No offence, but would you please update the speaker in this video..... because he sounds exasperating and unclear..... Would appreciate a change.... Thank you
When you think about it , we are all from mutations on this planet . We came about as mutations from the very earliest little worm like creatures in the sea . It was mutations that helped us develop eyes , a nervous system and later on lungs and limbs to help us leave the sea and become land mammals ...and so on ..
Mutations limit and degrade organisms and NEVER result in novel function or morphology but rather modify or eliminate previously existing ones. Just think, mutations result from error, toxins, radiation and these circumstances do not lend improvement. Fish cannot develop lungs or build legs and paws through mutation predicated on defense or accident. Bacteria can only degrade protein types to immunize from antibacterial exposure. Mutations do not contribute or explain the theory of evolution from molecules to man or land mammal to whale but only help explain some inadvertent adaptation aka natural selection in ecosystems within genus types. Please like and subscribe.
The Encyclopedia Americana acknowledges: "The fact that most mutations are damaging to the organism seems hard to reconcile with the view that mutation is the source of raw materials for evolution. Indeed...mutation seems to be a destructive rather than a constructive process". 1977, Vol 10, p.742.
@@spatrk6634 do not forget natural selection is not predictable. Look at the the fossil record and just the past few hundred years of plant and animal extinctions. You see any new critters evolving ?
"No currently existing formal language can tolerate random changes in the symbol sequences which express its sentences. Meaning is invariably destroyed." - M. Eden, "Inadequacies of Neo-Darwinian Evolution as a Scientific Theory", from "Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution," at the Wistar Institute Symposium, page 11 (Philadelphia, Wistar Institute Press, 1967, Cited by Wysong, ref [7], p. 107. "All morphological mutations that we know of either have no effect on the organism at all - no fitness effect - or they're harmful. We don't know of any that are useful." - Dr. Johnathan Wells, Ph.D in Molecular and Cell Biology from the University of California at Berkeley, formerly a postdoctoral research biologist at the University of California at Berkeley, supervisor of a medical laboratory in Fairfield, California. He has taught biology at California State University in Hayward and continues to lecture on the subject. "But there is no evidence that DNA mutations can provide the sorts of variation needed for evolution. There is no evidence for beneficial mutations at the level of macroevolution, but there is also no evidence at the level of what is commonly regarded as microevolution." - Dr. Johnathan Wells, Ph.D in Molecular and Cell Biology from the University of California at Berkeley, formerly a postdoctoral research biologist at the University of California at Berkeley, supervisor of a medical laboratory in Fairfield, California. He has taught biology at California State University in Hayward and continues to lecture on the subject. "Mutations, in summary, tend to induce sickness, death, or deficiencies. No evidence in the vast literature of heredity change shows unambiguous evidence that random mutation itself, even with geographical isolation of populations leads to speciation." - Lynn Margulis, evolutionist, Acquiring Genomes, 2003, p. 29. "Not even one mutation has ever been observed that adds a little information to the genome." - Dr. Lee Spetner, scientist and teacher at Johns Hopkins University, Not by Chance! Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution "But in all the reading I've done in the life-sciences literature, I've never found a mutation that added information. All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it." - Lee Spetner - Ph.D. Physics, MIT, Not By Chance: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution Distribution of fitness effects caused by random insertion mutations in Escherichia coli, Excerpt: "At least 80% of the mutations had a significant negative effect on fitness, whereas none of the mutations had a significant positive effect." www.springerlink.com/content/r37w1hrq5l0q3832/ “I have seen no evidence whatsoever that these [evolutionary] changes can occur through the accumulation of gradual mutations.” -- Lynn Margulis, as quoted by Charles Mann, “Lynn Margulis: Science’s Unruly Earth Mother,” Science, Vol. 252, 19 April 1991, p. 379. “If we say that it is only by chance that they [mutations] are useful, we are still speaking too leniently. In general, they are useless, detrimental, or lethal.” - W. R. Thompson, “Introduction to The Origin of Species,” Everyman Library No. 811 (New York: E. P. Dutton & Sons, 1956; reprint, Sussex, England: J. M. Dent and Sons, Ltd., 1967), p. 10. 