Wahnsinn einfach und zugleich extrem elegant, fast schon berauschend einer Zelle bei der Arbeit zuzusehen. Schön mal die Theorie in Aktion zu sehen. An alle die sich hier beschweren seht euch lieber Es war einmal das Leben Die Zelle an
Vielen herzlichen Dank für dieses wunderschöne Video. Es sollte jeder Mal gesehen haben, damit er sich bewusst macht, was er sich durch falsche Ernährung, Alkohol- und Nikotinmissbrauch antut
@@andreadieichbin2056 laut Markl Biologie Buch: kinesin, ein Motorprotein welches unter ATP-Verbrauch zwischen zwei Konformationenn hin und her springt. Dabei wandert es an Proteinfilamenten des Cytoskelettes entlang und transportiert so das Vesikel mit zb Proteinen.
Ein (sehr schönes) Video über bestimmte Vorgänge in Zellen (dynamische Instabilität von Mikrotibuli, Vesikeltransport durch Motorproteine, Proteinsynthese...) und was ist das vorherrschende Thema?! Intelligent design vs. Evolution...
@ViDeOfee1994 if those modifications are bad, we backtrack to an earlier stage, before that mutation took place and try again. This is because an organism has more than one offspring, so we're likely to have all the mutations in every stage at any one time. this is all done in parallel, so it doesn't take nearly as much time as it would if we had a string of parent and offspring. replication is also exponential, under ideal circumstances: 2, 4, 8, 16, 256, 512, 1024...
@pcdsgh Okay, please let me define what kind of Evolution we are talking about. 1. Microevolution. That means slight modification and changes within a species. This has been observed and no one in their right mind wouldn't agree. 2. Macroevolution. From one species to another. Never been observed and rather impossible due to genetic locks: (donkey and horse produce a mule, which is sterile)
@ViDeOfee1994 (continued: "and in fact") these variations were used to find out things about the Earth where history doesn't reach. A species' features are usually a response to their environment, whether that be climate or the presence of other life forms. If it (slowly) gets cold, as in an ice age, animals with longer fur will be naturally selected by living longer and having more descendants. This happens through multiple generations.. longer and longer hair. Yes, it happened.
@pcdsgh Wait a second. First of all, where did the countless cells come from? Second, which goal were they "working" toward, since they are just a cosmic accident with no purpose whatsoever? And please don't tell me that they wanted to become more complex. Nothing, absolutely nothing gets better by itself. Even genetic material doesn't because mutation always results in loss of information, never gain. (Which is fatal in most cases).
@ViDeOfee1994 I'd love to give you the exact details. But I'm no biologist, chemist, or geologist. I'll tell you what I know ;) And many things are unknown anyway, like what happened at that time. Proteins are basically chains of aminoacids which fold depending on the sequence that is used and the environment. aminoacids could have been gathered by these protobionts in time and had them react with each other. if you have a bill. pools of reactants, you can generate random proteins given the time
@ViDeOfee1994 ok, your points will take more than one comment to be covered. :) Evolution doesn't care about how life began. I could go on in that direction, but it's not a mature subject, so biologists haven't tested that from A to Z, mainly because they didn't have time. They did manage to create "life" from other organic compounds. And they did manage to make those organic compounds from inorganic chemicals. What they don't have is a billion years to test it. And I don't blame them.
Perfekt wäre es doch noch wenn man es "Dummheitsgerecht" machen würde, weil nicht jeder automatisch weiß was was ist. Ich wusste jetzt gerade nicht ob das ein Heilungsprozess war oder ein routine Ablauf oder an manchen stellen ein Angriff (zerstörung) Davon abgesehen ist es ein wirklich sehr schönes, grafisch dargestelltes Video.
@ViDeOfee1994 The first cells did not have DNA. They were something like bubbles absorbing the matter around them, growing, and multiplying when they got big. After a while of mindless replication and chemical reactions they got more complex proteins. they were already replicating, so making more complex proteins was bound to happen. After all, they did have a lot of time to do that. DNA is only one way in which information can be passed from one generation to the next.
Oh, really? How did these eggs then get the durability needed to not be burned/dried out by the sun's heat? All eggs laid on land need a shell around it, mostly for protection. And how exactly did the fish come out of the water without legs?
@ViDeOfee1994 oh. one last comment before you reply. sorry for your inbox. the first cell didn't have to evolve right away. it probably couldn't do that too fast even if it "wanted to", because of its simplicity. It could have waited 100 generations before anything happening to it. by then there would be plenty.
how? slowly. First off, they weren't necessarily "fish". There were plenty of marshes and rocks around for protection against the sun. It could have been a process of laying eggs closer and closer to the surface of the water, until the eggs and animals had the ability to go out of it, temporarily at least. If I remember correctly, plants left the water long before animals did. Not moving much makes it easier to live with less oxygen. (until they were better adapted to breathing air)
@ViDeOfee1994 a mutation is a change in the genetic material, whether we're aware of it or not. And it doesn't even matter if it affects anything. It's a change which will persist in the offspring of an organism. Almost none of them are visible. It takes many mutations to cause even cancer! accumulating these mutations makes small changes in an organism's workings. the fact that they're small gives almost every mutation a chance to succeed. If it helps it, it will have higher chances of staying.
