The Big Bang theory doesn't propose that anyone or anything created the universe. nobody knows what caused the singularity to exist in the first place or what existed before the Big Bang which is freaky
Exactly,. It also doesn't explicitly rule out that a god or gods created the universe as we know it using the Big Bang. The theory neither requires not excludes, it is neutral.
@@PongoXBongo I mean we never know if it wasnt a God or not but it will make snse if it was because look at our planet its the only planet that can sustain life out of the whole solar system the only planet in our galaxy that we know of that human beings or any life can be on
It kinda scares me cause if God exists too ,that means he had to be made or file from somewhere, existence is impossible if there's nothing,the more I think about it the more my mind goes haywire ,it's impossible
@@ryannyarumba5919 exactly bro it’s crazy to sit down and actually think about what created the create if that made sense😂 how did it happened it just answers we probably never going to be able to answer until another thousands of years. hopefully by than they would have time travel and shit like that
@@quawrld_5016thousands of years is a huge understatement. In the entire age of human life we will never quite understand everything about our universe because it is literally impossible to know.
We didn't evolve from monkeys, we are apes (like chimpanzees and gorillas) and monkeys and apes share a common ancestor. Which means that we both evolved from the same original thing. Check out a chimpanzee's hands, look at their joints, ears, nose, eyes etc, their DNA is 98.8% identical to that of a human being. We are much much much more alike then we are different. 98.8% alike.
By the way, a scientific theory is not the same as a literary theory. They basically have the opposite meaning. A scientific theory shows evidentiary proof of as statement (basically showing your work/your recipes). Literary theory is an idea, where you then go to find the evidence to proove said theory.
No, the video is not saying there is a creator. The way he is talking when the screen is white isn't meant to be taken literally, he is being humorous and clever with the language there as he does throughout the entire video. He also isn't saying there isn't a creator. He is taking a neutral position.
Hi, nice reaction. Thumbs up! :) 1) Evidence from fossils, proteins and genetic studies indicates that humans and chimpanzees had a common ancestor millions of years ago. Most scientists believe that the 'human' family tree (known as the sub-group hominin) split from the chimpanzees and other apes about five to seven million years ago. 2) We have remains of a tail in our skeleton. It's called the tail bone. Tails of animals are full of nerve ends and are very touchy. That's why it hurts so much, if one is falling down directly on the tail bone. It is the last remain of our ancient animal tail.
Came here to clarify these points as well but you already summarized it very nicely! The genetic evidence is quite telling though - so I don't know if indicates is the best fitting word here. But I am not a native english speaker so it might be that I just get the wrong impression.
Thank you for this! I know a lot of people have a knee-jerk reaction to their kinds of comments, but the way you responded was the best way to do it. I know I personally need to work on this myself.
A few things I will mention. There are plenty of people who study science and believe in God. I personally don't think of a creator as a person. When he was talking about the universe being created. That's the force I believe in, science is just a way of understanding what that force is and finding the beauty in that. COVID didn't do nearly enough to come close to Black plague, one thing you have to remember the population wasn't as big back then. Worldwide 200 million people died from this, but Europe had an estimated 75 million people before that. Awesome video you two 👍🏼
I appreciate your sentiment. Many scientists see their work as exploring and explaining God's creation; enriching it and elevating the level of awe and wonder. If you take a less literal view of Genesis, then you open up the possiblities of His "mysterious ways" (which well could have included the Big Bang or the like).
The funny thing is that the black death had a role in ending the Middle Age and kick starting the Renaissance. Half of the population died, but their goods were still here so the survivors were considerably richer, they suddenly had more, they could afford more, it wasn't just surviving from one day to another. A sort of a middle class was born. And since there were so few people left, so few workers, they could suddenly negotiate higher wages from their overlords. Another factor is that the church always said that the plague is God's punishment for sins. But people could see that the priests and the monks died too, maybe even in higher proportions because they lived together in monasteries. So they decided that one of the following must be true: 1. The church people are just as much of a sinners as we are 2. The explanation is wrong. For the first time people started to doubt the church. Before that, whatever the church said was the absolute, unquestionable truth. Mind you, some fundamentalist Evangelicals still didn't get that memo...
When he says instructions it is not being serious. It is just a way for people to understand. Explaining how life came about is my favorite thing ever. Chemical evolution is so cool. To start, you have to talk about the Urey-Miller experiment. Back in the 1950s these two biochemists did an experiment in which they took a containment chamber, filled it with water, ammonia, methane, hydrogen, and all the things you expect to find on any fledgling planet. All the things you would expect on any new Earths. They put a fire underneath so it would evaporate, go into another container to be zapped with electrodes, cooled, funneled back to the original container, and cycles back through. They are simulating the patterns of an early Earth and simulating all the elements you could find on Earth. You take early simple ingredients, get them hot, get them cold, zapped with lightning and other normal processes. They ran it for a while, and when they came back, they took samples. To their surprise, the water is no longer clear but is a gross reddish brown. They test it and find it is now full of amino acids. Amino acids are the things that build proteins and make life happen. That is called chemical evolution. Very simple inorganic ingredients come together via totally natural means and form organic macromolecules. There are 4 macromolecules that make up life. Lipids, proteins, carbs, and nucleic acids. Those are the 4 macromolecules that make up everything alive. Each one is a polymer, meaning it's a molecule that forms a chain. I'll explain each of these below: PROTEINS are made of chains of amino acids that fold up on themselves. A chain of amino acids is a primary structure. Then, it folds into an alpha helix or a beta pleated sheet called a secondary structure. Then, it forms a glob called a tertiary structure. Sometimes, some globs come together, and that's then a quaternary structure and so on. That's how proteins work. Proteins make up skin, muscle, bones, and everything like that. CARBS are sugars. Long chain simple sugars such as glucose or fructose. If you stick them together, you get sucrose. A bunch of those together makes a polysaccharide. This makes carbs like starch, cellulose, and such. LIPIDS are fats. You have a twisted hydrocarbon chain that repels water, and that's a lipid. There are various kinds like phospholipids where a long hydrocarbon chain comes off it to repel water and, on the other end, is a phosphorus group that attracts water. This makes a hydrophilic and hydrophobic end. One attracts and one repels water. If you take any lipid like cooking oil, for example, and put it in water, it forms a bubble all by itself. Nobody has to tell it to do that. That's because a sphere is the smallest possible surface area and is the most energetically protected from the water around it. It would take more energy to make any other shape, and the universe is lazy. Everything is always as energetically simple as possible. Lipids that naturally form out of normal stuff under normal circumstances naturally form spheres. Amino acids which make proteins that naturally form out of natural stuff can get stuck in one of these spheres, and you now have something that practically represents a cell. All this stuff is formed by totally natural means and naturally assumes the shape of a sphere can naturally come together and form a cell. You can do this in a jar. Now imagine that on a planet taking place over millions of years. The Urey-Miller experiment has been redone in different ways many times by putting other things in, leaving some things out, and hundreds of combinations, and it just always works. Later, we figured out this happens in hydrothermal vents. They pump out acids and bases. These have proton gradients. What's