If a puzzle is missing a single piece, does that prevent you from seeing the picture it makes before you? It might be incomplete, but it is still complete enough to be understood.
@@delavantyNo, evolution Is a theory, that means something 100% true, Is a theory because, even when we know it exist, we still don't know some things about it, like the origin of life itself. The picture example is a perfect one.
@@delavantyNot quite-- We might not have rigid data for stuff there's no hard evidence of, but science often relies on missing pieces-- the discovery of Neptune happened because that missing piece was able to be inferred. Obviously with life science the issue of actual remains can be an issue, but if a species is clearly descended from another, we don't presume there's no link there.
He moves the goalpost each time he's wrong. I think this episode was ahead of Its time. EDIT: I forgot at the time of this episode that people were debating evolution like this. I saw it as how people today move the goalpost when they are proven wrong in a situation regardless of the topic.
@@mathiasrryba Every time he was proven wrong by the professor, he then says. "Well, no one's found the link between _ and _" at least 10+ times. Instead of accepting the loss, he just moved the goalpost of the missing link each time to avoid being seen as wrong.
He then moves it again after the professor DOES find the missing link by showing a statue/painting thing without proof. It was literally a parody on how stupid people are too stupid to know they're stupid because they hide behind a degree.
Except all those missing links were proven false. Heck one is a 3d model based on a pigs tooth and another included monkey skull fragments and pottery.
Not really a fallacy if you’re not trying to prove your own point but simply prove the other guy wrong. While there is a point it becomes fallacical, there’s a lot of times where someone just made a mistake at where the goalpost should be.
@@luigimrlgaming9484 the point of the fallacy is to continuously move the point that will be “conclusive” evidence as is seen here showing how arguing is useless as he will just move it again
@@huehue3592logic is limited by perspective. At what point does moving a goal post fallacy apply when the objects morph to accommodate new data from the domain? And when is it arguing over subjective belief?
An argument with a flat earther be like. Edit: according to the Internet this makes me famous.not exactly what I expected to be famous for but thank you all XD
@@Aaroncarter95 that goes into politics as well I mean anyone that doesn't want to open their minds to others will never do so because they want to be right so much due to their ignorance and ego.
I was just playing that game and was surprised how stupid all the characters were. They're bad at their jobs. I think an AI ace attorney game would be fun, though, so you can argue different points.
It’s actually quite a large jump you don’t walk out of your house and see dolphins sprouting from corn stalks see different species like dogs and wolfs are an example of micro evolution we have never seen any evidence of macro evolution
@@ghostridare there is undeniable genetic evidence for microevolution, or speciation as it's also known All known lifeforms share 360 distinct genetic markers that verify universal common descent in the exact same way that your possession of your parents genetic markers proves you descended from them in a court of law
@@ghostridareMacro evolution is quite literally just micro evolution over larger time frames. I implore you to actually research the topic before making statements on it
@@ghostridare”we’ve never seen evidence of macro evolution” Because it doesn’t work the asinine way your brain came up with. Best way I can describe it is you don’t look any different than you did yesterday, but if you took a look at yourself between now and when you were a teenager, you’d see changes
This brings me back to learning about evolution after years of Christian school claiming missing links actually matter and pretending that the theory of evolution hadn't changed since Darwin's lifetime.
You know that some stories in the bible are just to give a message and aren’t really true? If we take that into count evolution makes sense even as a catholic
Weird that most Christian schools in my country actually teach evolution in it's purest form and has a policy to not add religious dogma in it. They basically say it's up to us if we want to believe it or not or both
When you find enough pieces, regardless of a few holes, the picture paints itself and allows you to deduce what's missing without technically finding it, when you have just one missing link that right after another another appears in front of it that it's too closely related to be something different, no one can fake that, it's undeniable. Evolution is muddy, arduous and not for the faint hearted to conceptualise their entire survival, life finds a way. Imagine nearly going extinct to a meager couple hundred to be secluded to a very tiny remote place and re-emerging close by, with destroyed or little to no fossil evidence that can't be found accessed or no longer in feasible for. The intelligence orangutan should realise that those that were mentioned clearly seem to be coming out from somewhere that's being more obviously pointing to the missing link and even far back. Having no link at all would mean all those hominids shouldn't have existed, they didn't pop out of thin air like some highly imaginative creation.
Young Earth Creationist: Oh no. We have 1 piece out of this 1 million piece puzzle missing. We will never know what the full picture is. Common sense people: It's a mammoth in the tundra. Look, it's right there. Sure we can't see part of the white snow it's walking on but we can clearly see a mammoth. YEC: Guess we'll never have proof of evolution.
@@ghostridare Ah, I see you've fall in to the DI propaganda pipeline. Both micro and macro evolution are real biology term. But not whatever definition the creationists trying to say them are.
I think the biggest reason why people don’t believe evolution is that humans just suck at conceptualizing time. It’s hard for a person to understand how long a thousand years is. Now imagine a million years, a billion. Some people just either can’t think like that or they won’t but I honestly don’t blame them.
Wouldn't say we suck considering we're the only beings we know that are capable of our level of long term planning. But we definitely aren't good enough for anything over our lifespans.
Do you have every corpse that links you to your great great great great great grandfather? No? Then how do you know you even had one? Same logic as creationists
I'm a creationist and my logic is faith I believe and have faith in my religion and in my god and as such believe that God made world and humans without evolution
@@the_frosnikian that's all well and good but the orangutan professor was arguing his position is right because there is no evidence yet there's one piece missing where you could easily deduce the two are clearly related, and this isn't a situation where if one case is false or not 100% proven than the other must be true, that's a false dichotomy, you still have to prove Hinduism isn't true, the Native American religions, Greek and Roman mythology, the Norse gods, etc.
