Darwin and Natural Selection: Crash Course History of Science #22
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2018
- "Survival of the Fittest" sounds like a great WWE show but today we're talking about that phrase as it relates to Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace. Darwin and Wallace are at the heart of understanding evolution and natural selection. Today, Hank talks about their wonderful (if not seasick inducing) trips around the world.
***
Crash Course is on Patreon! You can support us directly by signing up at / crashcourse
Thanks to the following Patrons for their generous monthly contributions that help keep Crash Course free for everyone forever:
Mark Brouwer, Erika & Alexa Saur Glenn Elliott, Justin Zingsheim, Jessica Wode, Eric Prestemon, Kathrin Benoit, Tom Trval, Nathan Taylor, Divonne Holmes à Court, Brian Thomas Gossett, Khaled El Shalakany, Indika Siriwardena, SR Foxley, Sam Ferguson, Yasenia Cruz, Eric Koslow, Caleb Weeks, Tim Curwick, D.A. Noe, Shawn Arnold, Ruth Perez, Malcolm Callis, Ken Penttinen, Advait Shinde, William McGraw, Andrei Krishkevich, Rachel Bright, Mayumi Maeda, Kathy & Tim Philip, Jirat, Eric Kitchen, Ian Dundore, Chris Peters
--
Want to find Crash Course elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook - / youtubecrashcourse
Twitter - / thecrashcourse
Tumblr - / thecrashcourse
Support Crash Course on Patreon: / crashcourse
CC Kids: www.youtube.com/
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 65 | คู่เอก "จ้าวเสือใหญ่ vs ผึ้งหลวง"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TDpOh5eEJKw/mqdefault.jpg)
I can't believe biology did not emerge as a formal discipline until 1859. I would have thought it would have been older. Goes to show how new modern science and our modern world are in the greater scheme of human history and natural history.
The word "science" didn't even appear until the 19th century. Hell, "religion" didn't even appear until the 17th century. "Philosophy" is ancient, though, so you can safely use that concept to understand the past. In fact, until about the 20th century, universities generally only taught theology, medicine, politics, and "philosophy" - which was a catch-all phrase for everything else, including what we call "science" today. Today, philosophy is being gutted from many universities to be replaced with career training, so our oldest concept for education is disappearing.
Most of the scientific disciplines we recognise today weren't formalised until the mid to late 1800s. People have always studied life, but biology refers to a professional discipline studying life in a certain way. People have always studied how things physically interact, but physics again refers to a professional discipline studying life in a certain way. And so on and so forth.
Following on what Metaldigital said, what we call "science" now was called natural philosophy in the West before it was called science. It took me two, three years of studying biology and history and philosophy of science to realise that to do science IS to do philosophy. It deals with the same things as any other branch of philosophy does - questions about ontology, epistemology, the operations and pitfalls of logic, the creation and management of systems of organisation, and the question of how we - people - relate to whatever we're studying. It's just that each branch of science has very particular assumptions (usually hidden) that makes it look very straightforward, black and white. But it's anything but.
I am sure therr were greatest biologist before the flood
darwin is just theory
Modern science comes from the devil it is only rexent becauae satan only invented thia evil scheme recemtly watch kent hovind a videos
Those two giants of biology deserve all the credit they can get. To come up with a mechanism for evolution is no small feat. And to travel around the world on a ship in the 19th century is not pleasant. I'm still in awe of their deep understanding even by today's standards.
The rothschilds (the people who make money and therefor have infinite money) funded him. Why? Do your research.
They will.surely burn in hell bible says bewarebif you offend one of these little ones as.God will destroy darwin unless he repented befpre dying
@@truthtruthtruth6795 hai, why don't you stopped reading your fairy tale book and achually learn something that is real.
@@pedroguerrero3862 darwins theory is totally made up and not mathematically possible
@@justindixon4564 Says the one who believes in a magic man in the sky.
Stop reading the comments you have a test on Monday.
How tf did u know
Wtf how’d u know.
Close, i have to do a research paper for tommorow
Sorry
i actually do have to hand in my overdue paper on darwin
I remembered back in uni our lecturer asked us to see an exhibition about Wallace.