that? Well, an acid is a chemical with a bunch of extra protons, and a base is something that doesn't have enough and has too many electrons. When they neutralize, they give off electrical charges that move one place to the next. This is how your cells make energy today. Mitochondria pass protons across a membrane. This turns a protein called ATP synthase, which makes adenosine triphosphate, and that's how our body works. It's how most cells today work. Where can we find natural proton gradients right now? Hydrothermal vents. Where can we find the building blocks of lipids and proteins? Hydrothermal vents. We can even find amino acids, including all the ones important to life, in space. Just floating on asteroids. They form naturally all by themselves all over. You have the building blocks of life, the thing that makes energy in cells even today happening naturally all by itself in hydrothermal vents and all over the universe. Life then starts all by itself. Now, we also have NUCLEIC ACIDS, the 4th macromolecule, which is DNA and RNA. We do debate what came first, but the most common consensus is that RNA came first. I also follow the RNA world hypothesis. Let me explain why. RNA is cool because it isn't just something that carries information, but it also works as a catalyst to make reactions happen. A catalyst is something that lowers the activation energy of a reaction. It makes a reaction happen easier and faster with less energy. So RNA carries genetic information, it can also make more of itself, and it can make other reactions happen faster. Think about how proteins are made in your body today. It's like this. You have mRNA(messenger RNA) that makes proteins happen. How? It goes to a ribosome to be read. What are ribosomes made of? They are made of rRNA(ribosomal RNA) and aren't membrane bound organelles. In the ribosome, something brings over amino acids to make the protein. What brings them over? tRNA(transfer RNA). So when your body makes proteins, it uses RNA to tell RNA to use RNA to make a protein. Again, you can do this in a jar. That is why the major consensus is that RNA came first. RNA is something that is so unbelievably useful. Why do we have DNA, then? Because once it happened to form, DNA was/is really good at long term storage, and it's far more stable, meaning it stuck around better. You can divide it, make more of it, pack it into a tight wad and have it twist around proteins called histones to makes a tight rope called chromatin, and then chromatin forms a body called a chromosome. That's how DNA works. It wraps around proteins, wraps into a thick rope, and those thick ropes form a chromosome. It's super easy to divide these and split them up. Is it so hard to believe that some of these naturally forming nucleic acids found their way into a blob of naturally forming lipids? THEN they split, THEN you have 2 sets of chromosomes in a cell THEN cytokenesis happens where actin filaments tighten around the cell in a contractile ring, and remember lipids form bubbles naturally, so once squished together you now have a cleavage furrow that then splits into two seperate bubbles! You now have dividing life out of literally "nothing." It's not difficult at all to say that very simple ingredients found all over the universe that naturally form organic molecules by natural processes then naturally stated making more of themselves. You then get a VERY early organism. Something so insanely simple. Not bacteria, that would be unbelievably complex in comparison. Just a very simple membrane, very simple genetic material, and very simple proteins. The very basics of all of this. That is what we call LUCA. There was probably a ton of very early life, but LUCA is the one that stuck around. Everything that ever lived past that point is related to LUCA. We have a very clear picture of how everything evolved after that. I can gladly get into that if anyone wants me to. I'm an evolutionary biologist, so this tickles me all over when I get to explain it.
@@iammanny2115 everybody should be a teacher, though. Any knowledge you have should be spread to others who might not have it. I've explained this many times, and plenty of people read it. If they don't, they don't. Maybe somebody will and they will learn something. That is what it is all about.
I also find it almost comical how shocked people are when he says about like Africa being raped and then nanking being raped by Japan cuz that's pretty much exactly what happened. But it's almost like the reactor is offended by the term used when in actuality it's the reality that was offensive. Just as in the shock when he says how after slavery was gone we manifest our destiny across the country and killed all of the natives. Course we didn't kill ALL the natives, just a couple million in one way or another. Japan versus the u.s. fight, the extinction ball. How is that shocking when that was the reality?
Humans and apes/monkeys share a common ancestor. Whatever that ancestor was, at some point, produced offspring that instead of remaining as they were, they split into two different evolutionary branches. One of those branches evolved into humanoids and the other branch evolved into apes/monkeys. Humans were never monkeys as we know them and didn’t evolve from monkeys. It’s more like humans and apes/monkeys are like distant cousins. Humans and chimpanzees share something like 95% DNA. All life on earth evolved from one speck of life, likely a bacteria. But somewhere in that long ago time, the first humans and the first apes went down different paths. We are related to them but didn’t evolve from them.
The name of Greenland is basically a propaganda name of the first vikings, who got there. They needed more vikings to come there, too, to found a society there and so they had to find a cool, tasty name that made other vikings to come and settle there, too. And Greenland was a little more green back than then now. But not really a country even in greener times, where the vikings wanted to live for a longer time and so they left again later on. Found that in the net: "It actually got its name from Erik The Red, an Icelandic murderer who was exiled to the island. He called it “Greenland” in hopes that the name would attract settlers. But according to scientists, Greenland was actually quite green more than 2.5 million years ago"
@@Cobra-mb2gx Greenland was named so for propaganda purposes by one guy. Completely different people at much earlier times named Iceland that way without any thoughts in mind to make propaganda.
Iceland was discovered by Hrafna Flóki Vilgerðarson in the 9th century. When he landed, he hiked up the Westfjords, saw a fjord full of ice and icebergs, and named the island according to what he saw at the time, Ísland. Greenland was named long after that, nearly a century later, by Erik the Red, assuming people would be attracted to it because of the name. Erik's father Þorvaldr Ásvaldsson was exiled from Norway for killings he committed, so his whole family left with him, and they settled in Iceland. Two decades later, Erik was then exiled from Iceland because he killed multiple people during a land dispute similar to his father. His family sailed to find a new home and were the first to discover Greenland. When he landed, he discovered a great fjord landscape and fertile green valleys. He was very impressed with the new lands resources, so after a few years, when his exile was over, he returned to Iceland to spread the word of “The Green Land" or "Grænland". He knew he needed people to create a viable settlement in order to survive, and it was the perfect time to advertise to "you people of the poor land in Iceland” as they had suffered a recent famine. He was very sucessful in rounding people up and set sail back to Greenland with 25 ships carrying around 500 men and women, domestic animals and all the other elements required to create a new existence in a new land. Only 14 of those ships made it unfortunately, but after they landed, some people settled under the rule of Erik as chieftain while others continued north. These were the Western and Eastern settlements. The Eastern Settlement, where Erik ruled, had a couple thousand people compared to the Western Settlement that had around 500. They lasted around four centuries. We don't know what exactly caused them to vanish, but some of the reasons theorized are climate change, lack of natural resources and domestic animals that couldn't survive the cold, lost contact with Norway as their main trading partner, contact with Inuit which is thought to have been friendly except for the fact they had to share resources, and their overly conservative ideology in which they prioritized contact with Europe and relied on the church and the European way if life rather than fully adapting to Greenland. The smaller Western Settlement was the first to disappear and the Eastern after that. They were very successful, actually, lasting 400 years and being totally self-sufficient, while today Greenland relies heavily on Denmark for food. On a side note, his son Leif was the first European to set foot in the Americas.
