digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Evolution - addressing some misconceptions watch!

youtube.com — ..and explaining some of the basics.

Who dugg this? Made popular May 14, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

483 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • CrudOMatic, on 05/14/2009, -20/+288Exactly! I love the inclusion on the banana history too... showing exactly how Creationists do 0 (ZERO) research into their claims before spouting off at the mouth.

    Also, as a side note, as much as I like Alex Jones - he had a nutcase on his show about a week ago that claimed that Evolution is actually a religion, and it was based off Buddist Reincarnation... he tried to say that evolutionists believed that people came back as Goats or Snakes, and it was the never-ending acention to godhood. QUACK QUACK QUACK!!!!
  • AngelBunny, on 05/14/2009, -12/+257I like how well he explained that creationism and evolution do not contradict each other and in fact do not even really relate to each other at all.

    I wish more people realized that evolution is NOT anti religion.
  • LeviTheSmith, on 05/14/2009, -3/+191Dugg for Rhinocrocoduckpuss
  • yuutokun, on 05/14/2009, -9/+141Best video on you tube in awhile.
    How could one NOT accept the reality of evolution.
  • JRowe3388, on 05/14/2009, -2/+119We didn't come from monkeys. We just came from the same thing monkeys came from.
  • Tyrghast, on 05/14/2009, -19/+116Creationists aren't concerned with facts, merely with unprovable claims.
  • daschupa, on 05/14/2009, -1/+96Also, the Thunder Stone is the only way a Pikachu can evolve into a Raichu. I'm tired of these "leveling up" misconceptions!
  • hauntedchippy, on 05/14/2009, -1/+95"mice dna is more similar to humans than human dna."

    Epic fail.
  • Hetman, on 05/14/2009, -2/+93We are all mammals so we all share a common ancester. That includes mice.
  • inactive, on 05/14/2009, -2/+91Well, that's part of the problem with creationists, they make leaps that theory actually doesn't. Evolutionary theory doesn't say the mutations necessarily make an animal better, just different than before, if that mutation is a benefit, they will thrive, if not, they probably wont. As for evolving complexity, I would recommend reading "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins for several examples of how it has occurred.
  • saddino, on 05/14/2009, -2/+82Mice DNA and human DNA are so alike because both evolved from a common mammalian ancestor:

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/01/01 ...
  • elTito, on 05/14/2009, -2/+81Where do you get these silly ideas about evolution making anything "better" or "more complex"?

    Evolution makes no such assertions.
  • Hrodrik, on 05/14/2009, -10/+87It's a pity that the people that most need to see this video are either too proud to see it or too dumb to understand it.

    Hey, religious wackos, pride is a capital sin.
  • Geoth, on 05/14/2009, -3/+74Will, if you watched the first 18 seconds of that video you would know why your comment is invalid.
  • Noncentz, on 05/14/2009, -4/+73Fundamentalism is some scary *****. This vid should be required watching in 5th grade.
  • themastersb, on 05/14/2009, -4/+72This video should be called "Guide to evolution for retards"
  • Velvolver, on 05/14/2009, -1/+66I really like Yahtzee when he's not on drugs
  • JRowe3388, on 05/14/2009, -0/+52Way to edit your post so my reply seems completely irrelevant. lol

    Monkey or mouse, we came from the same thing at some point.
  • ftyuv, on 05/14/2009, -0/+49It's actually not even that organisms with beneficial mutations thrive; it's that the organisms that thrive are defined as having beneficial mutations (or lack of harmful mutations). In other words, it's not that you reproduce more because you have a mutation that's been pre-ordained as good; it's that if you reproduce more, the mutation is regarded as good.

    There are very natural forces in the world that cause things to become more complex: the desire for food, for instance. If I'm a bacterium with a stinger, and a random mutation turns that stinger into a propulsion device, and that helps me get to food quicker, then I'll be able to spend less time looking for food and more time making babies. Voila; evolution has increased complexity.
  • Hetman, on 05/14/2009, -4/+52It depends on your interpertation of the bible. If you take it literally than yes it does go against your religion. Fortunatly that is not the view held by most.
  • masrabel, on 05/14/2009, -0/+47"Scientists have just shown that mice dna is more similar to humans than human dna"

    Kind of saying "the color blue is more similar to the color red than blue itself" EPIC FAIL indeed. Do you realize how incredibly retarded what you said is ?
  • lexpattison, on 05/14/2009, -16/+63If religious people were rational - there would be no religious people.
  • perpafactor, on 05/14/2009, -1/+44Dugg for QualiaSoup. Check out his other videos, they're all very good!

    Especially this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-h9XntsSEro
  • digitalArtform, on 05/14/2009, -0/+43Better???