Here in Singapore we still have his samples and remember him. He has a cabinet display at Lee Kong Chian Natural History Museum and also a learning centre named after him, Wallace Education Centre at Dairy Farm Nature Park
Is it just me or should Crash Course make children books (or just illustrated books in general) about their different videos and topics?
Why does it make me giggle every time Hank refers to Charles Darwin as "Chuck"?
Norris
Same! the original Chuck D!
Charlie Brown references?
@@scottylilacleona9193 Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I just know it made me laugh every time he said "Chuck" lol.
Red dead redemption 2
This video is awesome! After being a biology teacher for 15 years, I wish I would’ve had this summary long ago. Fantastic job! Simplified, clear, entertaining, accurate, historically synthesized and relevant, beautiful job. Donation and support here I come!!
Evolution the process by which life changes over time, and in order to function it requires two things. The first is mutation-- random alterations in the genetic material over time due to copying errors, and the second is natural selection-- a non-random process that drives how mutations are spread through a given environment.
Mutations are extremely well documented and are actually the source of some of the more deadly diseases to afflict animals across the planet. There are two major types of mutations that can occur.
The first is a point mutation. A point mutation occurs when a base in a gene is swapped for another base, and nothing has been inserted or removed. The result is generally benign or produces no effect in the resulting protein as the amino acid is not altered (There are 64 possible combinations in a single codon, which consists of 3 base-pairs, and there are only 20 amino acids used in life on earth. As a result, more than one codon can code for the same amino acid). For example, sickle-cell anemia is a point mutation that produces malformed hemoglobin and increases the risk of various cardiovascular complications (due to their rigid shape).
The second type of mutation involves the insertion and removal of nucleotides from the gene and is prone to causing problems in translation. This sort of mutation causes problems because a single codon consists of 3 base pairs, and has designated start and stop signatures that are read by tRNA. When a single nucleotide is inserted into a sequence it can cause the translation of this gene into a protein to start or stop prematurely-- this is known as a frame-shift, and if this happens the mutation is referred to as a frame-shift mutation.
Of course, these sorts of mutations can occur with more than one nucleotide at a time, as is the case with Tay-Sachs disease. Tay-Sachs is most frequently caused by the insertion of four nucleotides into the HEXA (hexosaminidase A) gene, and the result is progressive deterioration of nerve cells-- generally starting at around six months old. There are several other kinds of mutations that can occur, though this should do for the basics.
On to natural selection... Natural selection is an observable process that has to do with a given population of animals. Specifically, it's a combination of social and ecological pressures on a population that causes mutations to propagate in a non-random pattern. Animals that express mutations that are ill-suited to their environments are less likely to pass on those genes when compared to animals that express genes that allow them to thrive more adequately given current pressures. This means that if you have a mutation that causes a disease such as sickle-cell anemia, you're (slightly) less likely to pass on that trait unless you live in an area of the world that is afflicted by Malaria, to which sickle-cell anemia provides natural resistance. As a result, sickle-cell anemia is quite common in tropical and sub-tropical regions of the world and still lingers in the populations of people who hail from these regions.
So to summarize:
- Mutations occur at random.
- Mutations come in several varieties, the most important for our purposes right now are insertion, deletion, frame-shift, and point.
- Point mutations are less likely to lead to health problems than insertion or deletion mutations because more than one codon can code for the same amino acid.
- A frame-shift can cause tRNA to begin or end translation from RNA to a protein prematurely and will cause the sequence following the frame-shift mutation to translate incorrectly.
- Natural selection is NOT random and is the result of environmental pressures on a population.
And from this we can make the following rather basic logical deductions:
- It is more likely for a point mutation to propagate through an environment than a mutation that adds or removes nucleotides.
- Insertion and deletion mutations are more likely to propagate through a population if they insert or remove nucleotides in multiples of three.
- A mutation does NOT need to be entirely beneficial to propagate. The benefits need only outweigh the detriments in a given environment. (See also: sickle-cell anemia)
- Animals better suited to their environment are more likely to thrive in it than animals that are not.
Pretty simple, right? Here's the tricky part.
Because genes are passed down from parent(s) to child(ren), you have an accumulation of mutations over time.