That was always the thing I never understood I've always tried to convince people that if the Big Bang is a thing why couldn't there be a god what did the Big Bang come from if we have no way to even guess that the Big Bang could have easily been caused by a god I bet even if he came down to earth and placed humans here it'll be kind of hard to explain what the big bang was with our lack of knowledge it's a lot easier just to say oh I created the Earth and leave it at that instead of trying to explain the expansion of the universe to people who only care about food and sex
I can understand why people misunderstand the monkey thing, but think about it this way: Did you evolve from your sister? No, but you have the same parents. Did you evolve from your cousin? No, but you have the same grandparents. And just keep that pattern going for about 200,000 years. Did you evolve from monkeys? No, but you have the same great great great great (...etc...) great grandparents. They're long gone, but the result is you and me, and chimpanzees, and bonobos, etc. You can do the same for any living thing - you just have to go back far enough in the family tree. Speaking of which, did you evolve from the tree in your back garden? No, of course not, but if you go back far enough, you'll find a common ancestor, so you are related.
No... We don't think it "just happened". There is a mountain of math which agrees with experiment and observation to an absurd level of precision, which describes an equally huge mountain of physics that accounts for our current understanding of the universe. Nowhere in any of that math, experiment, and observation is a 'creator' required for things to function the way we see it functioning. It all works perfectly fine without that assumption.
What i will never understand is people who dont believe in science even when theres undeniable proof, but yet choose to believe in a supernatural being. Christianity didnt even come along until quite a bit into world history. There were many religions that came before. Something christianity would like to forget.
And when it comes to the monkey stuff we keep finding links from one species to the next or overtime they look closer and closer to humans but we've even found other variations of humans that aren't homo sapiens suggesting while we were evolving other humans evolved in different ways and started their own groups and of course we want to war with them or they went to war with each other and went extinct and if you look at great apes they show more human traits year after year especially when you teach him sign language and find out they're depressed it's kind of scary a lot of animals have recently found to commit suicide for example a dolphin committed suicide after its sex partner was taken away from it which was honestly just a woman who was jacking off a captive dolphin and got fired and arrested for it after they found out so yeah he just stopped eating and drowned himself because dolphins breathe air
It's always interesting to me that followers of Abrahamic religions have no issue with single cell organisms evolving into moss and shrimp and fish, but something that looks exactly like humans leading to humans is incomprehensible. Like do they think mammals are some sort of phenomenon? or is it literally just the homo sapien subsect of mammals that they think is an anomaly? What are Neandethal in that case? Seems super weird to desperately try to rermove yourself from the nature that created you and that you rely on...then again all Abrahamic religions really care about is power
Nice reaction. Thumbs up! :) You looked pretty surprised at the scene of the beheadings of the French Revolution. Therefore I'm recommending the video "The French Revolution" from the channel "OverSimplified". That channel makes videos in a similar entertaining style like the makers of this "History of the entire World"-video. Greetings Mega
Bubonic still exists on average 6 people die from it in america every year, it's still very deadly in central asia, it's not as bad as lepracy anymore though
I don’t think we evolved _from_ monkeys, it’s more that we & monkeys share common ancestors. Also, I believe there were more cousin species than just humans & Neanderthals
Denisovians from Russian Siberia. These 3 branches seemed to overlap and there is Neanderthal DNA in humans so we just bred each other into a hybrid. And there are prly more cousins out there. Densovians weren't discovered until fairly recently if memory serves.
@@pfang32denisovians were another big one but theres estimated like 11 different species of humans that lived at the same time, we were basically just the lucky ones 😅
I just saw this... if I could erase the "we evolved from monkeys" idea from peoples heads, I would. All life had a common ancestor. Think of it like your own family. You and a cousin have a common ancestor in your grandparent. That grandparent has someone further back... and so on. And pick a trait... red hair. Someone in your past had red hair and as that then passed that down, and the shades changed, and sometimes blonds were born instead. That is how humans came about. It's hard to picture because all of our nearest cousins are extinct, and only the ones that are distant enough to be primates are left. Sadly. Also, you can be spiritual and believe in science. Lots of people are!
yo guys, u seem great, all the science and evolution, your damn i right i believe that though i wont belittle those that are unsure. i can talk about it forever though, love that stuff and with the gigantism of insects in the past your right my dude that stuff is gross and dinosaurs are crazy. evolving from another primate doesn't necessarily change anything my dude, some believe in a guiding hand kinda god others like myself do not believe in god but that doesnt have to be a bad thing. Anyway science rant over now, keep up the good work :D
Saying things need a reason to happen is a very human thing to say. It is a common misconception that "nothing became something," but in reality, the concept of "nothing" doesn't exist. There is never nothing and was never a nothing. At one point, all the matter in the universe was condensed down into a singularity. We can even pinpoint where, in space, this singularity was by looking as radiation. For some reason, the singularity started to expand. There was never really a "big bang," and that is a bad description of the event. It is better to describe it as an "everywhere stretch." There was never an explosion, but rather things started to expand. Why? We don't know yet, and neither does anybody else. Just because you don't know does not mean you get to claim "I don't know, therefore god" because that must mean you know. It is paradoxical and not how the real world works. We don't know, and therefore, nobody gets to proclaim that they do know. Of course, all matter being condensed means it was extraordinarily hot when it first expanded. This leads to bonds and fusion events of different molecules. Hydrogen was, of course, the first as it is the simplest. It also happens to be the most reactive because of this. Almost all stars start their life as hydrogen being condensed together with gravity. Through more and more pressure, as more and more hydrogen comes together, things like nuclear fusion kick off. New elements start to fuse into existence. When these stars go supernova as they start to produce iron. Iron really messes everything up. The star can no longer sustain equilibrium, and the core collapses in on itself, causing a supernova. This spews these new elements all over to come together and make larger stars, which have more pressure that makes even new elements. A lot of stars formed at the start of the singularity stretching. Lots of elements formed pretty quickly. Through these many, many supernova, you get particles of elements to combine into large chunks of themselves, and thus, we have asteroids, planets, and moons. Ever wonder why our solar system is the way it is? Why do we have rocky planets in the center and jovial planets outside of our solar system, then? It's because of thermal gradients. As you get further from the star, you get colder, and the solar winds get less powerful. Close to the star rock won't solidify, so you have a gap between sun and first planets in a system. There's a limit to where you can have terrestrial planets, those being Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars. You then get to a certain point where you can have liquid water, and that's where our planet is, the "goldilocks zone"."" We aren't special for that either. The goldilocks zone is millions of miles wide. It's a common myth that if we were a foot closer or further, we couldn't survive, and that's simply not true, but I digress. Past a certain point, the solar winds blasting the planets weaken. That's where we get these big gas giants. All the gas that's around Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune would have been here on Earth too, but the sun blasted it off to the back of the solar system. That's why the gas giants are out there. And if you look at any other star system, it follows the same format. No planets in front, the terrestrial planets in the center and the gas giants, if it has gas giants, in the back. This all happened after a supernova from a dead star created our sun, and the suns gravity attracted material from said supernova. All star systems are from generations of stars dying and being born. This all happened and created all the protoplanetary disks of various materials. Heavier stuff is closer to the star and lighter stuff further away. Over time, they became what we know them are today as they clumped together. One of those protoplanetary rings became Jupiter, and if it were two times bigger, it would actually become a brown dwarf star, the smallest star. It is already so big that it stopped us from having another planet. The asteroid belt is a protoplanetary disk that could have been a planet, but because it was stuck between the Sun and Jupiters' massive gravitation, it was torn apart. So all of this happened and nobody had to tell it to do that. There does not have to be reason for anything. Things just happen "just because" all the time.