10 Laws of Nature Regarding Information, which prove evolution false and prove creation is true: 1. Anything material, such as physical/chemical processes, cannot create something non-material 2. Information is a non-material fundamental entity and not a property of matter 3. Information requires a material medium for storage and transmission 4. Information cannot arise from statistical processes 5. There can be no information without a code -- no thought or idea can be shared without a code 6. All codes result from an intentional choice and agreement between sender and recipient 7. The determination of meaning for and from a set of symbols is a mental process that requires intelligence 8. There can be no new information without an intelligent, purposeful sender 9. Any given chain of information can be traced back to an intelligent source 10. Information comprises the non-material foundation for all: a. technological systems b. works of art c. biological systems Therefore: 1. Since the DNA code of all life is clearly within the definition domain of information, we conclude that there must be a sender 2. Since the density and complexity of the DNA encoded information is billions of times greater than man's present technology, we conclude that the sender must be supremely intelligent 3. Since the sender must have a. encoded (stored) the information into the DNA molecules, b. constructed the molecular biomachines required for the encoding, decoding, and synthesizing process and, c. designed all the features for the original life forms, We conclude the sender must be purposeful and supremely powerful. 4. Since information is a non-material fundamental entity and cannot originate from material quantities, we conclude that the sender must have a non-material component 5. Since information is a non-material fundamental entity and cannot originate from material quantities, and since information also originates from man, we conclude man's nature must have a non-material component (spirit) 6. Since information is a non-material entity, we conclude that the assumption "the universe is comprised solely of mass and energy" is false. 7. Since: 1) biological information originates only from an intelligent sender and, 2) all theories of chemical and biological evolution require that information must originate solely from mass and energy alone (without a sender), we conclude that all theories or concepts of biological evolution are false. Anyone who disagrees with these laws and conclusions must falsify them by demonstrating the initial origin of information from purely material sources. Therefore, the laws of nature about information have: 1. refuted the assumption of scientific materialism and the theories of chemical and biological evolution 2. all philosophies or theories based on the assumption of scientific materialism including chemical and biological evolution are falsified by the laws of nature about information. For more information: th-cam.com/video/DLb_VYomZkQ/w-d-xo.html
Straw-man fallacy. Mutations aren't random, they are guided, controlled and highly-specified by laws of physics (which is not an intelligence). Google "physical mechanisms of mutation" to see how mutations work, deterministically, by laws of physics and chemistry. Biology, like all other sciences above physics are a rough approximation and sometimes use random models to help explain, predict and understand the underlying deterministic processes. But that does not mean nature is random. Physics proves nature is neither random nor intelligent. For example, a sociologist might say, there is a 1% chance for a person to be homosexual. Does that mean there is really a 100 sided die being rolled by god or nature that determine someone's sexual orientation? Of course not. The random model is an approximation, not literal, which creationists have severe mental issues trying to understand, because they lack math education.
Benifitial mutations are unpredictable and rare. Would not call sickle cell benifitial but neutral. Just ask those that suffer from it. From an evolutionary point of view , I can see a person with sickle cell surviving a malaria infested environment to reproduce offsprings but have a short lifespan . Unpredictable benifitial mutations added to unpredictable Natural selection makes for a whole bunch of unpredictability. The best anology I can come up with is having a haystack pile of keys and a haystack pile of locks. In those haystack piles of locks and keys , only one lock and key matches. The process to get the right lock and key together is called Evolution. Tuff to wrap my mind around that.
No offence, but would you please update the speaker in this video..... because he sounds exasperating and unclear..... Would appreciate a change.... Thank you
He doesn't sound uncertain or exasperated to me. He just has a different accent. Pretty rude btw.
@@Dunduckuty if you can't understand him, it's not rude. This video is pointless if it's hard to understand the speaker.
Good content but the audio quality needs to be upgraded
would love for you to re-do the sound on this. Good video but the volume changes throughout and makes it hard to hear.