@@dainbramage9508thats all well and good if two things were indeed related However, what are claimed to be 'transitionatory' are typically gross over-inference. Less assume that the particular "transition species" for humans in this case are accurate and correct. Ie, they refer to humans and are indeed a middle ground, not a full man nor a full ape. That would lead to the assumption we could find transition species relics with decent frequency and the fact is we can not. Every so often, there pops up an animal or skeleton that some researchers claim can fit some bill, but those are often explained by other reasons almost immediately. Following the logical conclusion, one would have to assume they were possibly mistaken about transition species and how evolution works at a large scale
The most convincing argument for evolution for me is that good evidence allows for accurate predictions. Using the fossil record and comparative anatomy, we have been able to predict what a missing link would like, where to dig for them and how deep we should dig to find them. Also for the religious people, proving evolution does not disprove the existence of a creator just as proving there’s a creator doesn’t disprove evolution. We have mountains of evidence of evolution that has helped us understand how and why organisms function the way we do.
@@ghostridare there's over 550,000 scientific articles published to the accredited science journal Pubmed which outline and detail the evidence for evolution That's not including any other science journal, like biology for example Best get to reading
@@drsatan7554I’ve read a few of them. They’re all following the wrong string of logic. Just because something looks similar, or is genetically similar, doesn’t mean they came from the same thing. Every living thing uses a common code of DNA for its construction, so animals are bound to have similar parts at some point as there’s only a few different kinds of body structures they’ll have. There’s literally no hard evidence to say that said species are related, they’re merely similar, and there’s no easy way to tell where it came from.
@@luigimrlgaming9484that's incorrect Distinct genetic markers are only passed down to descendants DNA tests work because a child either is or isn't in possession of these distinct genetic markers These markers are not similar, they are the same. We have verified this is the case with countless humans and countless animals That's why DNA tests are undeniable evidence in court Absolutely all known lifeforms share 360 distinct genetic markers, proving we descended from a single lifeform
Actual debate: “There can’t be a common ancestor for everything as we’ve seen no fossils of say an ape-fish, or Dino-cat. Infact, how come you think that life could ever organize itself together based on random chance alone? Entropy never produces anything but disorder, so how can it produce an organism with order and function? Are you sure you’re even barking up the right tree or are you just following the evidence down a false line of logic?
@@luigimrlgaming9484 I think there is something we haven't discovered that produces life It's the best idea we have We know life needs water It needs heat And it needs carbon But there may be chemicals that came from the asteroids that struck earth that we haven't yet discovered Something that starts the process of life I think an undiscovered chemical mixture Is FAR more likely than a magical being spawning in everything Which we still have no evidence for
@@luigimrlgaming9484 Except abiogenesis and evolution are not the same thing. While both are scientific theories with very extensive evidence they are not the same theory. They are related but most definitely not the same thing. Disproving abiogenesis would not disprove evolution. Further more it’s not pure random chance it’s random chance with a variable outcome that allows or doesn’t allow reproduction. Let’s go outside of biology and training artificial intelligence. We have produce a ton of variations with slight random variations set a way to measure success and use the most successful as the base for further changes. It’s entirely random changes but the effect of those changes are constrained by whether they help reach the goal. In such a way we simulate evolution in a much simpler way for much simpler goals and we can see random changes whose results are constrained by physical reality increasing the probability of certain outcomes being beneficial and allowing reproduction. Also entropy is indeed always increasing… in a closed system. Kinda an import qualifier because as you may realize the earth is not a closed system.
There's probably a bunch we are missing Fossils are rare so we are likely missing countless links Though we do have enough to get a fairly solid timelime
@@diegelbeseegurke2116 If your referring to "lucy" then I have bad news lucy could not be a missing link because it has been determined that man walked upright before the time of lucy
I have actually had this very same conversation with one of my friends who doesn't believe in evolution and farnsworth's frustration with Dr banjo is pretty much the frustration I have with my friend on the same thing cuz he just will not listen to reason.
The one thing I actually liked about this episode was that it does bring into focus the idea that reason cant exist without some level of Faith, and even when Farnsworth sets out to prove evolution on a highly sped up timeline it was still put into motion by a higher power (himself) It was a nice way to take shots at the dogma of both sides (although clearly focusing more on the ridiculousness of creationists)
Arguing with a religious person about evolution, you can give them as much evidence as possible but despite how much you have they'll just move the goalpost
Actually two problems with this. The professor doesn’t have to find a “missing link” between man and ape. Man IS an ape. Homo sapiens belong to the family Hominidae which are the great apes. Second. Darwinius Masillae is far before the emergence of apes. In fact Darwinius Masillae is actually a shrew like animals about the size of a rat. If the professor has gone that far then he’s fat passed ape and man. Also there’s lots of debate about Darwinius Masillae since it’s only known by one complete fossil but it is an extremely early mammal fossil so it could be an early ancestor.
Unfortunately not how it works see we have never seen anything that suggests macro evolution we have however seen micro evolution which does not prove evolution also everything has a cause so in order for something to exist there must be a cause so the question is what was the uncaused cause and I personally think it was God
@@ghostridare logic is based on observations of the things in the universe The kalam cosmological arguments first premise is only sound because we observe that things in the universe which begin to exist have causes However trying to take a logical principle that we can only prove applies to things in the universe then applying it to the universe itself commits the fallacy of composition We do not know that the universe began to exist and we do not know that causality applies beyond universe
@@ghostridare micro evolutions build up after time. That is a macro evolution. When lots of small changes build up, you'll notice big changes from the New thing to the 20 generations outdated thing.