@alucard8433 from what I understand dogs might have originally started with wolves who were domesticated by tribes and these docile wolves evolved over time (which would explain why wolves are still around cause we didn't domesticated every wolf in the world) that's different than a mass evolution like monkeys becoming humans. From what ik scientist aren't sure how wolves evolved into dogs
@@quawrld_5016 What i'm saying is religious people will often laugh at the idea of the world always being there or being created by a big bang. But somehow the idea of god always being there is logical?
"If you believe in the Big Bang, that means you don't believe in a creator of the Earth" Well, yes and no. I don't believe in God myself, but it is perfectly possible to suppose that God set off the 'Big Bang' or whatever. Your options aren't limited to just atheism or scriptural literalism. As for the creator of the video, I don't know what Bill Wurtz believes, but he wasn't speaking as though he was God at the beginning of the video. That was a misunderstanding on Ollie's part.
@@SIXX2772 Yeah monkeys are obviously different enough to disregard but the mystery of how and when we became what we are is even more mysterious. Is it evolution or Gods perfected creation? Wild stuff. Maybe Monkeys were a failed version of what we are. Or maybe they are the stepping stones for what we can possibly be?
We know we evolved with a common ancestor of monkeys. That was proven by the unraveling of the human genome. Even without a single fossil we know this. You two should learn about evolution. Visit your closest museum of natural history.
I mean, we probably did evolve from monkeys -- there are skeletons of monkeys and humans and of all the species that were a "bridge", in-between stages from monkeys to humans.
Half of Europe died in the black death. If you want to think about what that means, pick half of all the people you know and imagine they're now dead. Was covid that bad? I don't think so!
Not at all. Evidence very clearly says otherwise. Creation did not occur, but if it did, then whoever did it did a sloppy job. You're right that we didn't come from monkeys, though. We evolved from a common ancestor. Monkeys fall into two groups, the Old World monkeys and the New World monkeys. Apes and Old World monkeys are more closely related to one another than either is to New World monkeys. There are similarly Great Apes, Chimps, Gorillas, Orangutans and Humans, as well as the Lesser Apes, Gibbons. The last common ancestor of a chimp or gibbon and a baboon or macaque would have struck an observer as an Old World monkey but would not have belonged to any modern "monkey" genus or species. "Monkey” is not a scientific term. In science, there are rules that govern what things are. This is called taxonomy. Evolution works via a population adapting over time to better fit environmental pressures. It's not a cat becoming a dog. In biology, you never outgrow your ancestors. You are what your ancestors were. You can never leave your order, only further specialize. So you belong to the taxonomic groups that your ancestors belong to, and if two species belong to a taxonomic group, then their last common ancestor must also belong to that group. This is called a nested hierarchy. "Monkey” violates the rules of taxonomy as it exludes some members of its order, that being primates. Apes are excluded here, and that is a violation. In science, we use the term “simian” to refer to this proper group instead. “simiiforme” essentially means all monkeys, including the apes, beaucse they must be included according to the rules of taxonomy. Apes evolved from earlier simiiformes. So, according to taxonomy, apes are simiiformes. Since “simian” is the scientific term for “monkey”, you could informally say that apes are monkeys. If we trace back generations between humans and chimps until we reach our common ancestor, that animal was an ape, not any modern species, but it was absolutely an ape. Humans absolutely evolved from apes. Humans and our fellow apes share a common ancestor, and that exact same pattern works with apes and monkeys. If you trace back generations between apes and monkeys until you reach our common ancestor, that creature was a "monkey." It was not a monkey of any current species, but it was absolutely a monkey. Apes absolutely evolved from monkeys. Apes and monkeys share a common ancestor. If you trace back generations of monkeys and lemurs until you reach a common ancestor, that creature probably didn’t look enough like a lemur to be considered a lemur. It looked much more like a treeshrew and was likely similar to the plesiadapiforms. So this pattern does change to some degree, but looks only play a small part in identifying a creature. After the K-T extinction event, the small mammals who survived adapted to life in various different environments as they took over the world. Jungle habitats are where primate evolution starts. The earliest primate ancestor we know of is Purgatorius, and it looked much more like a treeshrew. These then specialized even more for arboreal life into Plesiadapiforms, as I mentioned. When we look back on the line of descent leading up to humans, it goes like this. You have basal primates like plesiadapiforms split into haplorhines and strepsirrhines. Strepsirrhines continue to do their own thing and further specialize in their own way, but we are haplorhines. Haplorhines split into simiiformes and tarsiiformes. Tarsiiformes continue to do their own thing and split into their own specialized groups, but we are Simiiformes. Basal simiiformes end up in different ecosystems, and due to different pressures, they split into platyrrhines(the New World Monkeys) and catarrhines. The New World Monkeys continue to do their own thing and further specialize in their own way. The basal catarrhines end up in different ecosystems, and due to different pressures, they split into cercopithecoids(the Old World monkeys) and hominoidea(Apes). Hominoids then further split into Hylobatidae(lesser apes/gibbons) and Hominidae(great apes). The hominids split into homininae and ponginae. Ponginae is the line that would lead to Orangutans. They are our our most further removed cousins. Hominines split into gorillini, which would become gorillas who are the next to split and next most removed cousins, and hominini. Hominini is the tribe that holds the creatures that would later split into the ancestor of Humans and our cousins the Panins(Chimps and bonobos). Sahelanthropus tchadensis is what we currently believe to be the last common ancestor we shared with Panins 6-7 million years ago. It lived at the right time, it had the right characteristics, and it lived in the African Rift Valley when it would be split. This is what would cause the split into Panins and our line. They would become ardipithecines, australopithecines, paranthropines, and homo among other things.
The Big Bang theory doesn't propose that anyone or anything created the universe. nobody knows what caused the singularity to exist in the first place or what existed before the Big Bang which is freaky
Exactly,. It also doesn't explicitly rule out that a god or gods created the universe as we know it using the Big Bang. The theory neither requires not excludes, it is neutral.
@@PongoXBongo I mean we never know if it wasnt a God or not but it will make snse if it was because look at our planet its the only planet that can sustain life out of the whole solar system the only planet in our galaxy that we know of that human beings or any life can be on
It kinda scares me cause if God exists too ,that means he had to be made or file from somewhere, existence is impossible if there's nothing,the more I think about it the more my mind goes haywire ,it's impossible
@@ryannyarumba5919 exactly bro it’s crazy to sit down and actually think about what created the create if that made sense😂 how did it happened it just answers we probably never going to be able to answer until another thousands of years. hopefully by than they would have time travel and shit like that
@@quawrld_5016thousands of years is a huge understatement. In the entire age of human life we will never quite understand everything about our universe because it is literally impossible to know.
We didn't evolve from monkeys, we are apes (like chimpanzees and gorillas) and monkeys and apes share a common ancestor. Which means that we both evolved from the same original thing.
Check out a chimpanzee's hands, look at their joints, ears, nose, eyes etc, their DNA is 98.8% identical to that of a human being. We are much much much more alike then we are different. 98.8% alike.
By the way, a scientific theory is not the same as a literary theory. They basically have the opposite meaning. A scientific theory shows evidentiary proof of as statement (basically showing your work/your recipes). Literary theory is an idea, where you then go to find the evidence to proove said theory.