@pcdsgh Give me one example of a good mutation that can be observed today. Please don't bother to say Sickle cell anemia, because that causes respitory problems.
@ViDeOfee1994 don't worry. you won't know all these things unless you spend a huge amount of time or major in those areas. I didn't, so I'm doing the best I can too. exclude bananas, because those weren't made by natural selection. it's artificial selection: similar, but the goal isn't to be more efficient, but to be more useful to us. just like some breeds of dogs. of course you don't see adaptation everywhere. they might help, but they can also be remnants of previous environment. And in fact
@ViDeOfee1994 sickle cell anemia is good, overall. and in those circumstances. How good a mutation is depends on the environment where you test it. it's called adaptation. the North-Asian human race (which didn't even have that much time) presents faces with fewer protrusions, which can make cold winds more bearable. I'd have to be a biologist or anthropologist to answer that fully.
Wunderschön und das soll alles der Urknall gemacht haben laut Wissenschaftlern für mich eindeutig nein. Sowas kann nur eine höhere Macht.😇🙏👍❤️GOTT 🙏❤️DANKE FÜR DIESES FANTASTISCHE VIDEO.
@pcdsgh The human race had lots of industrial and electronic development. However, we do have intelligence and therefore a way of knowng what is good or bad. Nature, however, does not work like a computer and is completely subjected to randomness. If you look at the bacterial flagellum, it consists of over 40 proteins that are either used to build it or to make it work. Ockhams razor would prohibit the needed proteins to assemble just in case something starts working.
@ViDeOfee1994 watched it. It's a parody. I could talk about it for pages, but I'll try not to: The purpose of leaving the water wasn't to avoid extinction. it was probably a large sea. But leaving the water can be an advantage if one wants to lay its eggs without them being consumed by other species. they didn't have legs, obviously. and looking at our current species, you'll notice that they aren't necessary. holding one's breath for an extended period and having basic locomotive functions are
Wirklich ein wahnsinnig interessantes Video - kannte es schon in der englischen Version :) Am Besten gefällt mir die Darstellung des Kinesin (bzw Dynein), das, wie ein Gefängnissträfling, das Vesikel hinter "sich herzieht" x3
@ViDeOfee1994 ok, you might be right about that particular experiment. But the early earth did have those elements. they had to come from somewhere, right? That's before life began, however it did. That's what I meant by this being a relatively young area of research. Darwin was also wrong about certain things, but not the basic principles. Still, evolution is something different.
@pcdsgh I know that some people believe that before cells had DNA they had RNA, which also can carry information. Could you please clarify how they got more complex proteins?
@ViDeOfee1994 intelligence is a response to the environment. information is generated and gathered by anything which interacts with its environment. you could say that the underlying principle behind natural selection is intelligent, but that doesn't mean someone created it. simple things can generate complex results and mathematics has been showing that from ancient times. evolution is based on mathematics.
@pcdsgh So plants are intelligent too? In my opinion, you wouldn't expect a New York Times to just show up in nature and then assume that the information contained in it happened because paper and ink reacted to the environment. Information can be modified but it has to start somewhere, with someone creating it.
@pcdsgh How did the information passed on if it were a good mutation? It is not exactly like the stronger cell kills the weaker cell. Survival of the fittest doesn't work in this case. Also, please check out this link and tell me what you think: watch?v=UXVNJXu4R1c
@ViDeOfee1994 I didn't say what you rephrased in your first couple of sentences. we're in a little pool of nature. It tests to see what works and what doesn't. 1. mutate 2. replicate 3. test all replicas 4. drop the bad ones 5. repeat. This gathers information about what works and what doesn't. I don't know how you can argue about that with what we invented in the last 500 years. that was not the product of any one mind. we, as a species, tested what worked and what didn't. Nature does the same.
@ViDeOfee1994 (cont 2) mammoths, for instance. but they went extinct, like almost all species that lived on this planet. Extinction is natural and is the main reason why we don't see the continuity that one would suspect with gradual evolution. And extinction is to be expected, because we only have this planet to populate. some species are driven out of existence by lack of resources or predators which, again, adapted to consume them. life is an endless contest and humans didn't exist for long.
@ViDeOfee1994 it's not the result of chance. if you have two days of flipping coins, is it "chance" that you get 10 heads in a row at some point? no. it's almost certain that you will. Now, to put it in the necessary perspective for evolution: We had 4 billion years and countless cells working towards a goal. Add the fact that the best outcomes are learned and naturally selected and you see it's no chance that we have such complexity. it's maths.