@@hexeltron8625 yeah no the original comment is truly a generalization. While both perspectives are accepted by the Catholic church, most believe in evolution
I had a friend ask me why I "believed in evolution" and it went pretty much like this. The kicker is that we predicted all of this before we found it so it pretty much means it's true regardless of if there is a "missing link"
The definition of moving the goal post. Sometimes its not about, but the discourse its about biases, feelings and pretending you care about the discourse.
Science only explained what is observable and how things work in the universe while the Bible explained the caused and origin. I ALSO don't see why people think a "theory" means it's factual when the definition of a theory implies speculation - a presumption, a hunch, a guess, an opinion.
@@omni-galachu9684Lmao, "theory" in science has an entirely different definition than the regular word. Theory of gravity? Germ theory? Even the Earth going around the sun (heliocentric theory) was a theory, and guess who didnt like that theory back in the day? Lol. "A theory in science is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts."
@@ghostridare Fossils, DNA, Chromosomes that are fused, vestigial organs, speciation events that have happened in our lifetimes, the age of the Earth, 99% of all species have gone extinct, mutations. Need I go on?
Gotta love how literally no one sticks around all the way to the end. It's pretty funny how literally everybody is taking a liking but then they just leave and some are just falling asleep. 🤣🤣🤣
I had this exact conversation with a know it all family member who thought the Bible was completely factual. It didn’t help that I started poking hole in his miss quoted bible verse when he tried to preach afterwards.
@@IKnowWhatYouDid3and they do it not knowing its actually heresy public preaching is a sin. Condemning someone to hell is a sin as well these modern Christians are dumbbb there won't even be enough room in hell for us atheists because they're sending themselves there.
Can we have context, because it sounds like you wanted to bash their faith instead of having a reasonable conversation. School does a lot when it comes to preparing us for how to make an argument, I know it helped me a lot (sadly it's lost on a lot of people) and that's because there is one part no one is really taught it's called reading the room. The goal of an argument is more than being right it's about winning people over. Most do it in ways that make us dumber but there can be times where people that are right are understanding and reasonable. Of course I have a political mindset when saying this.
The funny thing is, they prove evolution with just the first few links to humans. The argument is that humans evolved from apes, that humans didn't evolve. In the context of the show.
As a Christian it may sound stupid to believe in something that dont have evidence. Even if god doesn't exist and you still believe it you don't lost anything
@@bolabela-jb3pxWhat if there is a god who just specifically hates Christians? There isn't, but it's about as easy to prove/disprove as your God you actually believe in
@@joaquinvideo2959Where is this god? Did he come down to smite us? Did he come down to die and save his people? No, he came down to torment them and lie to them, and he came long before Christ. There is a god to which you so claim, but He doesn’t control if I go to heaven or hell. He didn’t come down to earth, die, and rise from the freaking dead either.
Just to clarify. Darwinius is a primitive, lemur-like primate from Eocene Messel Pits. It's a distant ancestor of modern primates, so it can't be a missing link between apes and humans.
You mean Chimps not monkeys They are apes Those guys are our closest living relative because we share a common ancestor We split and one branch evolved into Chimps and one into Homo sapiens
If American came from Britain then why do we still have British people? Once you're old enough to answer that then you'll have the answer to your question, kiddo
And then the Professor finds that final missing link... only for the ape to win his argument anyway. (I forget how or why, though.) Then that leads to the famous meme of his saying "I don't want to live on this planet anymore."
Evolution is a like a jigsaw puzzle of a blue whale. Sure there's 2 pieces missing in its blowhole and one of the 8 for it eye is gone, but any honest person knows what the fuck theyre looking at here 😂
@@ghostridare Sure, one good example is the extra chromosome monkeys have. Since we share a common ancestor, scientists hypothesized there was a fusion of two of said chromosome leading to our modern amount. So, they looked, and found evidence of fusion due to the abundance of telomeres (essentially junk DNA found on the end of chromosomes to prevent damage during imperfect division) in the middle of one of our chromosomes. That was the fusion we predicted based on the other puzzle pieces we had
@Squirrel159 Slippery slope phalacy Ie any time people just want common sense gun control they say it will never lead to confiscation. It's never enough the right to bear arms will eventually wither away like in every dictatorship like in the soviet union, nazi Germany, venezuela, and now the uk
@@javiercarrasco2850it can, u try to show such person actual quotes and they don't even want to listen even though they don't have any Arguments themself
Trully encapsulates debunking creationists/flatearthers/antivaxxers/climate change deniers. There's just no winning someone who puts stance before facts.
Your characteristics change according to your region, but your origin will not change. Whoever insists that this is wrong should talk about his ancestors and leave our ancestors alone.
@@hithere7080 You want to convince me that creatures that have skin, feathers or fur have the same origin, so why aren't there humans who fly or breathe underwater?
@@AliAhmed-sn6mx because thats not how evolution works. And you know birds and furry mammals have skin... right? Small changes over time lead to large changes if i add 1 to a number over and over i will eventually get to 100000000 despite the fact 1 and 10000000000 are radically different numbers
Love that last bit of delf delusion and irony lmfao. "Things dont exist just because you believe in them... unless its the creature in the sky then its different" 😂
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.83[1/2] เปิดแคมป์หลอนต้อนรับ 2 ตัวพ่อแห่งวงการผี!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2uPuHYHgwiI/mqdefault.jpg)
I love how the answer is automatically programmed into the hologram with just a button
He planned for this
I mean it could just be when they touch the button it just ready their minds on what they want it to show
What if they just pressed the button again
@@xanderwhitt9580 wait doesn’t that mean he could have rigged it😂😂😂
It's a button labeled "next".