    What you call the 'better' species won't be so great after all if its environment changes to no longer favor it. That's what evolution says. Not better. Just better suited. For now.
  • inactive, on 05/14/2009, -3/+45You follow a religion in which humans were originally punished for seeking knowledge. Your argument is invalid.
  • bowens44, on 05/14/2009, -1/+43Home schooled?
  • desertDenizen, on 05/14/2009, -4/+44I have yet to meet a single person who rejects evolution and can explain it correctly.
  • cplusplus, on 05/14/2009, -1/+39Good video. I would prefer it if the narrator had a Southern US accent.
  • inactive, on 05/14/2009, -0/+35I think you need to take your crocoduck for a walk.
  • digitalArtform, on 05/14/2009, -0/+35The banana thing was high-*****-larious. I wish I had known that even sooner. I'm sure glad I know it now.
  • piieerrrree, on 05/14/2009, -0/+33"The theory of evolution breaks down, however, when you try to expand it to show that species become somehow "better" or gain features over time."
    Remember that bit with the moths in the video? Yeah, go watch it again.
  • burnin8r28, on 05/14/2009, -0/+32i want a rhinocrokcoduckpus =[
  • mrseptic, on 05/14/2009, -2/+34"As a christian I laugh at evolutionists"

    How fitting, we're all laughing at you too.
  • Pigeon, on 05/14/2009, -0/+31Nice how you accuse him of doing exactly what you are.
  • attercob, on 05/14/2009, -6/+37This video is great... but it uses logic to explain evolution and people who are willing to listen to logic already understand and embrace evolution. The people who don't believe in evolution are typically irrational meaning that rather than accept scientific evidence they insist that their faith contradicts evolution. You can't use reason to argue against faith, it's like trying to reason with a two-year-old.
  • Nemoso, on 05/14/2009, -0/+31You're all retarded fish-frogs. Great video.
  • ftyuv, on 05/14/2009, -0/+30jumanous, if you look back, I actually showed an example where evolution *does* increase complexity, as measured by number of proteins produced or length of DNA.

    As for "better," no, evolution definitely doesn't say that -- just more or less suited for a given situation, as digitalArtform said. To call something as "good" or "better" means having an opinion on it, and scientists don't ascribe opinions to science.

    Saying that something is better than something else raises the question: better *according to whom*? Science isn't a sentient being, so nothing is better or worse according to it -- any more than it's better or worse according to a rock, or to according to the color blue.

    You might say that a human is better than an amoeba, but what you're saying is "humans are better than amoebas in my judgment." Evolution doesn't deal with the second part of that statement, and without it the first part is meaningless.
  • MarkusX, on 05/14/2009, -3/+32The absolutely best video I have seen online in as long as I can remember.

    However, I'm wondering: my grandparents were NOT monkeys? ;-))
  • Lewie, on 05/14/2009, -1/+29I think he means because English accent = Elitist, and Southern Drawl = "one of us". You know, the reason people voted for Bush.
  • HEAVYisSPY, on 05/14/2009, -0/+27lay off the pixie sticks 0_o
  • dpbBryan, on 05/14/2009, -0/+27lol, he copy and pasted that from fundamentalists say the darnest things site.
  • Hrodrik, on 05/14/2009, -2/+29Ah I'm sorry, in Portuguese they are the capital sins.

    But I see in wikipedia that they are also called the capital vices or cardinal sins.
  • amorrise, on 05/14/2009, -0/+26I liked the clarification that (as my microbiology teacher frequently said) evolution doesn't explain how life got to earth nor does it address the creation of the universe. That leaves tons of room to accept evolution without giving up other beliefs. So why is this still not accepted by many people?
  • wizardzatz, on 05/14/2009, -0/+25Bananas are delicious.

    Thanks Evolution!
  • inactive, on 05/14/2009, -0/+24Rikkochet, I think Hetman was using the Bible and the Christian faith as an example, not referring to those as the only religious text and the only religion, respectively.
  • DeadlyAlpaca, on 05/15/2009, -17/+41I'm a 22 year old engineer who was raised a Catholic.

    I am no longer a Catholic. How can I believe in a God that gives me wits and intelligence and then expects me not to use them?
  • verynegative, on 05/15/2009, -0/+24Because by accepting it, you acknowledge the fact that the earth have been here for millions of years.
    Some people have trouble with that, they think its been here only for 6000 years.
  • yuutokun, on 05/15/2009, -2/+26Apparently you didn't WTFV
  • DforSpiD, on 05/15/2009, -1/+23Care to raise valid counter arguments... without resorting to these straw man arguments?
    Pro tip: any argument that 'proven' because 'it says so in the bible' is more of a straw man argument than any of these points
  • svendm, on 05/14/2009, -1/+22Well then you've misunderstood. You're wrong, or you don't know what 'creationism' is.

    cre·a·tion·ism (krē-ā'shə-nĭz'əm)
    n. Belief in the literal interpretation of the account of the creation of the universe and of all living things related in the Bible.

    "Creationism" is NOT the same thing as believing God created the universe and man. It is a literal belief in the Bible's versions of those events, and it is indeed entirely incompatible with Science.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 494 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.