Whales evolution

Whales are mammals whose ancestors lived on land. So how did they evolve into the sea creatures of today? Based on illustrations by Carl Buell and displayed as part of the Whales Tohor? exhibition.

Login to rate this video.

You can place this video on your website by inserting the (X)HTML code below:

Options:
pixels
pixels
Embed code:
<iframe src="https://www.snotr.com/embed/20326" width="400" height="330" frameborder="0"></iframe>

You can email this video to your friends by entering their addresses below:

Your information:
Recipients:

add Add another recipient

Human verification:

People who liked this video also liked

Fresh Guacamole by PES
How Cockroaches Use Karate Kicks to Avoid Becoming Zombies | National Geographic
How Microwaving Grapes Makes Plasma
How Microwaving Grapes Makes Plasma
Chiyonokuni vs Takanoyama
Gesture controlled touchscreen calculator watch

Comments

63 comments posted so far. Login to add a comment.

Expand all comments

Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements
Comment rated too low. Show this comment

-9 1. 2001cobra commented 301 days ago

About the stupidest thing I've seen in a while. But then that is all evolution is which is a bunch of stupid what ifs, could be, maybe, we think, possibly, we assume it happened this way, and with absolutely no proof kinda thingy.
Picture of Dubnuh27 achievements

+7 2. Dubnuh commented 301 days ago

#1. You, sir, are an imbecile.
Picture of thundersnow58 achievements

+1 3. thundersnow commented 301 days ago

#1 Then what is your theory on how our universe and this planet came to be?
Picture of mwak48 achievements

+3 4. mwak commented 301 days ago

#1 : you should take a look at recent epigenetic studies. Your adn can evolve even during your lifetime.
(I always though people saying that were an Internet meme lol)
Picture of Judge-Jake51 achievements

+7 5. Judge-Jake commented 300 days ago

It's interesting when thinking about evolution that people think of the journey from sea to land and then the progress through to Mammal and often disregard the reverse journey. But being a mammal the Whale did clearly make the return journey back to the sea after initially evolving from a sea based creature to a land based creature. One has to assume that conditions for the walking land creature that returned to the ocean were not beneficial to it's survival at the time, maybe a predator was getting the upper hand or climate change and taking to the water was the solution.

There is plenty of evidence in the bones of a whale that directly relate it to a land mammal rather than a fish. #1 I have to assume you are reading the ONE book like a lot of blinkered people in this world. Go visit a library and enlighten yourself. :)
Picture of Austin42 achievements

+4 6. Austin commented 300 days ago

Sigh. Methinks # 1. 2001cobra is just trolling people. You can’t really debate with such a retrograde and primitive mind-set.

As for proof, to add to # 4. mwak comments. One just has to look at the amazing varieties of dogs that humans bred from the Canis lupus give or take 10,000 years ago.

I just pulled this image from the internet.

https://dogbreedslisted.blogspot.com/2017/02/how-many-breeds-of-dogs-are-there-in.html

This is the result of human intervention and breeding for specific purposes. These guys did not hitch a ride on Noah’s boat ;-) . Humans did this to another species. This is a lovely little example of evolution over time. Trait selection and adaptation. And yet wolves still exist and in some cases cross breeding is possible. Say what now?

Again – don’t try to argue with a fundie, not worth your time. Time better spent looking at the beauty of evolution and marvelling at what it has produced in the natural world.
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements
Comment rated too low. Show this comment

-6 7. 2001cobra commented 300 days ago

The point your missing with your example of dogs is this: "They are still dogs". You've evolved nothing new. Yes man can breed a species such as a dog to perform a needed task, but "it's still a dog". Not a new species. Now take a dog and a cat and first try to breed them into some animal that you think would be an improvement you might be looking for with a dog, such as making it more adept to climb trees to improve it's hunting or tracking abilities. Go ahead and try. Will you succeed? Of course not. If you can't do it with all your knowledge then how could it just happen with no explanation or "PROOF" when your out digging?
And yes don't waist your time with a "fundie". The reason you won't is you can't prove even the simplest of what you say evolution is, which you say is fact. In reality you nor any evolutionist has ever come up with any proof. All we ever get are insults that we don't or can't understand. Well yes we don't because there is no truths or proof at all with this "theory".
Picture of Austin42 achievements

+1 8. Austin commented 300 days ago

#7. 2001cobra ok. Fair point regarding the ability to produce offspring. That does suggest a close genetic relatedness – so you are suggesting a new critter at the genus level I assume. Plus this change was deliberate and faciliated by humans. Again - fair enough. So lets just go with Darwin's finches or the Peppered Moth in the UK as classic well attested examples of evolution due to enviromental factors and or pressures.

