He got hit by duh caaaaaar
Goddamn this reminds me of CreamSoda
Vague question is vague. the correct answer is it should be taught for what it is. As my father once told me, there are two approaches to evolution. Every single science figure accepts evolution clearly is an active force in driving species development. Not all of them agree that humans evolved from single cell organisms. Darwin himself wasn't quite convinced there was enough evidence that we evolved from apes, I agree with Darwin, sounds good but where are my skulls!? Evolution should be taught, but just like religion isn't taught in schools, evolution shouldn't be taught as the answer to life, which is, as we know it today, 42.
lol360
wow i feel so bad for bam now. i always knew he was best buds with dunn, but damn he really was a brother to that guy
This is the greatest 24 minutes on the internet
That videos a little deceptive, eh? The fruitfly example is a fine example of evolution, because it WOULD be selected out. However, had that mutation been beneficial, it would not only have survived, but likely done better than its prior form because it would be more stable/quick/whatever. If it were better at finding food, or evading predators, and therefor surviving long enough to reproduce, it would win out in the end.
I think its fairly ironic that Ken Miller appeared in that, yet, is one of the more outspoken scientist on evolution:
He does some of the better scientific videos on evolution, explained in simple enough terms:
the ponies thing instantly reminded me of this
Only creationists and morons think we evolved from apes. We share a common ancestor with apes. Not the same thing.
It doesn't matter what Darwin thought, because science isn't dogma. There's also no such thing as a Darwinist, just like there's no such thing as a Newtonist.
Evolution does not, has not, and never will concern the beginning of life or the beginning of the universe.
Where are your skulls? http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts
Don't mean to respond without a video, but I was taught evolution in school and I'm fairly certain everyone else was too. It is natural to me to assume that the only argument left is whether evolution explains the origin of life. However, it sounds like this isn't even the argument here [see second paragraph under misuse, assuming you stand with the link's position], so we are starting at different places in the discussion and this caused some misconceptions. You might like this link about early man if you haven't already read it. PM me any links you like if you have some interesting reads.
luv all the youtube commentators white-knighting up the place. Have they never heard of work place conversations?