Prof. Richard Dawkins gives some examples of evolutionary intermediates between bacteria and apes. From the discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby at Eden Court Theatre, Inverness, Wednesday 2 April 2008. See the full discussion and question and answer session by going to www.youtube.com
-
Categories
-
Recent Post
- Elements of Music-Basic Terms-Melody
- Guitar Training Hardware
- Guitar Chord Diagram
- Names of the notes on the open strings.
- How to Play the Guitar
- The Beach Boys, Surf Music, and the British Invasion
- Electric Guitar Distortion
- Learn to Play Guitar Essentials
- The Guitar Chord Learning System
- SQL Injection in Oracle PL-SQL packages
25 Comments
I’d like to hear more about the dinosaur foot-prints. Do you have a reference to that?
During millions of years the coastline can move quite a lot. Even the continents drift.
If we’d find a modern human from the dinosaur era, we would have to reconsider evolution. Maybe it would more be proof of time travel than disproof of evolution. But now we are talking about science fiction. And please, don’t try to claim the dinosaur and human footprint hoax proves it.
There is proof Noah’s flood was not global, but local. The holy Quran talks about the flood punishing only NOAH(PBUH)’S PEOPLE.
How can Noah fit all the animals in the ark?
How can he get all the good people in the earth?
What’s the point to flood a place were people are not guilty of not listening to Noah’s message?
Why is there no evidence for a global flood, but alot of evidence for a local one?
Why is a local flood more plausible?
abbasownage
Sorry, I don´t get the point on your comment, can you clarify it for me?
Actually. When we observe carbon dating, it is not like that. We see organisms forming fully formed with no past history. Study the cambrian period.
Also, as much as i do agree with carbon dating, since it is scientific, it is very innacurate. Still, i hope it is accurate, therefore read my previous paragraph.
Noah’s flood was not global.
I.E coverd the ENTIRE earth.
It was local:)
abba
I don´t think so, for instance down here at the of Baja we can observe many geological formation evidencing a global flood and that a terrible catastophe took place in the recent past, vuldqnism for example all at the very same time.-
Even geologist agree upon it, watch:
watch?v=3a44p_dOEis or The Grand Canyon: Evidence of an ancient earth, if the top of The Grand Canyon was once under water, so the whole world were too.
Sorry not to agree with you.
Peace be with you.
How can you ask “What is really scientific of all he said?” Science is based on theory. He is explaining a theory. All we can ever truly HAVE is theory because unless we make a time machine that will send us to the beginning of time (not happening) we can never actually prove how the universe began.
And if human fossils are found next to dinosaur fossils and agreed upon by the scientific community to have come from the same era, I’ll consider the possibility.
halonone
So if you find the fossil as if they were planted there with no evolutionary history, and this is repeated over and over again through out the fossil record, a rational theory (explanation) to explain these observational facts is the theory of evolution, no other explanation can be offerered, regardless if the whole evolutionary theory DOES NOT fit with the evidence found in the fossil record, gradualism has been discarded and punctualism is not making a very good job
I just want to totally plug ‘Ancestor’s Tale’, which is a more detailed covering of what Dawkins says in this video.
It’s like the Canterbury tales, but ‘Canterbury’ is the origin of life & the ‘pilgrims’ met on the way are our ancestor’s from apes all the way back to bacteria (inreverse chronological order).
If anyone is convinced that what he’s saying is just ‘theory’, then u must read it. Ut convinced me (a christian back then) that evolution is deeply profound & powerfully explanatory.
Dawkins never seizes to amaze me!
This man really knows his stuff.
Ricky was telling a fairy tale, wasn´t he?
If he was so, he´s the best in the field…jajaja
sounds like he had a big night
Jesus, there are some morons commenting on this video. Please religious weirdos, fuck off.
A great summarization. Short enough but still containing details of how the changes came about.
Time magazine story said we are ancesters to mushrooms. fungus? then i read it was black mold. so what? Do we really need to know this? Actually we do know, it’s like that song that is right on the tip of your tounge but you can’t spit it out. it doesn’t really matter anyway. trivia ACTUALLY.
ps, i WANT MY TALE BACK. hOW CAN WE GET OUR TALES BACK? hmmm, now that’s a problem i’d like to see solved. Growing them back.
i’m not sure about the seizures but he never ceases to amaze me, either
It may be possible if individuals born with tail bone mutation were inbred for synthetic selection, resulting in a protrutding ‘tail’. But it wouldn’t function like a tail I imagine. And thia process would probably take a very long time, and due to genetic drift, it would really be hit or miss.
ceases*. lol
Evolution is a fact. And I believe you understand the word theory incorrectly, scientifically, a theory is an explanation of a fact.
For one, I think that is impossible, and even if such an unusual discovery came to be, it wouldn’t really prove anything, because the footprint would have to match up with a species of homo prior to australopithecus.
I agree, its like asking that what if we found out that the Earth is flat. Well, then we would have to accept it.
But this would mean all science is wrong, that all the evidence we have is wrong, that gravity and the whole world is nothing like the evidence says. That’s crazy.
Or what if we found out that gravity is controlled with a machine by penguins on the south pole. Well, then we would also have to accept it, but there is a reason why we wont find such things.
That’s where senses come into arguement in burden of proof. We know that we will not find that out because, gravity is not a mental concept, it is a law of physics, that needs no enforcement, and from seeing the Earth, viewing it from the vacuum, that it is indeed round. So there’s no point in even mentioning the Earth could be flat. Cheers.
facts and laws