You have lost me however with your argument that one cannot interbreed members of the dog / Canidae and cat / Felidae families to create a new specialized critter. Agreed. You cant. Why this cannot happen has been known and explained by science for a while now. You know chromosomes and such. This is now accepted by most if not all scientists.

>Will you succeed? Of course not.

But we know why it will not succeed so your point is??

>If you can't do it with all your knowledge then how could it just happen with no explanation or "PROOF" when your out digging?

However, is precisely our scientific knowledge that explains why it cannot be done (outside of gene splicing I suppose, ok by ‘natural’ procreative means) so we have booth evidence and a well-tested theory and explanation… no digging required.

Again, I do not understand your point.

>And yes do not waste your time with a "fundie".

You have unfortunately just proven my point.

>The reason you will not is you cannot prove even the simplest of what you say evolution is, which you say is fact. In reality, you nor any evolutionist has ever come up with any proof.

That is just patently false and ignores all the advancements and discoveries made in the sciences over the past 200+ years.

You are playing the classic creationist / Intelligent Design rhetorical game which is show me the proof without ever operationally defining what you mean by ‘proof’, or acknowledging much less accepting genetic records, fossil records, etc. etc, or suggesting that any proof you will accept must violate basic science and what is known. The evidence and proof is all around you mate. Evolution is a theory but it is very robust, it has been tested countless times (always being found as valid), it allows for predictions, and it is accepted by a great majority of the scientists and researchers and academics in the world.

On the other hand, you can rely on Bronze Age observations and deliberate ignorance of the world of science and the empirical method and the insights into the universe that it has provided for an answer.

Clearly we have taken different incommensurate paths.....
Picture of Judge-Jake51 achievements

+3 9. Judge-Jake commented 300 days ago

#1#7 There is a book you should read called 'The magic of Reality' by Richard Dawkins. It's for Children and has lots of pictures, so it's about your level. Once you have read it and been educated on the subject you are commenting on, feel free to come back onto Snotr and continue in the discussion with the adults. JJ
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements
Comment rated too low. Show this comment

-5 10. 2001cobra commented 300 days ago

I'm very open minded to science which is a subject I love and respect. But only true science. I've been trying for over 50 years to get just one, not ten, not 100 so called evolutionist to simply lay out on a table the proof of evolution. Show me step by step how animal "A" turned into animal "B" by the fossil record, not some carton like shown here in this mans idea of "how it could have happened".
Again in every single carton, article, discourse or in whatever way it is presented the same words appear every time: "We think, we suppose, we assume, could be, could have, maybe, etc, etc are always there. That is not proof.............................
If this ((((proof)))) truly exist, please share it.
Picture of Austin42 achievements

+2 11. Austin commented 300 days ago

#10. 2001cobra the evidence and research done in support of the theory of evolution is widely available. You can start with Darwin’s ‘On the Origin of Species’ or for a excellent modern treatise read Richard Dawkin’s ‘The Selfish Gene’. Or the Dawkin’s book that #9 JJ suggested.

The fact that you have chosen to not avail yourself of the countless books and accept heaps of scientific evidence produced in support of this theory is evidence of your wilful and deliberate ignorance and NOT, as you put it, a ‘lack of proof’. The proof is all around you, you have just chosen to deny its existence – much like evolution.

The proverb you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink comes to mind and seems most apropos for situation.

As is my previous statement about the futility of engaging with a Fundamentalist / Creationist / intelligent Design proponent.
Picture of Judge-Jake51 achievements

+5 12. Judge-Jake commented 300 days ago

#10 It seems you me, that unless you are able to watch a an actual video taken from the time the first creature (allegedly) crawled out of the sea, millions of years ago showing all the evolutionary changes from day one until around 1970 you aren't going to get it.