Because mutations occur at random during the copying process, any part of your genome can be affected by them.
Since both of these things are true, then that means that mutations can be accumulated by a population over time. If mutations can be accumulated by a population over time, there will come a time where a species will no longer share enough DNA in common with its ancestors to breed successfully (children will be sterile, stillborn, will miscarriage, or won't even fertilize an egg). This is what is known as speciation.
This, in a nutshell, is evolution.
What an amazing set of discoveries we learned from Charles Darwin!
Darwin.the great liar devil possessed can natural selection think? No does it has brain? No can it plan? No but l thimgs are planned your shoes someone chose the color the size the shape.why os earth blue? Not red yellow ? From.natural selection? No it cannot tjonk nor plan anything thus it can only come from God
@@truthtruthtruth6795 It doesn't necessarily need to have mind for it to work that is why its called "natural" selection.
@@azap12 The cross of Christ will be the science and the song of the redeemed through all eternity. In Christ glorified they will behold Christ crucified. Never will it be forgotten that He whose power created and upheld the unnumbered worlds through the vast realms of space, the Beloved of God, the Majesty of heaven, He whom cherub and shining seraph delighted to adore-humbled Himself to uplift fallen man; that He bore the guilt and shame of sin, and the hiding of His Father’s face, till the woes of a lost world broke His heart and crushed out His life on Calvary’s cross. That the Maker of all worlds, the Arbiter of all destinies, should lay aside His glory and humiliate Himself from love to man will ever excite the wonder and adoration of the universe. As the nations of the saved look upon their Redeemer and behold the eternal glory of the Father shining in His countenance; as they behold His throne, which is from everlasting to everlasting, and know that His kingdom is to have no end, they break forth in rapturous song: “Worthy, worthy is the Lamb that was slain, and hath redeemed us to God by His own most precious blood!” GC 651.2
@@truthtruthtruth6795 Stop preaching
@@azap12 explain
All.thimg.require plannimg.a song.requores planning the number of chorises the xolor of car house material ised yes it all needs planning
You believe in magic then.ah ah
I love the ongoing in-joke about Darwin and Wallace in the movie "The Fall". A fictional version of a young Charles Darwin is shown wearing a psychedelic, butterfly patterned coat. His secret companion is a monkey named Wallace that he keeps hidden in a sack. He's able to understand Wallace who repeatedly chatters helpful ideas pertinent to the bizzare situations in which they end up. Ideas that Darwin repeatedly passes off as his own.
I love the Fall! I should go watch it again, it's been a while.
By all accounts, Wallace does deserve credit for evolution. But alongside, not instead of, Darwin. Darwin didn't simply pass off Wallace's ideas as his own (don't think you intended to suggest the real one did, but just in case). Also worth noting that they weren't competitors - they published together, supported each others ideas and Darwin also tried to help Wallace with his financial difficulties.
Wallace deserves far more recognition than what he gets.
wow I literally just searched for this exact video an hour ago as I'm cramming for my anthropology test. And then you just upload it in front of my very eyes :o
Wallace was a brilliant scientist with an amazing life story. Thanks for shedding some light on him. Great intro to Darwin as well!
you guys have really done a bang up job with this series
This is amazing! Intelligent, informative and humorous. Thank you!
its gonna be a really good episode, i really sense the excitement in your eyes Hank !
Fun fact: Charles Darwin was born on the exact same day as Abraham Lincoln.
It's always fun to debate which person born on Feb. 12th, 1809, had a greater impact on world history: Darwin or Lincoln. At first glance, you'd think it's no contest - Darwin's ideas have transformed the world whereas Lincoln's impact was a bit more local in scale.
But when you think about it a little more deeply you realize that science would have kept on trucking even if Darwin had never lived (we'd just be celebrating Wallace nowadays instead of Darwin.)
Had Lincoln not been there to hold the United States together at the most critical point in its history, the world might currently be ruled by Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan.
@@AbbeyRoadkill1 It's also entirely possible that any president would have basically done the same thing. No president would want to be the one who let the country split in half.