@ViDeOfee1994 let's count the flaws in your argument: 1. anything which replicates has one purpose: replicate efficiently. be it life, technology, computer viruses etc. But life is the first of these to mutate. 2. they didn't want to become more complex, but that's the natural way to be more efficient at replicating: overcoming your competitors. 3. mutation leads to diversity. make experiments yourself, go to information theory or anything... v=mcAq9bmCeR0 4. mutation is rarely fatal. fact.
@ViDeOfee1994 Ok.. let me answer this before going to the video. All organisms compete for "food", whatever form it may take. Either aminoacids floating around or other organisms. the one which replicates faster will draw the slow ones into extinction. it's up to your imagination what could happen. What actually happened and in what order, we (as individuals) may never know. And it doesn't matter, because if it ever happened again, chances are the results would be different.
@ViDeOfee1994 (cont 3) It will just take some time for people to understand it, the same way the Sun doesn't revolve around the Earth. Both old theories "make sense" until you look at the big picture. Once you understand evolution, you'll know what I mean. And of course I'm certain it will happen. Sorry if I'm too direct, but in the appropriate scientific world, there's literally no doubt about its validity. It's inexcusable for a biologist/geneticist not to "believe" it. and there aren't many.
@pcdsgh Adaptation occurs, as can be seen in various kinds of dogs. However, Macroevolution can't be explained by Adaptation. I am 16 years old and still in high school, so i don't know a whole lot about anthropology or biology, but I know whether i am looking at an ape, a banana, a human, or a dog (even if it is a Chihuahua).
@WildAxe07 I'm very interested in both: Science and religion; I'm also a biologist and - I'm sorry - but you're statement is just ignorant. Complexity is not proof that god exists, it is merely proof that something is highly advanced. If you immediately reduce everything you don't understand to god then you'll never learn a thing. The power in cells you speak of also isn't invisible/unexplainable, it's ATP. These are simple chemical mechanisms, fascinating and futuristic, but it's not 'magic'.
Stimmt! Kolosser 1:15 Er ist das Ebenbild des unsichtbaren Gottes, der Erstgeborene vor aller Schöpfung. 16 Denn in ihm ist alles geschaffen, was im Himmel und auf Erden ist, das Sichtbare und das Unsichtbare, es seien Throne oder Herrschaften oder Mächte oder Gewalten; es ist alles durch ihn und zu ihm geschaffen. 17 Und er ist vor allem, und es besteht alles in ihm.
@pcdsgh What I mean is where did that first cell come from, since all cells came from other cells? Where did the information in the cell's DNA come from? Humans know only of one source of information: Intelligence. I agree that there are slight changes and modifications in Genes (different breeds of Dogs) but mutations that would cause something to change the species would be fatal. Which competitors? The first cell probably didn't have any.
@ViDeOfee1994 There is very conclusive evidence for evolution and absolutely no assumptions that weren't already verified. And if that's not enough, this process already has applications around us, which only strengthen the need for it. And of course I might ask you to find any successful person who doesn't believe in evolution and works in: cancer research, vaccines, information theory, anthropology, economics, genetics. You will find none, because 4 of these completely rely on this process.
Ganz deiner Meinung. Sowas nennt die Wissenschaft auch Intelligent Design. Auch die Theorien um Morphogenetischer Felder finde ich (als Biotechnologe) interessant. Ich verachte radikale Atheisten, die religiöse Menschen beleidigen (So Kommentare wie von SuicideFixated (Der Name sagt wohl alles)) ... Solch eine radikale Intoleranz hat mit Aufklärung übrigens auch nichts mehr zu tun. Was soll man da noch zu sagen, wenn die einem ständig Sozialdarwinismus eintrichtern.
@ViDeOfee1994 understanding evolution is the first step. then you can look for evidence and I assure you there is plenty. it's just one of those things which are unfairly looked down by the majority because of some propaganda, taking the chance from those who're yet to grasp its concepts. because, and this is another fact, we all depend on this knowledge for survival. others do the work.
Ja schön. Und was sehen wir da? Die Natur hat dem Menschen Sprache gegeben, um zu erklären - als Text oder Wort. Ohne das ist es nur ein optischer Gimmick. Und zieht entsprechende Gimmick-Kommentare an.
Maximilian Eberl Wenn du was von Biologie weisst, dann siehst du was das so ist. Zb ist dort Cotranslationärer Proteintransport, Translation, Transkription, dynamische Instabilität von Mikrotubuli und die Funktionsweise von Myosin zu sehen. Aber ich bin auch Medizinstudent und hab das alles gelernt, daher erkenne ich das. Ich glaube nicht, dass dieses Video gemacht wurde für Menschen die nicht etwa Biologie oder ähnliches studiert haben. Das Video wurde ja auch von Harvard Medical University gemacht. Aber in meinen Augen ist es eine grandiose, extrem schöne und akkurate Darstellung der Dinge, die ich gelernt habe, und damit hat es mich motiviert weiter zu machen.