No, the video is not saying there is a creator. The way he is talking when the screen is white isn't meant to be taken literally, he is being humorous and clever with the language there as he does throughout the entire video. He also isn't saying there isn't a creator. He is taking a neutral position.
Hi, nice reaction. Thumbs up! :)
1) Evidence from fossils, proteins and genetic studies indicates that humans and chimpanzees had a common ancestor millions of years ago. Most scientists believe that the 'human' family tree (known as the sub-group hominin) split from the chimpanzees and other apes about five to seven million years ago.
2) We have remains of a tail in our skeleton. It's called the tail bone. Tails of animals are full of nerve ends and are very touchy. That's why it hurts so much, if one is falling down directly on the tail bone. It is the last remain of our ancient animal tail.
Came here to clarify these points as well but you already summarized it very nicely! The genetic evidence is quite telling though - so I don't know if indicates is the best fitting word here. But I am not a native english speaker so it might be that I just get the wrong impression.
Thank you for this! I know a lot of people have a knee-jerk reaction to their kinds of comments, but the way you responded was the best way to do it. I know I personally need to work on this myself.
@@SomethingSeemsOff
Thank you for the nice feedback! :)
Wait kid on the left is old enough to get tattoos but has never heard of evolution?
Depends on how he was raised. Heavily religious families won't even discuss the possibility it wasn't all god.
A few things I will mention. There are plenty of people who study science and believe in God. I personally don't think of a creator as a person. When he was talking about the universe being created. That's the force I believe in, science is just a way of understanding what that force is and finding the beauty in that.
COVID didn't do nearly enough to come close to Black plague, one thing you have to remember the population wasn't as big back then. Worldwide 200 million people died from this, but Europe had an estimated 75 million people before that.
Awesome video you two 👍🏼
I appreciate your sentiment. Many scientists see their work as exploring and explaining God's creation; enriching it and elevating the level of awe and wonder. If you take a less literal view of Genesis, then you open up the possiblities of His "mysterious ways" (which well could have included the Big Bang or the like).
The funny thing is that the black death had a role in ending the Middle Age and kick starting the Renaissance. Half of the population died, but their goods were still here so the survivors were considerably richer, they suddenly had more, they could afford more, it wasn't just surviving from one day to another. A sort of a middle class was born. And since there were so few people left, so few workers, they could suddenly negotiate higher wages from their overlords.
Another factor is that the church always said that the plague is God's punishment for sins. But people could see that the priests and the monks died too, maybe even in higher proportions because they lived together in monasteries.
So they decided that one of the following must be true:
1. The church people are just as much of a sinners as we are
2. The explanation is wrong.
For the first time people started to doubt the church. Before that, whatever the church said was the absolute, unquestionable truth.
Mind you, some fundamentalist Evangelicals still didn't get that memo...
The city of Florence in Italy STILL hasn’t recovered from the Black Death
When he says instructions it is not being serious. It is just a way for people to understand. Explaining how life came about is my favorite thing ever. Chemical evolution is so cool. To start, you have to talk about the Urey-Miller experiment. Back in the 1950s these two biochemists did an experiment in which they took a containment chamber, filled it with water, ammonia, methane, hydrogen, and all the things you expect to find on any fledgling planet. All the things you would expect on any new Earths. They put a fire underneath so it would evaporate, go into another container to be zapped with electrodes, cooled, funneled back to the original container, and cycles back through. They are simulating the patterns of an early Earth and simulating all the elements you could find on Earth. You take early simple ingredients, get them hot, get them cold, zapped with lightning and other normal processes. They ran it for a while, and when they came back, they took samples. To their surprise, the water is no longer clear but is a gross reddish brown. They test it and find it is now full of amino acids. Amino acids are the things that build proteins and make life happen. That is called chemical evolution. Very simple inorganic ingredients come together via totally natural means and form organic macromolecules. There are 4 macromolecules that make up life. Lipids, proteins, carbs, and nucleic acids. Those are the 4 macromolecules that make up everything alive. Each one is a polymer, meaning it's a molecule that forms a chain. I'll explain each of these below:
PROTEINS are made of chains of amino acids that fold up on themselves. A chain of amino acids is a primary structure. Then, it folds into an alpha helix or a beta pleated sheet called a secondary structure. Then, it forms a glob called a tertiary structure. Sometimes, some globs come together, and that's then a quaternary structure and so on. That's how proteins work. Proteins make up skin, muscle, bones, and everything like that.
CARBS are sugars. Long chain simple sugars such as glucose or fructose. If you stick them together, you get sucrose. A bunch of those together makes a polysaccharide. This makes carbs like starch, cellulose, and such.
LIPIDS are fats. You have a twisted hydrocarbon chain that repels water, and that's a lipid. There are various kinds like phospholipids where a long hydrocarbon chain comes off it to repel water and, on the other end, is a phosphorus group that attracts water. This makes a hydrophilic and hydrophobic end. One attracts and one repels water. If you take any lipid like cooking oil, for example, and put it in water, it forms a bubble all by itself. Nobody has to tell it to do that. That's because a sphere is the smallest possible surface area and is the most energetically protected from the water around it. It would take more energy to make any other shape, and the universe is lazy. Everything is always as energetically simple as possible. Lipids that naturally form out of normal stuff under normal circumstances naturally form spheres. Amino acids which make proteins that naturally form out of natural stuff can get stuck in one of these spheres, and you now have something that practically represents a cell. All this stuff is formed by totally natural means and naturally assumes the shape of a sphere can naturally come together and form a cell. You can do this in a jar. Now imagine that on a planet taking place over millions of years.
The Urey-Miller experiment has been redone in different ways many times by putting other things in, leaving some things out, and hundreds of combinations, and it just always works. Later, we figured out this happens in hydrothermal vents. They pump out acids and bases. These have proton gradients. What's that? Well, an acid is a chemical with a bunch of extra protons, and a base is something that doesn't have enough and has too many electrons. When they neutralize, they give off electrical charges that move one place to the next. This is how your cells make energy today. Mitochondria pass protons across a membrane. This turns a protein called ATP synthase, which makes adenosine triphosphate, and that's how our body works. It's how most cells today work. Where can we find natural proton gradients right now? Hydrothermal vents. Where can we find the building blocks of lipids and proteins? Hydrothermal vents. We can even find amino acids, including all the ones important to life, in space. Just floating on asteroids. They form naturally all by themselves all over. You have the building blocks of life, the thing that makes energy in cells even today happening naturally all by itself in hydrothermal vents and all over the universe. Life then starts all by itself. Now, we also have NUCLEIC ACIDS, the 4th macromolecule, which is DNA and RNA. We do debate what came first, but the most common consensus is that RNA came first. I also follow the RNA world hypothesis. Let me explain why.
RNA is cool because it isn't just something that carries information, but it also works as a catalyst to make reactions happen. A catalyst is something that lowers the activation energy of a reaction. It makes a reaction happen easier and faster with less energy. So RNA carries genetic information, it can also make more of itself, and it can make other reactions happen faster. Think about how proteins are made in your body today. It's like this.