Well, timezones .... So Darwin was born first
@@ShaedeReshka ... George McClellan had promised to immediately end the war and come to terms with the Confederacy. Had he won the 1864 election it's quite possible that's what would've happened.
nice!
For a good in-depth textbook overview of the history of evolutionary theory-including the preliminaries to Darwin's theory, as discussed in previous episodes-I highly recommend "Evolution: The History of an Idea" by Peter J. Bowler, a distinguished historian of science and professor at Queen's University Belfast.
The thing that social darwinists don’t understand is that the trait that has made humans successful is our capacity for cooperation.
^This
Cooperation can serve an evolutionary benefit since it increases the likelihood that certain individuals will pass on their genes. It doesn't really contradict Darwin's theory of natural selection in this sense. Knowing when to work constructively with other is in and of itself a survival strategy.
I would amend that statement to say that "intelligent cooperation in the face of increased competition" was the trait that sealed our dominance of the planet.
Well I wouldn't say that was the only trait that made us successful. Pattern recognition was also an important trait.
@Diglikeashovel oversimplification
This is the best history of science episode so far.
Thank you Hank, John, and everyone. I've watched hundreds of hours and I owe you so much. Not ready yet, but my patreon membership is imminent..
As someone who just finished reading On the Origin of Species, I'm so glad you focused on the other creatures he studied so I could learn WHY HE WOULDN'T STOP TALKING ABOUT PIGEONS. (Also he literally only mentions finches twice)
On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life *
Fun fact: the only thing Darwin's theory of evolution was missing at the time was an article written by Mendel. His article was one of very few Darwin probably never read as he didn't take any notes on a copy he had.
I'm just so happy this series exists.
Awesome episode
Darwin, the scientist that was known to eat his specimens
That was why it was so hard to get a Galapagos tortoise to zoos at the time. They were apparently quite tasty and never survived the trip.
Haha, Darwin wasn't the only one! It took 300 years to officially name the giant turtiose due to its deliciousness! (A specimen needed to be brought to London to get an official name)
So at one point in Darwin's life, he ate postly barnacles and pigeons? :s
Cancelled
he frick fracked w his cousin n ate turtles. he be wilding.
Anyone else here during quarantine for Bio Class?
Darwin and Natural Selection talking about Wallace I greatly appreciate, and great for him to get a shout out as the creator of Biogeography, but can we get a series focusing on "Great People of Science" (and other disciplines) where we get an episode or two focusing exclusively on individuals such as Darwin and Wallace?
Actually, this video about Charles Darwin, Alfred Russel, Wallance with their natural selection is something familiar to me. I think when I was in grade 9 or 10. Darwin Wallance as the one man who truly understand the idea of evolution by natural selection. Natural selection can be used by farmers to generate organisms with desirable fruits. Darwin Theory explained through the natural selection, more individuals are produced each generation than can survive.
I'm amazed to the both of them! Thanks to this video.
Such an interesting episode!
Can't wait for the next episode!
Nicely Done 👌🏾
I love the remake of the intro theme.
I love how they make it interesting!
Very informative video 👍
This will help me on my assignment thank you.
:D
Ahh man I just summarized an entire chapter on Darwin when I could have just watched this
I have long awaited this day!!!
Watching this for my History 04B class!!
Thank you for this
Every time I watch this video, I can't help but imagine just how brilliant Darwin and Wallace were. Discovering natural selection was no mean feat.
Perfect timing seeing as I have a midterm on this exact subject tomorrow
It's often difficult to find one's self in the Context of The evolution of the Genome . Yet , there you are
This is good art direction.
Hank: there are no stupid, ugly turtles
me: there's one. Mitch McConnell
1:42 1 of many reasons why i love crash course
Love this video
ME: this video could help me A's my exam
FUTURE ME: nah a got a normal sore -_-
Bro you got a normal sore? I’m so sorry. What about ur test score tho
Thankyou, this was really helpful for my project about Charles Darwin.
I didn’t know all those details on Wallace, aside from his figuring out natural selection, contacting Darwin, and their publishing the joint paper a year before Darwin’s “Origins”. I do THANK YOU for pointing out that Darwin and Wallace DID NOT come up with “survival of the fittest”, and that it’s no more than a perversion of “Darwinism”. Great video!