Fun fact: Evolution doesn't really go linear like this. It's more like confusing branches.
Yeah
Yes, just like Neanderthals aren't directly linked to us Homo Sapiens. Their branch ended there.
Branches even converge.
Like a Family Tree, but without Incest
@@chrismar3700 yeah, people forget that our ancestor isn't monkey or apes, we simply have the same or similar ancestor but evolved differently.
I have no words but I agree with the Professor on the presentation
Which professor banjo or farnsworth
@thegamingbendu obviously the one usually referred to as 'The Professor' -_-
@@thegamingbendu Yes
Ur the only monkey, we didn't evolve from apes
Did you even watch the video 😂@@sanicthehedgehog6346
From chimpan A to chimpan Z
under rated comment man
You’ll never make a monkey out of meeeee🎶🎵🎶🎵
If only we could find that missing b
Dr Zaius Dr Zaius
aha! but as shown in the vedio chimpan B has not been found
If a puzzle is missing a single piece, does that prevent you from seeing the picture it makes before you? It might be incomplete, but it is still complete enough to be understood.
Sadly thats not how science works.... If a piece is missing and cant be found it gets scrapped
@@delavantyNo, evolution Is a theory, that means something 100% true, Is a theory because, even when we know it exist, we still don't know some things about it, like the origin of life itself. The picture example is a perfect one.
@@knightreploid3398 i don't think u understand what i mean .... Then
@@delavantyNot quite-- We might not have rigid data for stuff there's no hard evidence of, but science often relies on missing pieces-- the discovery of Neptune happened because that missing piece was able to be inferred. Obviously with life science the issue of actual remains can be an issue, but if a species is clearly descended from another, we don't presume there's no link there.
My guy that is GOLD! You should keep that. 👍🏾
He moves the goalpost each time he's wrong. I think this episode was ahead of Its time.
EDIT: I forgot at the time of this episode that people were debating evolution like this. I saw it as how people today move the goalpost when they are proven wrong in a situation regardless of the topic.
It wasn't it was just describing how they argue.
@@mathiasrryba Every time he was proven wrong by the professor, he then says. "Well, no one's found the link between _ and _" at least 10+ times. Instead of accepting the loss, he just moved the goalpost of the missing link each time to avoid being seen as wrong.
@@GrubSlimeyeah, that's exactly how young earth creationists will argue against evolution
He then moves it again after the professor DOES find the missing link by showing a statue/painting thing without proof.
It was literally a parody on how stupid people are too stupid to know they're stupid because they hide behind a degree.
Except all those missing links were proven false. Heck one is a 3d model based on a pigs tooth and another included monkey skull fragments and pottery.
His defense is just "nu uh"
More like: Yes, but
I mean the episode has then find the missing link, it was just cut out.
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
it’s a classic fallacy called moving the goalpost and still gets used a lot today
Not really a fallacy if you’re not trying to prove your own point but simply prove the other guy wrong. While there is a point it becomes fallacical, there’s a lot of times where someone just made a mistake at where the goalpost should be.
@@luigimrlgaming9484 the point of the fallacy is to continuously move the point that will be “conclusive” evidence as is seen here showing how arguing is useless as he will just move it again
@@luigimrlgaming9484How?! it's literally right there, it is a fallacy.
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
@@huehue3592logic is limited by perspective. At what point does moving a goal post fallacy apply when the objects morph to accommodate new data from the domain? And when is it arguing over subjective belief?
This scene is a lot funnier when in full screen, the list of links between humans and ancient apes is really extensive
We are talking about millions of years here, just one piece of the puzzle or a better way to think about it is one part part of a path.
Series name?
@@topdawg975 futurama
@@topdawg975 Futurama
@@topdawg975 Futurama
An argument with a flat earther be like.
Edit: according to the Internet this makes me famous.not exactly what I expected to be famous for but thank you all XD
Honestly, an argument with ANY similar group like that.
Earth expansionists, flat earthers, hollow earthers. They're all the same.
@@Aaroncarter95 that goes into politics as well I mean anyone that doesn't want to open their minds to others will never do so because they want to be right so much due to their ignorance and ego.
@@Aaroncarter95 I found some people believe that Earth is donut shape. Yeah... I don't have a clue why whey think so...
Wait Theres MORE!!! Why The He**Cant We Just All Agree Its Round With A Core In The Center An Be Donw With It Lmao 😂@@Aaroncarter95
Hell no this is more like from scientist to scientists.
Average ace attorney prosecutor argument
I was just playing that game and was surprised how stupid all the characters were. They're bad at their jobs. I think an AI ace attorney game would be fun, though, so you can argue different points.
This is a great way to show that the "missing link" is a lot smaller jump than some people believe.
It’s actually quite a large jump you don’t walk out of your house and see dolphins sprouting from corn stalks see different species like dogs and wolfs are an example of micro evolution we have never seen any evidence of macro evolution
@@ghostridare there is undeniable genetic evidence for microevolution, or speciation as it's also known
All known lifeforms share 360 distinct genetic markers that verify universal common descent in the exact same way that your possession of your parents genetic markers proves you descended from them in a court of law
@@drsatan7554we are all theorized to have evolved from a single common ancestor
LUCA a tiny little amoeba that started it all
@@ghostridareMacro evolution is quite literally just micro evolution over larger time frames.