@WildAxe07 Maybe god does exist, but evolution is a fact: if he does than he has only been the one to start the process, not the one who's moving proteins and fatty acids around in countless cells. I believe god has better things to do. Religion and science don't contradict each other. If you want to understand how things work you need to stop believing that there is nothing new to learn first.
There is much to learn, but every new discovery leads us to see more of God's creation, and glorify Him more. According to the Bible, God gave animals and humans the ability to reproduce - each after its kind. Yet even the simplest cell speaks of a Designer, who made it work in the first place, by speaking it into existance, not by letting it evolve randomly over millions of years. Religion and Science don't contradict, but Truth and the denial thereof, namely, compexity through randomness.
Ich glaube der Bibel, und ich glaube daher auch, dass Gott alles in sechs Tagen erschaffen hat. Evolution ist nichts als Zufall und Milliarden on Jahren. Der Tod ist das, was sie vorantreibt. Entweder du glaubst nicht an Gott, oder du glaubst an Gott den Schöpfer und seinem Wort, denn er hat uns gesagt was er geschaffen hat und wie lange er dafür brauchte: 1. Mose 1!
Bin ich die einzige, die bei diesem Video ein leicht beklemmendes Gefühl bekommt? Ich meine, keine Ahnung. Habe vorhin mal die Musik durch nen lustigen, irischen Fiverdance ausgetauscht beim anschauen, und es war ein biiisschen besser. Aber keine Ahnung, das Video löst dezentes Unwohlsein in mir aus ^^
auf welche wissenschaftlichen Quellen stützt du deine Aussage?...bitte keine Gefühlsargumente im Sinne von "Man kann doch nicht wirklich denken dass,...", "Schau doch mal in die Natur, ich meine...". Aus wiss. Sicht braucht es einfach keinen zusätzlichen Faktor als die Zeit und Evolution, um das hervorzubringen, was wir heute in der Natur vorfinden.
Und wie macht deine Aussage in irgendeiner Weise Sinn? Die Wissenschaft hat das alles nur entdeckt, das sagt nichts darüber aus, wodurch alles entstanden ist.
@pcdsgh There is evidence for both Evolution and creation, and neither can be verified or falsified for sure. Both depend on faith, because you cannot test many of the assumptions. I hope that someday all will know the truth, until then I trust my instincts which tell me that I am more than an advanced Ape because I have a soul.
Das ist auch eher was für Studenten & Profs die all den Kram kennen, das was sie dort zeigen ist vieel vieeeel viel zu detailliert um es in einem Video zu erklären :D
Woow vielen lieben Dank.
Ich empfinde bei diesem Video vor allem Gottesfurcht🙏
Hä was hat das mit Gott zutun
Wahnsinn einfach und zugleich extrem elegant, fast schon berauschend einer Zelle bei der Arbeit zuzusehen. Schön mal die Theorie in Aktion zu sehen.
An alle die sich hier beschweren seht euch lieber Es war einmal das Leben Die Zelle an
Das Spiel ist überall. Alles strebt zusammen und teilt sich nur , um sich wieder zu finden.. das Werden und Vergehen ist herrlich🥳..Leben eben*
Vielen herzlichen Dank für dieses wunderschöne Video. Es sollte jeder Mal gesehen haben, damit er sich bewusst macht, was er sich durch falsche Ernährung, Alkohol- und Nikotinmissbrauch antut
Wundervoll, die Natur ist perfekt und weiß, was sie tut.
*Gott
1:15
Wollte einfach nur mal sehen wie dieses "kinesin" oder wie es auch immer heißt tatsächlich durch die Gegend spaziert 😂
Ja was ist das Dingens genau ..
@@andreadieichbin2056 laut Markl Biologie Buch: kinesin, ein Motorprotein welches unter ATP-Verbrauch zwischen zwei Konformationenn hin und her springt. Dabei wandert es an Proteinfilamenten des Cytoskelettes entlang und transportiert so das Vesikel mit zb Proteinen.
Ein (sehr schönes) Video über bestimmte Vorgänge in Zellen (dynamische Instabilität von Mikrotibuli, Vesikeltransport durch Motorproteine, Proteinsynthese...) und was ist das vorherrschende Thema?! Intelligent design vs. Evolution...
Wirklich Schade.
Gott!
bin ich der einzige, dem das Lied mehr gefallen hat als das Video? weiß einer, wie es heißt?