Cool video!
I love this episode...
WELL STATED! Thx!
I've been waiting for this one Love the channels
Taking a short break from my homework to watch some crash course hell yeah!
Love you guys.❤
Great video, thank you very much , note to self(nts) watched all of it 12:28
im actually related to darwins wife and that side of the family
i STAN hank
Malthusianism is a useful primitive model for animal populations, but it's worth noting that its application to humans was refuted in 1879 by Henry George.
I find it especially hilarious that Malthus declared that the human population globally would never exceed more than one billion, only for the Industrial revolution to kick off and guarantee that it would eventually septuple that figure
Malthus was right given the means of production he was familiar with. And there's no guarantee that the earth will always be able to support more than a billion humans.
It was refuted in 1867, 13 years prior, by Karl Marx. His theory of the Reserve Army of Labor is a much better, scientific and empirical theory.
Just Reading Henry George
I don't recall the bit about Malthus, but his "Progress and Poverty" remains a great guide to the cyclical problems of capitalism. I'm seeing businesses shutting down here in SF due to increasing rent just as he described in the 19th century. The problem is that we are greedy and like playing the game the way it is.
Darwin should have changed “most fittest” to “most adapted” so he would have avoided several misconceptions about natural selection. “Most fittest” conjures up super-strong animals. Being super-strong does not necessarily mean you will survive. Being a lion sucks if your only food source is meat and all the meat source is dying out while there are plenty of plants growing around. It boils down to energy balance and adapting to it.
Where are my science majors at?!
Biology reporting in
Austin Gray Same! What are you going to do after you finish?
Depends, I was hoping to get into bionics, but I have trouble researching it with it being such a new field, so I might have to get another degree in computing.
Austin Gray Cool! At first I was thinking on going to med school but I don’t think I’ld like their lifestyle. I kinda want to have free time to work on my passions such as TH-cam so I was thinking of going to Pharm school. But I still don’t know.
I like the idea of working for a smaller start up, but by the time I get all the necessary degrees who knows what the state of bionics will be.
Yo that background for the credits tho 😍 need google image sesrch
Very nicely explained. well, Why these theory are not talk much about plants and vegetation,
IT'S COMING! EVERYONE HIDE! ITS ALMOST HERE!
THE COMMENT SECTION!
Wow, hank is back
I just started rereading Kurt Vonnegut's novel Galapagos. Casual serendipity or formal synchronicity? 😉
By "fittest" does it mean those that fit the environment the best?
Magnus Peacock yes
more specifically, those who survive best in their environment to reproduce and thus pass on their traits to the next generation. so best at obtaining shelter, food, mating partners, etc.
The best Industrial Revolution example of this were the moths that changed their coloration twice,. They got darker when coal smoke made everything darker and then lightened up again when the coal smoke was reduced.
Na brah, its whoever makes the most gains at the gym. D'you even lift?
It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is most adaptable to change.
Great overview of Darwin and his bulldog. Glad you covered them both so much!
Also, at the very end, your comments on Social Darwinism were spot on. Glad you didn't gloss over that; it was more important than the religious controversy.
I liked the explanation!
I love turtles 😅
Hank. You are, by far, my favorite TH-cam personality. Awesome!
This is the best evolution i ever seen in the earth
b
Ohhh... I know why CrashCourse likes turtles...., It's because Turtles all the way down!
The fundamental idea of Social Darwinism, that some classes and/or races of people are fundamentally and inherently inferior to others and it is therefore counterproductive to society to spend resources on them, predates Darwin by more than 100 years. As you point out, it was these economic theories that influenced Darwin and Wallace. And in a kind of feedback-loop, some of Darwin's most enthusiastic supporters were the economists who were pushing this idea. In Natural Selection, they recognized a scientific theory they could dress their prejudice up in. And the echoes of those socioeconomic theories can still be heard in the politics and policies of the modern world.
If you get the chance, watch the 1978 BBC mini-series, The Voyage of Charles Darwin
And that’s why we give out Darwin awards these days kids...
I have to admit that I hate the term "Darwin award". It stems from a basic misunderstanding of natural selection. Nerd problems.
