LMFAO.
Lmao
THE MONK, IS STILL, HERE, HE NEVER LEFT
0:53 searching for your phone charger in the dark
😁
Imagine you see red eyes
Uhh
*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.
Baldness is a hair color
Early humans: killed elephants
Humans now: scared of a mosquito
Also humans: I am a geniusssssss!
I mean
If other animals evolved reason and discovered what diseases are they'd be scared too
I'd say annoyed more than scared.
No one is scared of a mosquito
You're not, you can't spell genius.
@@angrydorito3252 the op is
UA-cam: *sees naked ape* that's all good
UA-cam: *sees naked human* TAKE IT DOWN TAKE IT DOWN
Anoobguykid because it’s meant for education
।
This comment deserves more likes. Underrated 😂
Yesss
@@Nutshellin-zn6pz what education? Im not learning anything looking at some fake trash
Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. - Plato (c.400 BCE)
Parent were really worried when their 4 year old son, Bobby never spoke a word. Then on one day at breakfast, all of a sudden Bobby began to shout "This food is a piece of sh**t" The parents hogged Bobby and gave thanks to god for the miracle. After everyone calmed down, the father turned to Bobby and asked: "Son how come that you never spoke before?" Bobby replies "Well up till now, breakfast was OK".
Ok? How does this relate to this video?
I mean I'm not complaining, I have seen some brainrot in the comments of evolution topic videos.
@@FawnTheCreator It does not, but was only a joke.
@@MayLNgMake a joke to the related video
@@RandomChannel982
A young earth creationist is talking to his congregation...
"...and we are clearly intelligently designed!" he yells. "Just the eye itself is so incredibly complex, it could have only be designed by an all powerful Creator."
The congregation cheers.
"Now please be seated, brothers and sisters. Let the sermon begin." he says, as he puts on his glasses to read from the Bible.
4:07 rare video of man without wifi
I should put you on r/Im14andthisisdeep
r/ThanksIHateIt
@@millennium091 check your mom too
Ok boomer
Whitout?? Or without
2:10 such a gross sight im sorry
Lmao
Felt like watching a fever dream
M O N K E T I T I E S
WTF are you talking about those are sweet
Fuck me this is gonna waste my time
No creationist can show real evidence for their creationism or that refutes the Science of Evolution.
Unemployment is a job
Old day humans:not scared of a mammoth Humans now:*scared of spiders*
Bruh im afraid of daddy long legs ;_;
Old humans literally killed the biggest animals and yet were scared of spiders
Spiders is Pet in Australia
@@mfra959 oh shoot that means even more scarier insects or bugs
Humans now: Afraid of Free Speech.
*"Man was now armed."*
That sounded amazing and highly ominous at the same time
Ah yes stone gun 🗿
🔫 👈
I thought I was the only one who thought hearing that statement felt badass.
*stone gun.*
We need stone gun. 🗿
It’s why you exist as you do
GOD WAS A TREMENDOUS INVENTION AND A GREAT BENEFIT TO MANKIND. Before man created God, they felt really stupid. Confronted with any question, all they could say was "Gee, I don't know" and no matter how hard they thought, they couldn't think of a better answer.
Then someone came up with the brilliant idea of God. It was wonderful, it obviated the need to think about anything. The answer could always be "Gee, I don't know, it must be God." Problem solved. The "God concept" alleviated the need to think about mundane things and they could concentrate on serious questions, like "How many bibles can we sell?" There was no incentive for human intellect to advance beyond that of ancient goat herders. Religions need to perpetuate ignorance in order to preserve their influence.
It is quite likely that the "god concept" originated with Homo erectus as an explanation for thunder.
Thinking that humans Descend from animals is casa of psychiatric hospitalization
@@Ympatisec2K24 Your ignorance and cognitive deficiency not withstanding, "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution". - Theodosius Dobzhansky
TRUTH is determined by EVIDENCE, not by what anyone says and not by words in an old book. The rules of evidence are this:
IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY... *YOU LOSE!*
Music is so Evolutionary Peaceful.