You have mRNA(messenger RNA) that makes proteins happen. How? It goes to a ribosome to be read. What are ribosomes made of? They are made of rRNA(ribosomal RNA) and aren't membrane bound organelles. In the ribosome, something brings over amino acids to make the protein. What brings them over? tRNA(transfer RNA). So when your body makes proteins, it uses RNA to tell RNA to use RNA to make a protein. Again, you can do this in a jar. That is why the major consensus is that RNA came first. RNA is something that is so unbelievably useful. Why do we have DNA, then? Because once it happened to form, DNA was/is really good at long term storage, and it's far more stable, meaning it stuck around better. You can divide it, make more of it, pack it into a tight wad and have it twist around proteins called histones to makes a tight rope called chromatin, and then chromatin forms a body called a chromosome. That's how DNA works. It wraps around proteins, wraps into a thick rope, and those thick ropes form a chromosome. It's super easy to divide these and split them up.
Is it so hard to believe that some of these naturally forming nucleic acids found their way into a blob of naturally forming lipids? THEN they split, THEN you have 2 sets of chromosomes in a cell THEN cytokenesis happens where actin filaments tighten around the cell in a contractile ring, and remember lipids form bubbles naturally, so once squished together you now have a cleavage furrow that then splits into two seperate bubbles! You now have dividing life out of literally "nothing." It's not difficult at all to say that very simple ingredients found all over the universe that naturally form organic molecules by natural processes then naturally stated making more of themselves. You then get a VERY early organism. Something so insanely simple. Not bacteria, that would be unbelievably complex in comparison. Just a very simple membrane, very simple genetic material, and very simple proteins. The very basics of all of this. That is what we call LUCA. There was probably a ton of very early life, but LUCA is the one that stuck around. Everything that ever lived past that point is related to LUCA. We have a very clear picture of how everything evolved after that. I can gladly get into that if anyone wants me to. I'm an evolutionary biologist, so this tickles me all over when I get to explain it.
@@iammanny2115 everybody should be a teacher, though. Any knowledge you have should be spread to others who might not have it. I've explained this many times, and plenty of people read it. If they don't, they don't. Maybe somebody will and they will learn something. That is what it is all about.
I thoroughly enjoyed this, thank you for sharing this!
@@kitsunefire1 If you have any questions about anything, I'm happy to answer!
I also find it almost comical how shocked people are when he says about like Africa being raped and then nanking being raped by Japan cuz that's pretty much exactly what happened. But it's almost like the reactor is offended by the term used when in actuality it's the reality that was offensive. Just as in the shock when he says how after slavery was gone we manifest our destiny across the country and killed all of the natives. Course we didn't kill ALL the natives, just a couple million in one way or another. Japan versus the u.s. fight, the extinction ball. How is that shocking when that was the reality?
Humans and apes/monkeys share a common ancestor. Whatever that ancestor was, at some point, produced offspring that instead of remaining as they were, they split into two different evolutionary branches. One of those branches evolved into humanoids and the other branch evolved into apes/monkeys. Humans were never monkeys as we know them and didn’t evolve from monkeys. It’s more like humans and apes/monkeys are like distant cousins. Humans and chimpanzees share something like 95% DNA. All life on earth evolved from one speck of life, likely a bacteria. But somewhere in that long ago time, the first humans and the first apes went down different paths. We are related to them but didn’t evolve from them.
The name of Greenland is basically a propaganda name of the first vikings, who got there. They needed more vikings to come there, too, to found a society there and so they had to find a cool, tasty name that made other vikings to come and settle there, too.
And Greenland was a little more green back than then now. But not really a country even in greener times, where the vikings wanted to live for a longer time and so they left again later on.
Found that in the net:
"It actually got its name from Erik The Red, an Icelandic murderer who was exiled to the island. He called it “Greenland” in hopes that the name would attract settlers. But according to scientists, Greenland was actually quite green more than 2.5 million years ago"
What about Iceland? did they name it that so too many people wouldnt come for it?
@@Cobra-mb2gx
Greenland was named so for propaganda purposes by one guy.
Completely different people at much earlier times named Iceland that way without any thoughts in mind to make propaganda.
@@megatwingo thanks!
@@megatwingo I wonder if the vikings may have kept that earlier name to discourage their rivals from trying to take it from them?
Iceland was discovered by Hrafna Flóki Vilgerðarson in the 9th century. When he landed, he hiked up the Westfjords, saw a fjord full of ice and icebergs, and named the island according to what he saw at the time, Ísland. Greenland was named long after that, nearly a century later, by Erik the Red, assuming people would be attracted to it because of the name.
Erik's father Þorvaldr Ásvaldsson was exiled from Norway for killings he committed, so his whole family left with him, and they settled in Iceland. Two decades later, Erik was then exiled from Iceland because he killed multiple people during a land dispute similar to his father. His family sailed to find a new home and were the first to discover Greenland. When he landed, he discovered a great fjord landscape and fertile green valleys. He was very impressed with the new lands resources, so after a few years, when his exile was over, he returned to Iceland to spread the word of “The Green Land" or "Grænland". He knew he needed people to create a viable settlement in order to survive, and it was the perfect time to advertise to "you people of the poor land in Iceland” as they had suffered a recent famine.
He was very sucessful in rounding people up and set sail back to Greenland with 25 ships carrying around 500 men and women, domestic animals and all the other elements required to create a new existence in a new land. Only 14 of those ships made it unfortunately, but after they landed, some people settled under the rule of Erik as chieftain while others continued north. These were the Western and Eastern settlements. The Eastern Settlement, where Erik ruled, had a couple thousand people compared to the Western Settlement that had around 500. They lasted around four centuries. We don't know what exactly caused them to vanish, but some of the reasons theorized are climate change, lack of natural resources and domestic animals that couldn't survive the cold, lost contact with Norway as their main trading partner, contact with Inuit which is thought to have been friendly except for the fact they had to share resources, and their overly conservative ideology in which they prioritized contact with Europe and relied on the church and the European way if life rather than fully adapting to Greenland. The smaller Western Settlement was the first to disappear and the Eastern after that. They were very successful, actually, lasting 400 years and being totally self-sufficient, while today Greenland relies heavily on Denmark for food. On a side note, his son Leif was the first European to set foot in the Americas.
You can 'believe' in the big bang and believe in a creator..I don't, but you can 🤣
That was always the thing I never understood I've always tried to convince people that if the Big Bang is a thing why couldn't there be a god what did the Big Bang come from if we have no way to even guess that the Big Bang could have easily been caused by a god I bet even if he came down to earth and placed humans here it'll be kind of hard to explain what the big bang was with our lack of knowledge it's a lot easier just to say oh I created the Earth and leave it at that instead of trying to explain the expansion of the universe to people who only care about food and sex
Exactly. I'd wager that most Jews/Christians/Muslims do believe in both. It's just the extreme orthodox vocal minorities that don't.
For God's sake change the battery in your smoke alarm!
I can understand why people misunderstand the monkey thing, but think about it this way:
Did you evolve from your sister? No, but you have the same parents. Did you evolve from your cousin? No, but you have the same grandparents. And just keep that pattern going for about 200,000 years. Did you evolve from monkeys? No, but you have the same great great great great (...etc...) great grandparents. They're long gone, but the result is you and me, and chimpanzees, and bonobos, etc.
You can do the same for any living thing - you just have to go back far enough in the family tree. Speaking of which, did you evolve from the tree in your back garden? No, of course not, but if you go back far enough, you'll find a common ancestor, so you are related.