Noted!
When you think about it , we are all from mutations on this planet . We came about as mutations from the very earliest little worm like creatures in the sea . It was mutations that helped us develop eyes , a nervous system and later on lungs and limbs to help us leave the sea and become land mammals ...and so on ..
Can you do blood glucose regulation please?
We have an insulin & glucagon video coming soon.
Mutations limit and degrade organisms and NEVER result in novel function or morphology but rather modify or eliminate previously existing ones. Just think, mutations result from error, toxins, radiation and these circumstances do not lend improvement. Fish cannot develop lungs or build legs and paws through mutation predicated on defense or accident. Bacteria can only degrade protein types to immunize from antibacterial exposure. Mutations do not contribute or explain the theory of evolution from molecules to man or land mammal to whale but only help explain some inadvertent adaptation aka natural selection in ecosystems within genus types. Please like and subscribe.
Yup
If the mutation is good then evolution means the same.
The Encyclopedia Americana acknowledges: "The fact that most mutations are damaging to the organism seems hard to reconcile with the view that mutation is the source of raw materials for evolution. Indeed...mutation seems to be a destructive rather than a constructive process". 1977, Vol 10, p.742.
mutations are mostly neutral.
@@spatrk6634 do not forget natural selection is not predictable. Look at the the fossil record and just the past few hundred years of plant and animal extinctions. You see any new critters evolving ?
"No currently existing formal language can tolerate random changes in the symbol sequences which express its sentences. Meaning is invariably destroyed." - M. Eden, "Inadequacies of Neo-Darwinian Evolution as a Scientific Theory", from "Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution," at the Wistar Institute Symposium, page 11 (Philadelphia, Wistar Institute Press, 1967, Cited by Wysong, ref [7], p. 107.
"All morphological mutations that we know of either have no effect on the organism at all - no fitness effect - or they're harmful. We don't know of any that are useful." - Dr. Johnathan Wells, Ph.D in Molecular and Cell Biology from the University of California at Berkeley, formerly a postdoctoral research biologist at the University of California at Berkeley, supervisor of a medical laboratory in Fairfield, California. He has taught biology at California State University in Hayward and continues to lecture on the subject.
"But there is no evidence that DNA mutations can provide the sorts of variation needed for evolution. There is no evidence for beneficial mutations at the level of macroevolution, but there is also no evidence at the level of what is commonly regarded as microevolution." - Dr. Johnathan Wells, Ph.D in Molecular and Cell Biology from the University of California at Berkeley, formerly a postdoctoral research biologist at the University of California at Berkeley, supervisor of a medical laboratory in Fairfield, California. He has taught biology at California State University in Hayward and continues to lecture on the subject.
"Mutations, in summary, tend to induce sickness, death, or deficiencies. No evidence in the vast literature of heredity change shows unambiguous evidence that random mutation itself, even with geographical isolation of populations leads to speciation." - Lynn Margulis, evolutionist, Acquiring Genomes, 2003, p. 29.
"Not even one mutation has ever been observed that adds a little information to the genome." - Dr. Lee Spetner, scientist and teacher at Johns Hopkins University, Not by Chance! Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution
"But in all the reading I've done in the life-sciences literature, I've never found a mutation that added information. All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it." - Lee Spetner - Ph.D. Physics, MIT, Not By Chance: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution
Distribution of fitness effects caused by random insertion mutations in Escherichia coli, Excerpt: "At least 80% of the mutations had a significant negative effect on fitness, whereas none of the mutations had a significant positive effect." www.springerlink.com/content/r37w1hrq5l0q3832/
“I have seen no evidence whatsoever that these [evolutionary] changes can occur through the accumulation of gradual mutations.” -- Lynn Margulis, as quoted by Charles Mann, “Lynn Margulis: Science’s Unruly Earth Mother,” Science, Vol. 252, 19 April 1991, p. 379.