Musst beim gucken die Augen aufmachen 🤗
Ich finde das Lied auch schön. Haben es heute im Bio Unterricht gesehen😂
Kraftwerk Gottes :0)
@ViDeOfee1994 if those modifications are bad, we backtrack to an earlier stage, before that mutation took place and try again. This is because an organism has more than one offspring, so we're likely to have all the mutations in every stage at any one time. this is all done in parallel, so it doesn't take nearly as much time as it would if we had a string of parent and offspring. replication is also exponential, under ideal circumstances: 2, 4, 8, 16, 256, 512, 1024...
Es ist eine Computersimulation und was ist die Wirklichkeit?
@pcdsgh Okay, please let me define what kind of Evolution we are talking about.
1. Microevolution. That means slight modification and changes within a species. This has been observed and no one in their right mind wouldn't agree.
2. Macroevolution. From one species to another. Never been observed and rather impossible due to genetic locks: (donkey and horse produce a mule, which is sterile)
@ViDeOfee1994 (continued: "and in fact")
these variations were used to find out things about the Earth where history doesn't reach.
A species' features are usually a response to their environment, whether that be climate or the presence of other life forms.
If it (slowly) gets cold, as in an ice age, animals with longer fur will be naturally selected by living longer and having more descendants. This happens through multiple generations.. longer and longer hair. Yes, it happened.
Wer muss das auch im bio unterricht gucken??
Sehr bewegend
jetzt sollte man nur noch vetstehn was genau die einzelnen sequenzen bedeuten und was dargestellt wird
Das ist nicht schlecht! man muss halt nur etwas von biologie verstehen um das Video zu verstehen!
ja und wer versteht bio?
Es gibt eine besprochene Version, leider nur auf English
@pcdsgh Wait a second. First of all, where did the countless cells come from? Second, which goal were they "working" toward, since they are just a cosmic accident with no purpose whatsoever? And please don't tell me that they wanted to become more complex. Nothing, absolutely nothing gets better by itself. Even genetic material doesn't because mutation always results in loss of information, never gain. (Which is fatal in most cases).
@ViDeOfee1994 I'd love to give you the exact details. But I'm no biologist, chemist, or geologist. I'll tell you what I know ;)
And many things are unknown anyway, like what happened at that time. Proteins are basically chains of aminoacids which fold depending on the sequence that is used and the environment. aminoacids could have been gathered by these protobionts in time and had them react with each other. if you have a bill. pools of reactants, you can generate random proteins given the time
@ViDeOfee1994 ok, your points will take more than one comment to be covered. :)
Evolution doesn't care about how life began. I could go on in that direction, but it's not a mature subject, so biologists haven't tested that from A to Z, mainly because they didn't have time. They did manage to create "life" from other organic compounds. And they did manage to make those organic compounds from inorganic chemicals. What they don't have is a billion years to test it. And I don't blame them.
Perfekt wäre es doch noch wenn man es "Dummheitsgerecht" machen würde, weil nicht jeder automatisch weiß was was ist. Ich wusste jetzt gerade nicht ob das ein Heilungsprozess war oder ein routine Ablauf oder an manchen stellen ein Angriff (zerstörung)
Davon abgesehen ist es ein wirklich sehr schönes, grafisch dargestelltes Video.
@ViDeOfee1994 The first cells did not have DNA. They were something like bubbles absorbing the matter around them, growing, and multiplying when they got big. After a while of mindless replication and chemical reactions they got more complex proteins. they were already replicating, so making more complex proteins was bound to happen. After all, they did have a lot of time to do that. DNA is only one way in which information can be passed from one generation to the next.
Oh, really? How did these eggs then get the durability needed to not be burned/dried out by the sun's heat? All eggs laid on land need a shell around it, mostly for protection. And how exactly did the fish come out of the water without legs?
@ViDeOfee1994 oh. one last comment before you reply. sorry for your inbox.
the first cell didn't have to evolve right away. it probably couldn't do that too fast even if it "wanted to", because of its simplicity. It could have waited 100 generations before anything happening to it. by then there would be plenty.
how? slowly. First off, they weren't necessarily "fish". There were plenty of marshes and rocks around for protection against the sun. It could have been a process of laying eggs closer and closer to the surface of the water, until the eggs and animals had the ability to go out of it, temporarily at least.
If I remember correctly, plants left the water long before animals did. Not moving much makes it easier to live with less oxygen. (until they were better adapted to breathing air)
@ViDeOfee1994 a mutation is a change in the genetic material, whether we're aware of it or not. And it doesn't even matter if it affects anything. It's a change which will persist in the offspring of an organism. Almost none of them are visible. It takes many mutations to cause even cancer! accumulating these mutations makes small changes in an organism's workings. the fact that they're small gives almost every mutation a chance to succeed. If it helps it, it will have higher chances of staying.
Schöpfung des Geistes. Ich staune. Was für ein Wunder!
@pcdsgh Give me one example of a good mutation that can be observed today. Please don't bother to say Sickle cell anemia, because that causes respitory problems.