I implore you to actually research the topic before making statements on it
@@ghostridare”we’ve never seen evidence of macro evolution”
Because it doesn’t work the asinine way your brain came up with. Best way I can describe it is you don’t look any different than you did yesterday, but if you took a look at yourself between now and when you were a teenager, you’d see changes
This brings me back to learning about evolution after years of Christian school claiming missing links actually matter and pretending that the theory of evolution hadn't changed since Darwin's lifetime.
Religious schools should be illegal in modern world
You know that some stories in the bible are just to give a message and aren’t really true? If we take that into count evolution makes sense even as a catholic
Weird that most Christian schools in my country actually teach evolution in it's purest form and has a policy to not add religious dogma in it. They basically say it's up to us if we want to believe it or not or both
@@leonelzubieta8636that’s what I’ve always thought, that the creation of everything is supposed to be a story that is simple
@leonelzubieta8636 you're talking to an atheist, so somewhat ironically, you're preaching to the choir.
“You. You are the last missing link, sir!”
U can stretch it however long u want, just remember none can find the missing link between you and your father
No we Did! It's The Milk!
@@741podnammocooh I fucking love that
@@741podnammoc Then where is the missing link between you and this Milk, mhm!?
Maybe the missing link is the friends we made along the way
This is the funniest thing I have seen all week. Thank you!
Then where is the missing link between apes and this Friends we've made along the the way!
When you find enough pieces, regardless of a few holes, the picture paints itself and allows you to deduce what's missing without technically finding it, when you have just one missing link that right after another another appears in front of it that it's too closely related to be something different, no one can fake that, it's undeniable. Evolution is muddy, arduous and not for the faint hearted to conceptualise their entire survival, life finds a way. Imagine nearly going extinct to a meager couple hundred to be secluded to a very tiny remote place and re-emerging close by, with destroyed or little to no fossil evidence that can't be found accessed or no longer in feasible for. The intelligence orangutan should realise that those that were mentioned clearly seem to be coming out from somewhere that's being more obviously pointing to the missing link and even far back. Having no link at all would mean all those hominids shouldn't have existed, they didn't pop out of thin air like some highly imaginative creation.
Young Earth Creationist: Oh no. We have 1 piece out of this 1 million piece puzzle missing. We will never know what the full picture is.
Common sense people: It's a mammoth in the tundra. Look, it's right there. Sure we can't see part of the white snow it's walking on but we can clearly see a mammoth.
YEC: Guess we'll never have proof of evolution.
Bro learn the difference between micro evolution and macro evolution
@@ghostridareThey're the same thing the only difference is time
@@ghostridare Ah, I see you've fall in to the DI propaganda pipeline. Both micro and macro evolution are real biology term. But not whatever definition the creationists trying to say them are.
@@javiercarrasco2850 Unfortanly not true
The God of the Gaps Argument demonstrated perfectly
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
I think the biggest reason why people don’t believe evolution is that humans just suck at conceptualizing time. It’s hard for a person to understand how long a thousand years is. Now imagine a million years, a billion. Some people just either can’t think like that or they won’t but I honestly don’t blame them.
Wouldn't say we suck considering we're the only beings we know that are capable of our level of long term planning. But we definitely aren't good enough for anything over our lifespans.
When you claim there is no missing link between “ancient ape” and an ancient ape
Do you have every corpse that links you to your great great great great great grandfather? No? Then how do you know you even had one? Same logic as creationists
I'm a creationist and my logic is faith I believe and have faith in my religion and in my god and as such believe that God made world and humans without evolution
@@the_frosnikian that's all well and good but the orangutan professor was arguing his position is right because there is no evidence yet there's one piece missing where you could easily deduce the two are clearly related, and this isn't a situation where if one case is false or not 100% proven than the other must be true, that's a false dichotomy, you still have to prove Hinduism isn't true, the Native American religions, Greek and Roman mythology, the Norse gods, etc.
Why cant you just believe that god made a world that allows for evolution creationism is so silly and anti scientific @@the_frosnikian
@@dainbramage9508thats all well and good if two things were indeed related
However, what are claimed to be 'transitionatory' are typically gross over-inference.
Less assume that the particular "transition species" for humans in this case are accurate and correct. Ie, they refer to humans and are indeed a middle ground, not a full man nor a full ape.
That would lead to the assumption we could find transition species relics with decent frequency and the fact is we can not. Every so often, there pops up an animal or skeleton that some researchers claim can fit some bill, but those are often explained by other reasons almost immediately.
Following the logical conclusion, one would have to assume they were possibly mistaken about transition species and how evolution works at a large scale
@@joeb6750 by transition species relics do you mean fossilized specimens or artifacts like makeshift tools, weapons, and burial sites?
The most convincing argument for evolution for me is that good evidence allows for accurate predictions. Using the fossil record and comparative anatomy, we have been able to predict what a missing link would like, where to dig for them and how deep we should dig to find them. Also for the religious people, proving evolution does not disprove the existence of a creator just as proving there’s a creator doesn’t disprove evolution. We have mountains of evidence of evolution that has helped us understand how and why organisms function the way we do.
I would like to hear this mountain of evidence and don’t use the argument that because micro evolution exists that proves macro evolution
@@ghostridare there's over 550,000 scientific articles published to the accredited science journal Pubmed which outline and detail the evidence for evolution
That's not including any other science journal, like biology for example
Best get to reading
@@drsatan7554 You know they won't. They expect all the answers in a TH-cam comment section.