- can anyone tell me the name of this
" for millions of years our planet has been floating in space "
Yes. That's what a planet does
😂😂
Try billions
Underrated lol
@@pashapasovski5860 there’s no proof that the earth has been here for billions of years
If we evolved from monkeys then why are mokeys turning into humans today, the world has forgit its creator WHICH IS GOD THE ALMIGHTY 👑✝️!
Me when I was 9 turning off the lights in the livingroom: 6:28
I also did that
Same
I thought I was a pu$$y
But now I am confirmed that everyone was 😁😁
That's hilarious ! 🤣🤣
Sometimes
Religions are all about exploiting the gullible. "Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool." - Mark Twain. He also said "it is easier to fool someone than to convince them they have been fooled. That has been the basis of all religions.
Throwing the spear away was probably the dumbest thing the man could have done when the bear attacked.
Yeah true bears are stronger than Gorillas what’s even dumber is a farmer tried to beat up a bear the farmer kicked the bear in the balls and ran away luckily the farmer wasn’t hurt and Also even some humans today with guns like rifles humans still die
i don't think a spear would do anything good to a bear
@@catsbacon Lets put that theory to the test with a metallic spear.
@jensphiliphohmann1876 - So, you've had a lot of experience, eh?
Maybe cuz he didn’t have his homies
4:25 me trying to find who made all the bad decisions in my life
🤣
🤟😂🤟
😂😂😂😂
LMAO
@@geethkakinada8503 gfao
props to the cameraman who got hit by a austrolapith 😂
“Man was now armed”😂😂😂
This was so nostalgic
I remember me and my monkey friends where climbing trees eating fruit
@@valentinzaeuner I don’t want you here
@@valentinzaeuner disgusting
@@valentinzaeuner tell Jesus I want to be MONKEY
@@thewonderfulworldofsammy7776 stop like your own commmt
@@thewonderfulworldofsammy7776 i hate atheist disgusting apes u claim u are
6:36 Oh no, run great x25000 grandpa
needs more 0
@@ForumLight lul stfu
@@ForumLight this is your problem, you are asserting that an organism without lungs cannot evolve lungs.
But I asked you before if you assert something then you must give evidence to prove that assertion otherwise you have no room to talk.
@@ForumLight take your meds
@@ForumLight I never said that what cant be disprove is true, Im Saying that you are asserting that it's impossible for evolution to occur. The burden on proof is on you now to prove why it cannot happen. This is not to prove evolution but to rather to let you know that you can't be 100% certain with what you say.
great video, showed it to my kid and he also liked it.
Neanderthals and homo sapiens where two diferent human species that coexisted, neanderthals were not ancestors of homo sapiens
Yea
exactly why do like 40% of people think that we evolved from neanderthals.
From my understanding the Homo Erectus is the common ancestor as they occupied all of Africa, Asia and Europe. Interbreeding between the Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens created the modern man.
@@somedude1899 cro magnon is modern man
God made us
Reject modernity, Return to monke
no
yes
Why? Dude
@@malakaihernandez2235 its a meme, why do you care?
@@witachapinamk1507 the dude literally commented over 300 times about that lmao
Humans from 4 million years ago: A hunter that can throw rocks
3:06 props to the camera man almost getting attacked by the ape woman...
camera man has balls of titanium
@@mrcaptainfarte3619 I’m the cameraman 🤯
😆😆😆😆
How do you know that's a women? Maybe they are non-binary. Smh people have no hearts /s
@@parthsharma9699 lmao you can’t choose your gender if your born a man your a man for the rest of your life if your born a girl you a girl forever but nice joke
3:13 “Are ya winning, son?”
onebacondoggo no dad
@@happyboi6972 aw man
"always had been dad"
@Tip_OverKillsツ ?
@Tip_OverKillsツ Fuck you
*SOME PEOPLE STILL ASK, "WHY ARE THERE STILL APES (OR MONKEYS)?"*
It should be obvious that such people, usually creationists, lack an understanding of what evolution is and how it works. Apparently someone told such people that humans evolved from apes, and from that, due to their lack of education, they assumed that all apes were supposed to evolve into humans. That is not how evolution works, but creationists have no interest in learning anything other than creation mythology.