This is a wonderful video! Thanks for uploading it!
@ViDeOfee1994 don't worry. you won't know all these things unless you spend a huge amount of time or major in those areas. I didn't, so I'm doing the best I can too.
exclude bananas, because those weren't made by natural selection. it's artificial selection: similar, but the goal isn't to be more efficient, but to be more useful to us. just like some breeds of dogs.
of course you don't see adaptation everywhere. they might help, but they can also be remnants of previous environment. And in fact
@ViDeOfee1994 sickle cell anemia is good, overall. and in those circumstances.
How good a mutation is depends on the environment where you test it. it's called adaptation. the North-Asian human race (which didn't even have that much time) presents faces with fewer protrusions, which can make cold winds more bearable. I'd have to be a biologist or anthropologist to answer that fully.
@ViDeOfee1994 oh, I forgot to ask. What did you mean by "where did the countless cells come from?"
Ofc they came from other cells.
Wunderschön und das soll alles der Urknall gemacht haben laut Wissenschaftlern für mich eindeutig nein. Sowas kann nur eine höhere Macht.😇🙏👍❤️GOTT 🙏❤️DANKE FÜR DIESES FANTASTISCHE VIDEO.
@pcdsgh The human race had lots of industrial and electronic development. However, we do have intelligence and therefore a way of knowng what is good or bad. Nature, however, does not work like a computer and is completely subjected to randomness. If you look at the bacterial flagellum, it consists of over 40 proteins that are either used to build it or to make it work. Ockhams razor would prohibit the needed proteins to assemble just in case something starts working.
@ViDeOfee1994 watched it. It's a parody. I could talk about it for pages, but I'll try not to:
The purpose of leaving the water wasn't to avoid extinction. it was probably a large sea. But leaving the water can be an advantage if one wants to lay its eggs without them being consumed by other species. they didn't have legs, obviously. and looking at our current species, you'll notice that they aren't necessary. holding one's breath for an extended period and having basic locomotive functions are
Wirklich ein wahnsinnig interessantes Video - kannte es schon in der englischen Version :)
Am Besten gefällt mir die Darstellung des Kinesin (bzw Dynein), das, wie ein Gefängnissträfling, das Vesikel hinter "sich herzieht" x3
@ViDeOfee1994 ok, you might be right about that particular experiment. But the early earth did have those elements. they had to come from somewhere, right? That's before life began, however it did. That's what I meant by this being a relatively young area of research. Darwin was also wrong about certain things, but not the basic principles.
Still, evolution is something different.
@pcdsgh I know that some people believe that before cells had DNA they had RNA, which also can carry information. Could you please clarify how they got more complex proteins?
@ViDeOfee1994 intelligence is a response to the environment. information is generated and gathered by anything which interacts with its environment. you could say that the underlying principle behind natural selection is intelligent, but that doesn't mean someone created it. simple things can generate complex results and mathematics has been showing that from ancient times. evolution is based on mathematics.
@pcdsgh So plants are intelligent too? In my opinion, you wouldn't expect a New York Times to just show up in nature and then assume that the information contained in it happened because paper and ink reacted to the environment. Information can be modified but it has to start somewhere, with someone creating it.
@pcdsgh How did the information passed on if it were a good mutation? It is not exactly like the stronger cell kills the weaker cell. Survival of the fittest doesn't work in this case. Also, please check out this link and tell me what you think: watch?v=UXVNJXu4R1c
Meine Mutter, wenn ich einen Apfel nach meinem Handy anfasse
Los yankis le pusierón ruidos en la música porque este video tiene mejor calidad Hd.
@ViDeOfee1994 I didn't say what you rephrased in your first couple of sentences.
we're in a little pool of nature. It tests to see what works and what doesn't.
1. mutate
2. replicate
3. test all replicas
4. drop the bad ones
5. repeat.
This gathers information about what works and what doesn't. I don't know how you can argue about that with what we invented in the last 500 years. that was not the product of any one mind. we, as a species, tested what worked and what didn't. Nature does the same.
@ViDeOfee1994 (cont 2) mammoths, for instance. but they went extinct, like almost all species that lived on this planet. Extinction is natural and is the main reason why we don't see the continuity that one would suspect with gradual evolution.
And extinction is to be expected, because we only have this planet to populate. some species are driven out of existence by lack of resources or predators which, again, adapted to consume them. life is an endless contest and humans didn't exist for long.
@ViDeOfee1994 it's not the result of chance. if you have two days of flipping coins, is it "chance" that you get 10 heads in a row at some point? no. it's almost certain that you will. Now, to put it in the necessary perspective for evolution:
We had 4 billion years and countless cells working towards a goal. Add the fact that the best outcomes are learned and naturally selected and you see it's no chance that we have such complexity. it's maths.
@ViDeOfee1994 let's count the flaws in your argument:
1. anything which replicates has one purpose: replicate efficiently. be it life, technology, computer viruses etc. But life is the first of these to mutate.