@@tophers3756 by their own terms, giving out a Darwin award deserves being given a Darwin award
Go on? People who remove themselves from the gene pool are contributing to human evolution. Feeling fear is not a bad thing. If you're nervous around explosives, that's a sign of mental health. If you have the instinct to want to juggle them, something might be a little wrong.
Losing stupid people, not losing stupid people and gaining intelligent people all equally affect human evolution.
Anyone deserves the Darwin award as much as anyone else.
There is no goal to evolution, therefor no way to gauge who deserves more points in whatever made up scheme for an award there is.
Evolution is a force of nature, it doesn't have intentionality.
There are no "goals", only results.
Human beings are as much a part of nature as any other thing. Whatever we do isn't running counter to evolution. We may alter natural selection but since evolution has no end goal or even preferred path, saying things like "runs counter to evolution" is unintelligible.
Evolution isn't a path that you have to walk along or a ladder you have to climb. You are acting like evolution is a river when its actually more like the water in the river.
If you dam or divert a river you can make the logical conclusion that you stopped the river or ended it completely. The water that would have gone through that river still exists though, its just in a dam or going through another river or somewhere else in the world.
There is no law saying that people need to continually get more intelligent or that we need to stay as intelligent as we are. You are misinterpreting evolution if you are under that impression.
You also made conflicting claims, either people can survive and reproduce while being stupid because we are "running counter to evolution" or stupid people have poor survivability and thus aren't reproducing.
where do i get the little willy statue? i love so much
what about the Webber line along with Wallace's?
I guess someone could write a fictional book where "Nature" is a deity. If said book becomes massively popular, then it would probably cause too much confusion.
Wait Hank...did you pre-record this? How are you able to record this while on tour for your new book, "An Absolutely Remarkable Thing" that came out September 25 and is available for order now?
What, do you think they just made all these animations and edited the video together in 5 days?
Yes
Excellent. One very picky thing, though - the surname Lyell rhymes with 'trial'.
1:49 our science textbook is called science.
"If you remember one name in the history of modern biology, it should be TWO names!!!" Oh my god yes
Gotta love Chuck, right! lol
Q: Why did the creatard ask a snake to help him with his illness instead of a doctor?
A: Creatards believe in talking snakes but not antibiotics
Happily Secular I sense a lot of anger and self pity from you. Is everything okay?
@Andrew Miller “sense”? No, the word you’re looking for is “project”
O....... thank you for explanation
Have a great day
I mentioned Wallace during science and no one not even the teacher knew who he was.
Who's here because of Coronavirus
Me
i can’t be the only one who watches these for fun right?
… right?
"Married rich..." yes, THAT Wedgewood.
I think it is inaccurate to say that Natural Selection was accepted immediately, at least for long. Darwin was very widely respected, and all the evidence collected helped popularize evolution in general to the point it was widely accepted among naturalists. However, Natural Selection as a driving mechanism was considered for decades to be a "wrong guess" by Darwin by most. This is because you can mathematically demonstrate that Natural Selection cannot account for the diversity of life, until you begin to understand genetics and discrete transfer of genes.
Back then, everyone, including Darwin, believed in blending inheritance, that is that offspring's traits are a blend of that offspring's parents, like the blending of paint -- white paint and black paint would result in gray paint, but you can never blend gray paint and gray paint to get white paint. Therefore, given time, a species will never gain new traits, and over time everyone will tend to become completely uniform, natural selection or not. This is only solved by genetics. Thusly, other mechanisms than Natural Selection were more popular to explain the way evolution worked until the 1920s or 1930s.
@Goby Jake I think writing a youtube comment explaining something instead of just saying "you're wrong" like everyone else is marginally more productive than scrolling through a large comment section just to complain about seeing too many words in one place
I have a new hypothesis, skip classes, make C's and be renowned like Charles Darwin
blessing omoyemen you forgot coming up with a theory that explains the diversity of life and changes humanity’s understanding of how the natural world functions
Good luck with that 😂😂
At 22 I also had a collection of Beatles. And one of them had wings.
Nick likes biology 🧬
I can see it now.... the chaos in the comment section
"which to be honest its more than I had" lolll
i turn off addblock just for these videos