No... We don't think it "just happened". There is a mountain of math which agrees with experiment and observation to an absurd level of precision, which describes an equally huge mountain of physics that accounts for our current understanding of the universe. Nowhere in any of that math, experiment, and observation is a 'creator' required for things to function the way we see it functioning. It all works perfectly fine without that assumption.
What i will never understand is people who dont believe in science even when theres undeniable proof, but yet choose to believe in a supernatural being. Christianity didnt even come along until quite a bit into world history. There were many religions that came before. Something christianity would like to forget.
And when it comes to the monkey stuff we keep finding links from one species to the next or overtime they look closer and closer to humans but we've even found other variations of humans that aren't homo sapiens suggesting while we were evolving other humans evolved in different ways and started their own groups and of course we want to war with them or they went to war with each other and went extinct and if you look at great apes they show more human traits year after year especially when you teach him sign language and find out they're depressed it's kind of scary a lot of animals have recently found to commit suicide for example a dolphin committed suicide after its sex partner was taken away from it which was honestly just a woman who was jacking off a captive dolphin and got fired and arrested for it after they found out so yeah he just stopped eating and drowned himself because dolphins breathe air
It's always interesting to me that followers of Abrahamic religions have no issue with single cell organisms evolving into moss and shrimp and fish, but something that looks exactly like humans leading to humans is incomprehensible. Like do they think mammals are some sort of phenomenon? or is it literally just the homo sapien subsect of mammals that they think is an anomaly? What are Neandethal in that case? Seems super weird to desperately try to rermove yourself from the nature that created you and that you rely on...then again all Abrahamic religions really care about is power
"science and spirituality are the same thing" oowww
Aaand.. if the God theory is so more believable than the big bang then what existed before God? Who created God?
A god is not a theory on par with scientific theories. It is a guess. A scientific theory is not the same as a layman theory.
Nice reaction. Thumbs up! :)
You looked pretty surprised at the scene of the beheadings of the French Revolution. Therefore I'm recommending the video "The French Revolution" from the channel "OverSimplified".
That channel makes videos in a similar entertaining style like the makers of this "History of the entire World"-video.
Greetings
Mega
I like that this is the only reaction where they get super deep and philosophical 😂 love it
Bubonic still exists on average 6 people die from it in america every year, it's still very deadly in central asia, it's not as bad as lepracy anymore though
I don’t think we evolved _from_ monkeys, it’s more that we & monkeys share common ancestors. Also, I believe there were more cousin species than just humans & Neanderthals
Denisovians from Russian Siberia. These 3 branches seemed to overlap and there is Neanderthal DNA in humans so we just bred each other into a hybrid. And there are prly more cousins out there. Densovians weren't discovered until fairly recently if memory serves.
@@pfang32denisovians were another big one but theres estimated like 11 different species of humans that lived at the same time, we were basically just the lucky ones 😅
I just saw this... if I could erase the "we evolved from monkeys" idea from peoples heads, I would. All life had a common ancestor. Think of it like your own family. You and a cousin have a common ancestor in your grandparent. That grandparent has someone further back... and so on. And pick a trait... red hair. Someone in your past had red hair and as that then passed that down, and the shades changed, and sometimes blonds were born instead. That is how humans came about. It's hard to picture because all of our nearest cousins are extinct, and only the ones that are distant enough to be primates are left. Sadly. Also, you can be spiritual and believe in science. Lots of people are!
Smoke detector out here reinforcing stereotypes
The difference between the plague and covid is like the difference between stubbing your toe and having your leg ripped of by tiger.
yo guys, u seem great, all the science and evolution, your damn i right i believe that though i wont belittle those that are unsure. i can talk about it forever though, love that stuff and with the gigantism of insects in the past your right my dude that stuff is gross and dinosaurs are crazy. evolving from another primate doesn't necessarily change anything my dude, some believe in a guiding hand kinda god others like myself do not believe in god but that doesnt have to be a bad thing. Anyway science rant over now, keep up the good work :D
ps im into science but also call myself spiritual. They aren't the same but they are not mutually exclusive either.
The use of various forms of "fuck" throughout the video is, probably, why this isn't shown in schools.
Have you never heard of social Darwinism? Because you're going to become it's victim if you don't change the smoke detector battery.
Saying things need a reason to happen is a very human thing to say. It is a common misconception that "nothing became something," but in reality, the concept of "nothing" doesn't exist. There is never nothing and was never a nothing. At one point, all the matter in the universe was condensed down into a singularity. We can even pinpoint where, in space, this singularity was by looking as radiation. For some reason, the singularity started to expand. There was never really a "big bang," and that is a bad description of the event. It is better to describe it as an "everywhere stretch." There was never an explosion, but rather things started to expand. Why? We don't know yet, and neither does anybody else. Just because you don't know does not mean you get to claim "I don't know, therefore god" because that must mean you know. It is paradoxical and not how the real world works. We don't know, and therefore, nobody gets to proclaim that they do know.
Of course, all matter being condensed means it was extraordinarily hot when it first expanded. This leads to bonds and fusion events of different molecules. Hydrogen was, of course, the first as it is the simplest. It also happens to be the most reactive because of this. Almost all stars start their life as hydrogen being condensed together with gravity. Through more and more pressure, as more and more hydrogen comes together, things like nuclear fusion kick off. New elements start to fuse into existence. When these stars go supernova as they start to produce iron. Iron really messes everything up. The star can no longer sustain equilibrium, and the core collapses in on itself, causing a supernova. This spews these new elements all over to come together and make larger stars, which have more pressure that makes even new elements. A lot of stars formed at the start of the singularity stretching. Lots of elements formed pretty quickly. Through these many, many supernova, you get particles of elements to combine into large chunks of themselves, and thus, we have asteroids, planets, and moons.
Ever wonder why our solar system is the way it is? Why do we have rocky planets in the center and jovial planets outside of our solar system, then? It's because of thermal gradients. As you get further from the star, you get colder, and the solar winds get less powerful. Close to the star rock won't solidify, so you have a gap between sun and first planets in a system. There's a limit to where you can have terrestrial planets, those being Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars. You then get to a certain point where you can have liquid water, and that's where our planet is, the "goldilocks zone"."" We aren't special for that either. The goldilocks zone is millions of miles wide. It's a common myth that if we were a foot closer or further, we couldn't survive, and that's simply not true, but I digress. Past a certain point, the solar winds blasting the planets weaken. That's where we get these big gas giants. All the gas that's around Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune would have been here on Earth too, but the sun blasted it off to the back of the solar system. That's why the gas giants are out there. And if you look at any other star system, it follows the same format. No planets in front, the terrestrial planets in the center and the gas giants, if it has gas giants, in the back.
This all happened after a supernova from a dead star created our sun, and the suns gravity attracted material from said supernova. All star systems are from generations of stars dying and being born. This all happened and created all the protoplanetary disks of various materials. Heavier stuff is closer to the star and lighter stuff further away. Over time, they became what we know them are today as they clumped together. One of those protoplanetary rings became Jupiter, and if it were two times bigger, it would actually become a brown dwarf star, the smallest star. It is already so big that it stopped us from having another planet. The asteroid belt is a protoplanetary disk that could have been a planet, but because it was stuck between the Sun and Jupiters' massive gravitation, it was torn apart. So all of this happened and nobody had to tell it to do that. There does not have to be reason for anything. Things just happen "just because" all the time.