2. they didn't want to become more complex, but that's the natural way to be more efficient at replicating: overcoming your competitors.
3. mutation leads to diversity. make experiments yourself, go to information theory or anything... v=mcAq9bmCeR0
4. mutation is rarely fatal. fact.
großartig
danke
Gottes Schöpfung!
@ViDeOfee1994 Ok.. let me answer this before going to the video.
All organisms compete for "food", whatever form it may take. Either aminoacids floating around or other organisms. the one which replicates faster will draw the slow ones into extinction. it's up to your imagination what could happen. What actually happened and in what order, we (as individuals) may never know. And it doesn't matter, because if it ever happened again, chances are the results would be different.
@ViDeOfee1994 (cont 3)
It will just take some time for people to understand it, the same way the Sun doesn't revolve around the Earth. Both old theories "make sense" until you look at the big picture. Once you understand evolution, you'll know what I mean. And of course I'm certain it will happen.
Sorry if I'm too direct, but in the appropriate scientific world, there's literally no doubt about its validity. It's inexcusable for a biologist/geneticist not to "believe" it. and there aren't many.
@pcdsgh Adaptation occurs, as can be seen in various kinds of dogs. However, Macroevolution can't be explained by Adaptation. I am 16 years old and still in high school, so i don't know a whole lot about anthropology or biology, but I know whether i am looking at an ape, a banana, a human, or a dog (even if it is a Chihuahua).
welches Programm wurde benutzt?
Ist ja garnicht HD
);
Wie heißt das Lied
@WildAxe07 I'm very interested in both: Science and religion; I'm also a biologist and - I'm sorry - but you're statement is just ignorant. Complexity is not proof that god exists, it is merely proof that something is highly advanced. If you immediately reduce everything you don't understand to god then you'll never learn a thing. The power in cells you speak of also isn't invisible/unexplainable, it's ATP. These are simple chemical mechanisms, fascinating and futuristic, but it's not 'magic'.
faszinierend
erst kiffen, dann gucken :D
Legende sag wer bist du 9 Jahre später? :DD
Stimmt! Kolosser 1:15 Er ist das Ebenbild des unsichtbaren Gottes, der Erstgeborene vor aller Schöpfung.
16 Denn in ihm ist alles geschaffen, was im Himmel und auf Erden ist, das Sichtbare und das Unsichtbare, es seien Throne oder Herrschaften oder Mächte oder Gewalten; es ist alles durch ihn und zu ihm geschaffen.
17 Und er ist vor allem, und es besteht alles in ihm.
aber sonst gehts dir auch noch gut oder wer hat dir das ins gehirn eingepflanzt
@pcdsgh What I mean is where did that first cell come from, since all cells came from other cells? Where did the information in the cell's DNA come from? Humans know only of one source of information: Intelligence. I agree that there are slight changes and modifications in Genes (different breeds of Dogs) but mutations that would cause something to change the species would be fatal. Which competitors? The first cell probably didn't have any.
Just awesome!!
1:15 my biology teacher laughed at this
Mine too :D
so did I
@StellarCry *your (wow, that's what enthusiasm does to you...)
@ViDeOfee1994 There is very conclusive evidence for evolution and absolutely no assumptions that weren't already verified. And if that's not enough, this process already has applications around us, which only strengthen the need for it.
And of course I might ask you to find any successful person who doesn't believe in evolution and works in: cancer research, vaccines, information theory, anthropology, economics, genetics. You will find none, because 4 of these completely rely on this process.
ua-cam.com/video/B_zD3NxSsD8/v-deo.html
Hier der Link zur Vollversion :)
Ganz deiner Meinung. Sowas nennt die Wissenschaft auch Intelligent Design. Auch die Theorien um Morphogenetischer Felder finde ich (als Biotechnologe) interessant. Ich verachte radikale Atheisten, die religiöse Menschen beleidigen (So Kommentare wie von SuicideFixated (Der Name sagt wohl alles)) ... Solch eine radikale Intoleranz hat mit Aufklärung übrigens auch nichts mehr zu tun. Was soll man da noch zu sagen, wenn die einem ständig Sozialdarwinismus eintrichtern.
@ViDeOfee1994 understanding evolution is the first step. then you can look for evidence and I assure you there is plenty. it's just one of those things which are unfairly looked down by the majority because of some propaganda, taking the chance from those who're yet to grasp its concepts. because, and this is another fact, we all depend on this knowledge for survival. others do the work.
Ja schön.
Und was sehen wir da?
Die Natur hat dem Menschen Sprache gegeben,
um zu erklären - als Text oder Wort.
Ohne das ist es nur ein optischer Gimmick.
Und zieht entsprechende Gimmick-Kommentare an.