@@drsatan7554I’ve read a few of them. They’re all following the wrong string of logic. Just because something looks similar, or is genetically similar, doesn’t mean they came from the same thing. Every living thing uses a common code of DNA for its construction, so animals are bound to have similar parts at some point as there’s only a few different kinds of body structures they’ll have. There’s literally no hard evidence to say that said species are related, they’re merely similar, and there’s no easy way to tell where it came from.
@@luigimrlgaming9484that's incorrect
Distinct genetic markers are only passed down to descendants
DNA tests work because a child either is or isn't in possession of these distinct genetic markers
These markers are not similar, they are the same. We have verified this is the case with countless humans and countless animals
That's why DNA tests are undeniable evidence in court
Absolutely all known lifeforms share 360 distinct genetic markers, proving we descended from a single lifeform
Creationist vs biologist debate in a nutshell.
Actual debate: “There can’t be a common ancestor for everything as we’ve seen no fossils of say an ape-fish, or Dino-cat. Infact, how come you think that life could ever organize itself together based on random chance alone? Entropy never produces anything but disorder, so how can it produce an organism with order and function? Are you sure you’re even barking up the right tree or are you just following the evidence down a false line of logic?
@@luigimrlgaming9484 I think there is something we haven't discovered that produces life
It's the best idea we have
We know life needs water
It needs heat
And it needs carbon
But there may be chemicals that came from the asteroids that struck earth that we haven't yet discovered
Something that starts the process of life
I think an undiscovered chemical mixture
Is FAR more likely than a magical being spawning in everything
Which we still have no evidence for
@@luigimrlgaming9484is this your logic or are you quoting someone else?
Is this what you actually believe?@@luigimrlgaming9484
@@luigimrlgaming9484
Except abiogenesis and evolution are not the same thing. While both are scientific theories with very extensive evidence they are not the same theory. They are related but most definitely not the same thing. Disproving abiogenesis would not disprove evolution.
Further more it’s not pure random chance it’s random chance with a variable outcome that allows or doesn’t allow reproduction.
Let’s go outside of biology and training artificial intelligence. We have produce a ton of variations with slight random variations set a way to measure success and use the most successful as the base for further changes.
It’s entirely random changes but the effect of those changes are constrained by whether they help reach the goal. In such a way we simulate evolution in a much simpler way for much simpler goals and we can see random changes whose results are constrained by physical reality increasing the probability of certain outcomes being beneficial and allowing reproduction.
Also entropy is indeed always increasing… in a closed system. Kinda an import qualifier because as you may realize the earth is not a closed system.
Missing links will always exist unless you somehow piece your entire family tree with no missing relatives the entire way back to where you want to be
That isn’t necessarily true I think most people just want to see a half monkey half human and unfortunately we don’t have that
There's probably a bunch we are missing
Fossils are rare so we are likely missing countless links
Though we do have enough to get a fairly solid timelime
@ghostridare just search for australopithecus. If that's not what you want, then Idk what you want.
@@diegelbeseegurke2116 If your referring to "lucy" then I have bad news lucy could not be a missing link because it has been determined that man walked upright before the time of lucy
"The absence of evidence isn't the evidence of absence" - some angry vet from a cartoon
I have actually had this very same conversation with one of my friends who doesn't believe in evolution and farnsworth's frustration with Dr banjo is pretty much the frustration I have with my friend on the same thing cuz he just will not listen to reason.
My friend I would love to hear your argument I for one have seen very little to suggest we have common ancestors to apes
@@ghostridare do you have a discord? It'd be much easier to do this over a voice call rather than doing this over a TH-cam common thread
@@supernew10doh64 Yeah its ghostridare
@@ghostridareit’s been 20 hours since the comment. Did the conversation happen? If so how did it go?
@@TheKnowledgeRaccoonThey put a pagan curse on him and now he's fighting in helheim
This is literally how arguments with creationists go
Yup, at least they are on the correct side
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
@@kreskasd5589 The creationists?
@@themortician3186 yes
@@kreskasd5589 Hahaha that's funny.
"How people argue" - colorized
Trying to explain to flat earthers:
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
🤣 just to make them mad
I mean the earth is flat but okay.
I was gonna say those people got bored really quickly, then i realized how many links there were in that chain😂
Amazing how creatively the captions manage to misspell everything
@@petergieg4560 Tbf the spelling for some are pretty nasty.
The one thing I actually liked about this episode was that it does bring into focus the idea that reason cant exist without some level of Faith, and even when Farnsworth sets out to prove evolution on a highly sped up timeline it was still put into motion by a higher power (himself)
It was a nice way to take shots at the dogma of both sides (although clearly focusing more on the ridiculousness of creationists)
Arguing with a religious person about evolution, you can give them as much evidence as possible but despite how much you have they'll just move the goalpost
Quit arguing then it's annoying.
Well i would stop arguing if a person could actually give me a reason for that
Actually two problems with this. The professor doesn’t have to find a “missing link” between man and ape. Man IS an ape. Homo sapiens belong to the family Hominidae which are the great apes.
Second. Darwinius Masillae is far before the emergence of apes. In fact Darwinius Masillae is actually a shrew like animals about the size of a rat. If the professor has gone that far then he’s fat passed ape and man.
Also there’s lots of debate about Darwinius Masillae since it’s only known by one complete fossil but it is an extremely early mammal fossil so it could be an early ancestor.