“If we say that it is only by chance that they [mutations] are useful, we are still speaking too leniently. In general, they are useless, detrimental, or lethal.” - W. R. Thompson, “Introduction to The Origin of Species,” Everyman Library No. 811 (New York: E. P. Dutton & Sons, 1956; reprint, Sussex, England: J. M. Dent and Sons, Ltd., 1967), p. 10.
10 Laws of Nature Regarding Information, which prove evolution false and prove creation is true:
1. Anything material, such as physical/chemical processes, cannot create something non-material
2. Information is a non-material fundamental entity and not a property of matter
3. Information requires a material medium for storage and transmission
4. Information cannot arise from statistical processes
5. There can be no information without a code -- no thought or idea can be shared without a code
6. All codes result from an intentional choice and agreement between sender and recipient
7. The determination of meaning for and from a set of symbols is a mental process that requires intelligence
8. There can be no new information without an intelligent, purposeful sender
9. Any given chain of information can be traced back to an intelligent source
10. Information comprises the non-material foundation for all:
a. technological systems
b. works of art
c. biological systems
Therefore:
1. Since the DNA code of all life is clearly within the definition domain of information, we conclude that there must be a sender
2. Since the density and complexity of the DNA encoded information is billions of times greater than man's present technology, we conclude that the sender must be supremely intelligent
3. Since the sender must have
a. encoded (stored) the information into the DNA molecules,
b. constructed the molecular biomachines required for the encoding, decoding, and synthesizing process and,
c. designed all the features for the original life forms,
We conclude the sender must be purposeful and supremely powerful.
4. Since information is a non-material fundamental entity and cannot originate from material quantities, we conclude that the sender must have a non-material component
5. Since information is a non-material fundamental entity and cannot originate from material quantities, and since information also originates from man, we conclude man's nature must have a non-material component (spirit)
6. Since information is a non-material entity, we conclude that the assumption "the universe is comprised solely of mass and energy" is false.
7. Since:
1) biological information originates only from an intelligent sender and,
2) all theories of chemical and biological evolution require that information must originate solely from mass and energy alone (without a sender), we conclude that all theories or concepts of biological evolution are false.
Anyone who disagrees with these laws and conclusions must falsify them by demonstrating the initial origin of information from purely material sources. Therefore, the laws of nature about information have: 1. refuted the assumption of scientific materialism and the theories of chemical and biological evolution 2. all philosophies or theories based on the assumption of scientific materialism including chemical and biological evolution are falsified by the laws of nature about information.
For more information: th-cam.com/video/DLb_VYomZkQ/w-d-xo.html
Straw-man fallacy. Mutations aren't random, they are guided, controlled and highly-specified by laws of physics (which is not an intelligence).
Google "physical mechanisms of mutation" to see how mutations work, deterministically, by laws of physics and chemistry. Biology, like all other sciences above physics are a rough approximation and sometimes use random models to help explain, predict and understand the underlying deterministic processes. But that does not mean nature is random. Physics proves nature is neither random nor intelligent.
For example, a sociologist might say, there is a 1% chance for a person to be homosexual. Does that mean there is really a 100 sided die being rolled by god or nature that determine someone's sexual orientation? Of course not. The random model is an approximation, not literal, which creationists have severe mental issues trying to understand, because they lack math education.
I have asthma...
Well who cares?
We care!! I have asthma too!
Benifitial mutations are unpredictable and rare. Would not call sickle cell benifitial but neutral. Just ask those that suffer from it. From an evolutionary point of view , I can see a person with sickle cell surviving a malaria infested environment to reproduce offsprings but have a short lifespan .
Unpredictable benifitial mutations added to unpredictable Natural selection makes for a whole bunch of unpredictability.
The best anology I can come up with is having a haystack pile of keys and a haystack pile of locks. In those haystack piles of locks and keys , only one lock and key matches. The process to get the right lock and key together is called Evolution. Tuff to wrap my mind around that.
I #subscribed #chaz is now #chopped into three and its #mutations are spreading like #Covid2020 #saveyourpennies for #VisforVendetta Part #Deux
there is something absolutely wrong with your intonation...
Minecraft
One dislike for poor audio quality...
Audio quality is garbage