Maximilian Eberl Wenn du was von Biologie weisst, dann siehst du was das so ist. Zb ist dort Cotranslationärer Proteintransport, Translation, Transkription, dynamische Instabilität von Mikrotubuli und die Funktionsweise von Myosin zu sehen. Aber ich bin auch Medizinstudent und hab das alles gelernt, daher erkenne ich das. Ich glaube nicht, dass dieses Video gemacht wurde für Menschen die nicht etwa Biologie oder ähnliches studiert haben. Das Video wurde ja auch von Harvard Medical University gemacht. Aber in meinen Augen ist es eine grandiose, extrem schöne und akkurate Darstellung der Dinge, die ich gelernt habe, und damit hat es mich motiviert weiter zu machen.
Ich hab ein Gänsehaut . Ganz ehrlich Leute wer nach diesem Video immer noch nicht an die Existenz Gottes glaubt der ist verloren.
an yu kanda
das video soll nix erklären sondern beeindrucken es kein lehrfilm
Wow,fascinating
@WildAxe07 Maybe god does exist, but evolution is a fact: if he does than he has only been the one to start the process, not the one who's moving proteins and fatty acids around in countless cells. I believe god has better things to do. Religion and science don't contradict each other. If you want to understand how things work you need to stop believing that there is nothing new to learn first.
There is much to learn, but every new discovery leads us to see more of God's creation, and glorify Him more. According to the Bible, God gave animals and humans the ability to reproduce - each after its kind. Yet even the simplest cell speaks of a Designer, who made it work in the first place, by speaking it into existance, not by letting it evolve randomly over millions of years. Religion and Science don't contradict, but Truth and the denial thereof, namely, compexity through randomness.
FInd ich auch
wen was dazu gesagt würde täte das bestimt mehr verstehen
Ich glaube der Bibel, und ich glaube daher auch, dass Gott alles in sechs Tagen erschaffen hat. Evolution ist nichts als Zufall und Milliarden on Jahren. Der Tod ist das, was sie vorantreibt. Entweder du glaubst nicht an Gott, oder du glaubst an Gott den Schöpfer und seinem Wort, denn er hat uns gesagt was er geschaffen hat und wie lange er dafür brauchte: 1. Mose 1!
War dass bevor der Fisch zum Mensch wurde oder danach?
Humanoide DNA oder repto DNA!
Fragen über Fragen!
#WWG1WGA
Der Mensch wurde von Gott geschaffen
ist es normal das ich Gänsehaut bekommen hab :o
lirio sogno auch bekam Gnsehaut... versteht denn niemand das Besondere das Schöne an diesem Film..?
Live dabei zu sein an so etwas schönem...
Bin ich die einzige, die bei diesem Video ein leicht beklemmendes Gefühl bekommt?
Ich meine, keine Ahnung. Habe vorhin mal die Musik durch nen lustigen, irischen Fiverdance ausgetauscht beim anschauen, und es war ein biiisschen besser. Aber keine Ahnung, das Video löst dezentes Unwohlsein in mir aus ^^
hmm ..
Awesom
lmao yes boom crash
ein perfektes System !!! nichts zutun mit Zufall ;) alles KLEVERES DESIGN von GOTT !
intelligent design ist der größte Schwachsinn den sich die Menschen ausgedacht haben... Also gut, nach "Gott"
Wohl eher das Ergebnis von Millionen von Jahren von "trial and error".
auf welche wissenschaftlichen Quellen stützt du deine Aussage?...bitte keine Gefühlsargumente im Sinne von "Man kann doch nicht wirklich denken dass,...", "Schau doch mal in die Natur, ich meine...". Aus wiss. Sicht braucht es einfach keinen zusätzlichen Faktor als die Zeit und Evolution, um das hervorzubringen, was wir heute in der Natur vorfinden.
Und wenn du in Schwierigkeiten stehst, zu wem betest du?
Und wie macht deine Aussage in irgendeiner Weise Sinn? Die Wissenschaft hat das alles nur entdeckt, das sagt nichts darüber aus, wodurch alles entstanden ist.
Boah, wie ich diese Religionsdebatten hasse
@pcdsgh There is evidence for both Evolution and creation, and neither can be verified or falsified for sure. Both depend on faith, because you cannot test many of the assumptions. I hope that someday all will know the truth, until then I trust my instincts which tell me that I am more than an advanced Ape because I have a soul.
Billige Computertricks
darwin rules
religion down
Das schlechteste UA-camvideo zum Tema Zelle !! Es hilf kein bischen weil kein Komentar dabe ist der das gesehene erklärt. -.-
Das ist auch eher was für Studenten & Profs die all den Kram kennen, das was sie dort zeigen ist vieel vieeeel viel zu detailliert um es in einem Video zu erklären :D
Sehr schlecht gemacht
Giulia Traub alter Schwede du bist nicht gerade die hellste Kerze auf der Torte oder ?