I want to say this doesn’t live rent free in my head, but it unfortunately does.
The actual progression to where we are today is actually a bit more complicated and isn’t a strict progression from one to the next
Unfortunately not how it works see we have never seen anything that suggests macro evolution we have however seen micro evolution which does not prove evolution also everything has a cause so in order for something to exist there must be a cause so the question is what was the uncaused cause and I personally think it was God
@@ghostridare logic is based on observations of the things in the universe
The kalam cosmological arguments first premise is only sound because we observe that things in the universe which begin to exist have causes
However trying to take a logical principle that we can only prove applies to things in the universe then applying it to the universe itself commits the fallacy of composition
We do not know that the universe began to exist and we do not know that causality applies beyond universe
@@ghostridare micro evolutions build up after time. That is a macro evolution. When lots of small changes build up, you'll notice big changes from the New thing to the 20 generations outdated thing.
@@Justaguy852 Funny we have never seen nor do we have record of macro evolution or anything that would suggest that it happens
POV: you're debating against christians
Its either shifting the burden of proof, special pleadining, moving the goal post, or demanding doubters prove a negative.
I'm a Christian that believes in evolution and I know I'm not the only one.
@@hexeltron8625 yeah no the original comment is truly a generalization. While both perspectives are accepted by the Catholic church, most believe in evolution
POV: You found someone who generalizes
Being Christian doesn't mean you disregard science, that's what Americans do
@@hexeltron8625you say your a Christian yet that’s directly against what the Bible says
The missing link was my neighbor.
it's evolving just backwards
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
“Ah yes… you cannot make things up” -the guy in the sky talking to the monkey
Bro wasn't giving up. He needed to be right
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
Bruh the monkey doesn’t want to take the L
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
If you watch that one futurama movie with the giant alien that gives birth to all life, you'll realize that the orangutan guy was right all along
I had a friend ask me why I "believed in evolution" and it went pretty much like this. The kicker is that we predicted all of this before we found it so it pretty much means it's true regardless of if there is a "missing link"
Monkey Alucard has a point there🗿
I mean we do have links between apes and Darwinius masalai, just not when this episode was aired
Wait is it actually Alucard's voice actor voicing the Orangutan?
It's been a long time old one
Finding missing links is like Zeno's Paradox.
Explain please 😢
Ho ho I’ve got you now I love that for some reason
The definition of moving the goal post. Sometimes its not about, but the discourse its about biases, feelings and pretending you care about the discourse.
This is genuinely all religious peoples argument. “Science can’t explain everything so I’ll believe a religion that can’t explain anything!”
Bible actually at least gives a start of this all, science Don't
Science only explained what is observable and how things work in the universe while the Bible explained the caused and origin.
I ALSO don't see why people think a "theory" means it's factual when the definition of a theory implies speculation - a presumption, a hunch, a guess, an opinion.
@@omni-galachu9684Lmao, "theory" in science has an entirely different definition than the regular word. Theory of gravity? Germ theory? Even the Earth going around the sun (heliocentric theory) was a theory, and guess who didnt like that theory back in the day? Lol.
"A theory in science is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts."
This is a great explanation of why the missing link argument doesn’t work
Man it’s sad that people actually believe evolution isn’t a thing
Yeah I know right lol never mind I’m one of those people care to share why you think evolution is real
@@ghostridare Fossils, DNA, Chromosomes that are fused, vestigial organs, speciation events that have happened in our lifetimes, the age of the Earth, 99% of all species have gone extinct, mutations. Need I go on?
Because it's not, at least not for humans
@kreskasd5589 let me guess because the bible says so?
@kreskasd5589 So literally every other living organism evolved...EXCEPT humans??? Tf???!!!!
It was really bold of them to depict an argument between whites and blacks like this
Oh my god, how did i not realize this was a religious thing before
Gotta love how literally no one sticks around all the way to the end. It's pretty funny how literally everybody is taking a liking but then they just leave and some are just falling asleep. 🤣🤣🤣
I had this exact conversation with a know it all family member who thought the Bible was completely factual. It didn’t help that I started poking hole in his miss quoted bible verse when he tried to preach afterwards.
Don't argue with Bible bashers, faith is not fact and they will spew the same nonsense over and over again
@@IKnowWhatYouDid3 I know, but it was the only way to get him to shut up and sulk. Oh, and his “faith” is Trump and the logic of that cult.
@@IKnowWhatYouDid3and they do it not knowing its actually heresy public preaching is a sin. Condemning someone to hell is a sin as well these modern Christians are dumbbb there won't even be enough room in hell for us atheists because they're sending themselves there.
My answer is that "we didn't came from apes we just have similar ancestor and we evolve differently so there's no 'missing lin'""
Can we have context, because it sounds like you wanted to bash their faith instead of having a reasonable conversation.
School does a lot when it comes to preparing us for how to make an argument, I know it helped me a lot (sadly it's lost on a lot of people) and that's because there is one part no one is really taught it's called reading the room.
The goal of an argument is more than being right it's about winning people over. Most do it in ways that make us dumber but there can be times where people that are right are understanding and reasonable.
Of course I have a political mindset when saying this.
That episode was good ngl.
Exactly how it goes with believers of any religion
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
They Worship Wokeness as a god
I’m more surprised the professor didn’t say “We haven’t found the missing link between the two because there is no missing link, THEY ARE THE LINK”
The funny thing is, they prove evolution with just the first few links to humans. The argument is that humans evolved from apes, that humans didn't evolve. In the context of the show.