They might just as well have asked "If dogs are descended from wolves, why are there still wolves?" Or even "If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?" Just as dogs descended from a population of wolves, so too did humans evolve from one particular population of apes.
What we know is that the first apes evolved in Africa during the Miocene, about 25 million years ago from a population of Cercopiths. Whereas monkeys run on all four feet across the TOPS of branches, apes evolved skeletal changes giving the ability to ability to swing, arm over arm, from branch to branch. Evolution works to make each species best suited to their environment. For apes, that environment was the forest and they are well suited for it. At one time there were about 30 different species of apes in those forests.
Had environmental conditions remained the same, we would still see forests covering the whole African continent. However, conditions did not stay the same; the climate became drier. As a result, forested areas shrank in size and were replaced by grasslands, the African savanna, with just a few scattered trees. The shrinking forests put different ape species in competition with each other and many went extinct.
Then, about 6 or 7 million years ago, one population of apes split, with some of them opting for life on that open savanna. Other apes are capable of walking upright, they are just not comfortable doing so for long periods of time. Recent experiments with trained chimps on a treadmill have shown that for them, walking upright was more efficient in terms of energy expended than quadrupedal walking. Chimps and other apes though must shift their weight from side to side while walking bipedaly.
That savanna environment favored skeletal changes that placed the knees directly under the center of gravity. By about 4 mya, our ancestral australopithecines had almost the same skeletal features as modern humans. Changes to pelvis, femur, knees and feet gave them a smooth stride that was efficient for long distance travel. They did however, retain long arms and curved fingers enabling them to climb a tree when danger threatened. Their brains, as measured by cranial capacity, were only slightly larger than that of today's chimpanzees.
The apes that remained in a forest environment were under little pressure to change as they were well adapted to it. They became the ancestors of today's chimps and bonobos. Those living on the open savanna were presented challenges not experienced by woodland apes, and that required greater intelligence and cooperation to overcome them. It set their descendants on a different evolutionary trajectory that culminated in us.
“Comes back to check the comment section after a while”
*yep, still triggered creationists as far as the eye can see*
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Thanks to the animation team who worked hard for this
Nah thanks to the cameraman who live million years ago.
Wait you telling me they didn't go back in time and started recording?
Yes, to perpetuate a myth...
@@PauloPereira-jj4jv this isn't a myth its a fact
Exactly!
The earliest humans also developed a freaking six packs and muscles 💪🏻
Cuz they were on the go 24/7 lol
Yea because they had to both hunt all there food and build anything they needed lol
Heck, They're Stronger than ME! (now that's embarrassing)
Muscles? Yes. Six packs? no
@@Blu-gi7wb lol
*IF YOU HAVE BEEN LEAD TO BELIEVE THAT EVERYTHING IN THE BIBLE IS LITERALLY TRUE, THIS IS WHAT IT TELLS YOU:*
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. That is just another example of the low esteem in which the biblical authors held women in general. Whereas the bible limits the servitude of male slaves to six years, women were granted no limitations and would remain slaves for life. Children born to a female slave were property of her master and slaves from birth.
Whereas a male Hebrew slave was entitled to be freed after 6 years, a wife provided by his owner was not, nor were any children born of that marriage. That was a strong incentive for a male Hebrew slave to reject freedom and commit to life as a slave. Free will?
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 (Luke 12:47-48). That is why slave owners in the Americas pushed Christianity onto their slaves and punished those caught practicing their ancient religions. Jesus had an opportunity to condemn slavery, he did not. That was a sin of omission.
Paul said 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 (Ephesians 6:6). Christianity perpetuated an evil institution.
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.
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 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.
Atheists are far more moral 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.
And the bible has a special message for women: "STFU", but it can be a source of pride for women that apparently not a single one of them participated in the writing of the bible.
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.