Covid was nothing like The Black Plaque, They had bodies wheeled past them on carts daily lol
No we not evolve from monkey. Humans and ape(monkey are smoll ones) share ancestor.
The video i watch said that we are chimpanzee cousin. We did not come from monkeys. I recommend the video by big history
No humans didn't evolve from monkey's if we did they'd be extinct. The theory (if u believe it) goes that we share a common ancestor, so like cousins.
There definitely gotta be a real theory we share if im not wrong 98 percent of our dna w chimps dat gotta mean some
And why would we be extinct? Your comment makes 0 sense
@@arcanevi4477 Read my comment over again lol
@@catcountry0099 Then how do you explain wolves being alive? Dogs evolved from them.
@alucard8433 from what I understand dogs might have originally started with wolves who were domesticated by tribes and these docile wolves evolved over time (which would explain why wolves are still around cause we didn't domesticated every wolf in the world) that's different than a mass evolution like monkeys becoming humans. From what ik scientist aren't sure how wolves evolved into dogs
Lol @7:09 this exchange is hilarious
Yo bro do u have any tips how to grow your channels
Staying consistent is most important bro 🤙🏽
@@NdayNOllie thank bro trust me u gonna be real big soon 📈💯
whats the song outro?? i know the song but dont remember the name nor the artist
Tokyopill- emptiness
bro who made this video😂
Bruh dat vid was funny to me for no reason😂 the sound effects caught me off guard
IF there was a creator where does the creator come from? IMO these questions are above human understanding
creator of what the world? 2 theory’s either a God did it or the bing bang
@@quawrld_5016 What i'm saying is religious people will often laugh at the idea of the world always being there or being created by a big bang. But somehow the idea of god always being there is logical?
"If you believe in the Big Bang, that means you don't believe in a creator of the Earth"
Well, yes and no. I don't believe in God myself, but it is perfectly possible to suppose that God set off the 'Big Bang' or whatever. Your options aren't limited to just atheism or scriptural literalism. As for the creator of the video, I don't know what Bill Wurtz believes, but he wasn't speaking as though he was God at the beginning of the video. That was a misunderstanding on Ollie's part.
Did not evolve from monkeys.
Then what do you have in mind?
@@bottlecap8372 I have mind enough to know that monkeys would not exist if they had evolved into humans! So what do you have in mind then?
@@SIXX2772 nothing, just wanna know your perspective. So where exactly do humans come from?
@@SIXX2772 Yeah monkeys are obviously different enough to disregard but the mystery of how and when we became what we are is even more mysterious. Is it evolution or Gods perfected creation? Wild stuff. Maybe Monkeys were a failed version of what we are. Or maybe they are the stepping stones for what we can possibly be?
@@gogousa6661monkeys are like 90 percent related to us in the animal kingdom which why it make sense
We know we evolved with a common ancestor of monkeys. That was proven by the unraveling of the human genome. Even without a single fossil we know this. You two should learn about evolution. Visit your closest museum of natural history.
I mean, we probably did evolve from monkeys -- there are skeletons of monkeys and humans and of all the species that were a "bridge", in-between stages from monkeys to humans.
Half of Europe died in the black death. If you want to think about what that means, pick half of all the people you know and imagine they're now dead. Was covid that bad? I don't think so!
We didn’t evolve from monkeys lol we were created
Not at all. Evidence very clearly says otherwise. Creation did not occur, but if it did, then whoever did it did a sloppy job. You're right that we didn't come from monkeys, though. We evolved from a common ancestor. Monkeys fall into two groups, the Old World monkeys and the New World monkeys. Apes and Old World monkeys are more closely related to one another than either is to New World monkeys. There are similarly Great Apes, Chimps, Gorillas, Orangutans and Humans, as well as the Lesser Apes, Gibbons. The last common ancestor of a chimp or gibbon and a baboon or macaque would have struck an observer as an Old World monkey but would not have belonged to any modern "monkey" genus or species. "Monkey” is not a scientific term. In science, there are rules that govern what things are. This is called taxonomy.
Evolution works via a population adapting over time to better fit environmental pressures. It's not a cat becoming a dog. In biology, you never outgrow your ancestors. You are what your ancestors were. You can never leave your order, only further specialize. So you belong to the taxonomic groups that your ancestors belong to, and if two species belong to a taxonomic group, then their last common ancestor must also belong to that group. This is called a nested hierarchy. "Monkey” violates the rules of taxonomy as it exludes some members of its order, that being primates. Apes are excluded here, and that is a violation. In science, we use the term “simian” to refer to this proper group instead. “simiiforme” essentially means all monkeys, including the apes, beaucse they must be included according to the rules of taxonomy. Apes evolved from earlier simiiformes. So, according to taxonomy, apes are simiiformes.
Since “simian” is the scientific term for “monkey”, you could informally say that apes are monkeys. If we trace back generations between humans and chimps until we reach our common ancestor, that animal was an ape, not any modern species, but it was absolutely an ape. Humans absolutely evolved from apes. Humans and our fellow apes share a common ancestor, and that exact same pattern works with apes and monkeys. If you trace back generations between apes and monkeys until you reach our common ancestor, that creature was a "monkey." It was not a monkey of any current species, but it was absolutely a monkey. Apes absolutely evolved from monkeys. Apes and monkeys share a common ancestor. If you trace back generations of monkeys and lemurs until you reach a common ancestor, that creature probably didn’t look enough like a lemur to be considered a lemur. It looked much more like a treeshrew and was likely similar to the plesiadapiforms. So this pattern does change to some degree, but looks only play a small part in identifying a creature.
After the K-T extinction event, the small mammals who survived adapted to life in various different environments as they took over the world. Jungle habitats are where primate evolution starts. The earliest primate ancestor we know of is Purgatorius, and it looked much more like a treeshrew. These then specialized even more for arboreal life into Plesiadapiforms, as I mentioned.
When we look back on the line of descent leading up to humans, it goes like this. You have basal primates like plesiadapiforms split into haplorhines and strepsirrhines. Strepsirrhines continue to do their own thing and further specialize in their own way, but we are haplorhines. Haplorhines split into simiiformes and tarsiiformes. Tarsiiformes continue to do their own thing and split into their own specialized groups, but we are Simiiformes. Basal simiiformes end up in different ecosystems, and due to different pressures, they split into platyrrhines(the New World Monkeys) and catarrhines. The New World Monkeys continue to do their own thing and further specialize in their own way. The basal catarrhines end up in different ecosystems, and due to different pressures, they split into cercopithecoids(the Old World monkeys) and hominoidea(Apes). Hominoids then further split into Hylobatidae(lesser apes/gibbons) and Hominidae(great apes). The hominids split into homininae and ponginae. Ponginae is the line that would lead to Orangutans. They are our our most further removed cousins. Hominines split into gorillini, which would become gorillas who are the next to split and next most removed cousins, and hominini. Hominini is the tribe that holds the creatures that would later split into the ancestor of Humans and our cousins the Panins(Chimps and bonobos). Sahelanthropus tchadensis is what we currently believe to be the last common ancestor we shared with Panins 6-7 million years ago. It lived at the right time, it had the right characteristics, and it lived in the African Rift Valley when it would be split. This is what would cause the split into Panins and our line. They would become ardipithecines, australopithecines, paranthropines, and homo among other things.