Champion of moving the goal posts
"Things don't exist just because you believe in them" like religion 😅
As a Christian it may sound stupid to believe in something that dont have evidence. Even if god doesn't exist and you still believe it you don't lost anything
@@bolabela-jb3pxWhat if there is a god who just specifically hates Christians? There isn't, but it's about as easy to prove/disprove as your God you actually believe in
@@bolabela-jb3px you lose the fun in life, lust, greed and gluttony are all fun activities!!!!
@@joaquinvideo2959Where is this god? Did he come down to smite us? Did he come down to die and save his people? No, he came down to torment them and lie to them, and he came long before Christ. There is a god to which you so claim, but He doesn’t control if I go to heaven or hell. He didn’t come down to earth, die, and rise from the freaking dead either.
@@Freshwave72Ok if you fast forward 30 years on all of those activities, where do you think you will end up?
" then he does find it " lol
Average creationist argument
Just to clarify. Darwinius is a primitive, lemur-like primate from Eocene Messel Pits. It's a distant ancestor of modern primates, so it can't be a missing link between apes and humans.
Then why do we still have monkeys? 😅
Only a portion of a larger population evolved into the next species
You mean Chimps not monkeys
They are apes
Those guys are our closest living relative because we share a common ancestor
We split and one branch evolved into Chimps and one into Homo sapiens
If American came from Britain then why do we still have British people?
Once you're old enough to answer that then you'll have the answer to your question, kiddo
If dogs come from wolfs why we still have wolfs?.... bc not all the individuals from a specie change at unison
Does your parents die when you are born??
Just press it again to find it
Hehe... Erectus
And then the Professor finds that final missing link... only for the ape to win his argument anyway. (I forget how or why, though.) Then that leads to the famous meme of his saying "I don't want to live on this planet anymore."
Evolution is a like a jigsaw puzzle of a blue whale. Sure there's 2 pieces missing in its blowhole and one of the 8 for it eye is gone, but any honest person knows what the fuck theyre looking at here 😂
Yeah that analogy doesn’t hold up considering we are missing like half the pieces and the other half are made up lol
@@ghostridareWe aren't
@@ghostridareNo, we have a SHIT ton of the pieces. So much so we can make accurate predictions on what the remaining pieces look like.
@@thunderspark1536 mind naming a few?
@@ghostridare Sure, one good example is the extra chromosome monkeys have. Since we share a common ancestor, scientists hypothesized there was a fusion of two of said chromosome leading to our modern amount.
So, they looked, and found evidence of fusion due to the abundance of telomeres (essentially junk DNA found on the end of chromosomes to prevent damage during imperfect division) in the middle of one of our chromosomes.
That was the fusion we predicted based on the other puzzle pieces we had
Ohh, this joke is so much funnier after my anthropology class
Someone arguing about the second amendment
How so?
What?
@Squirrel159
Slippery slope phalacy
Ie any time people just want common sense gun control they say it will never lead to confiscation. It's never enough the right to bear arms will eventually wither away like in every dictatorship like in the soviet union, nazi Germany, venezuela, and now the uk
One of my favorite scenes
Talking to a Cristian
To be fair the same could be said of an atheist
@@ghostridareit can't
@@javiercarrasco2850it can, u try to show such person actual quotes and they don't even want to listen even though they don't have any Arguments themself
@@kreskasd5589 Quotes? Like what quotes?
@@javiercarrasco2850 from bible, Certain text that explains or answers something
We all know someone like that rangga
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
Trully encapsulates debunking creationists/flatearthers/antivaxxers/climate change deniers. There's just no winning someone who puts stance before facts.
I love how the darwinius masalai looks exactly like the ape.
Such a great example of moving the goalpost
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
The orangoutang believes in a magical sky man
Dr. Zaius Dr. Zaius Dr. Zaius !
The professor has some really good patience
This is such great commentary on the argument
When I watched this as a kid I think the actual joke whent over my head
Talking with believers literally always ends like that 😂
Recently we discovered Saelantropus Tchadensis
Most avarage flat earthen conversation 💀
Moving the goal post and forgetting that species aren't descrete categories, but on a spectrum
*Finds bone* MISSING LINK
I like the fact he had the answers already programmed into his hologram device
Exactly how creationist argue that dont understand evolution.
no way bro said "things don't exist simply because you believe in them" as his argument that god exists💀
Monkey proving God exists to the professor
😂😂😂 this is hilarious, especially considering that these arent missing links
It's sences like which is the reason why I love futurama
Really good ep
It's been awhile since I've watched this skit.... might even be funnier now 🤣
This is what it feels like to argue with a flat earth person
Liberals and Democrats in a nutshell 😂
Your characteristics change according to your region, but your origin will not change.
Whoever insists that this is wrong should talk about his ancestors and leave our ancestors alone.
🪐
And all living things on earth seem to have one origin
@@hithere7080 You want to convince me that creatures that have skin, feathers or fur have the same origin, so why aren't there humans who fly or breathe underwater?
@@AliAhmed-sn6mx because thats not how evolution works. And you know birds and furry mammals have skin... right?
Small changes over time lead to large changes if i add 1 to a number over and over i will eventually get to 100000000 despite the fact 1 and 10000000000 are radically different numbers
No one says the origin changes lol
As a paleontology enjoyer this makes me happy to see
Love that last bit of delf delusion and irony lmfao. "Things dont exist just because you believe in them... unless its the creature in the sky then its different" 😂
Things don't simply exist, just because you believe in them. Said the monke who believed in invisible sky daddy