As Austin says there is plenty of excellent literature, explaining not only what we know, but more importantly what we don't need to know to prove the process. I find it hard to understand why you remain so skeptical and the only conclusion I can come to (correct me if I'm wrong) is that you are arguing because of a religious belief, which opens a whole new can of Nematodes.

Lets just change the subject very slightly and hear your thoughts on God and your belief for when you die?
Picture of Austin42 achievements

+4 13. Austin commented 300 days ago

Curse you JJ for dragging me back in ;)

I did the mic drop and everything and then you made me reflect with your next post re evidence. Good stuff by the way.

Actual evidence will never be enough for #10. 2001cobra, he/she will find an intellectually unsustainable way to disqualify it, but a quick google and I found what I recall reading back in the day.

This has been pinched from Wikipedia but it is what he/she is asking for.

Lenski's E. E. coli long-term evolution experiment

One of the most widely known examples of laboratory bacterial evolution is the long-term E.coli experiment of Richard Lenski. On February 24, 1988, Lenski started growing twelve lineages of E. coli under identical growth conditions.[32][33] When one of the populations evolved the ability to aerobically metabolize citrate from the growth medium and showed greatly increased growth,[34] this provided a dramatic observation of evolution in action. The experiment continues to this day, and is now the longest-running (in terms of generations) controlled evolution experiment ever undertaken.[citation needed] Since the inception of the experiment, the bacteria have grown for more than 60,000 generations. Lenski and colleagues regularly publish updates on the status of the experiments.[35]

Mice, fruit flies, and other critters with shorter life spans and robust breeding have also been subjected to longitudinal testing. Again – providing clear evidence for evolution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_evolution

But again – horse, water, :squirrel: sigh.
Picture of mwak48 achievements

+3 14. mwak commented 299 days ago

In fact there is an interesting experiment on foxes that have been selected breed for years in order to make them sociable. Russian are using them as a genetic and epigenetic evolution experiments that still continue today.

Here is a talk about it : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShaxRuy47p8
Here is a documentary : https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xwq3rs

They have created a new race of foxes that already show visible and genetic differences through only some years of forced evolution.
You can also find some interesting papers where some people tried to determine the sociable complex behavior gene sequence that made a wolf into dog breeds through centuries of domestication.

Through human history, selective breeding has made, in animal and vegetal reign, new type of subspecies and species (ie : german shepards, chickens eggs size, the peaches known as Prunus persica, some citrus). It's the same principle but without the genetic analysis in background.
Picture of Natan_el_Tigre52 achievements

0 15. Natan_el_Tigre commented 299 days ago

"Just to add to some of the excellent answers, proof only really exists in math. In the real world almost nothing can be truly proven, which is why you'll usually see the word evidence instead, especially in a scientific context. Evidence lends support to a hypothesis (or eventually theory), but those conclusions are always open to change when new evidence is found." – Nicholas
Picture of kissmybackbone38 achievements

-2 16. kissmybackbone commented 299 days ago

#1 has proved evolution, he evolved from a basic idiot to a much bigger idiot; case and point
Picture of Judge-Jake51 achievements

+1 17. Judge-Jake commented 299 days ago

Well it seems to me, and I am prepared to be proven wrong, that 2001cobra has slithered off stage first left, I think it was the religion question that did it. There is probably a clue in the name in that we are dealing with a seventeen year old who has been subjected to a Southern Baptist upbringing (I think the 50 year comment was a swerve ball) if I'm wrong, then I remain puzzled as to why an individual would be putting up so much opposition to an awful lot of work that has been done by scientists for many decades to establish the origins of life on this planet. Why would you set yourself up in opposition unless you are being subjected to contrary information from a Holy book? or you are just an argumentative plum sucker?

If you are still reading this Snakey (for you have been renamed, just like Thomas in the Bible) and you haven't yet read the book I suggested, then Google (there are other search engines) The recurrent Laryngeal Nerve. Now although there are articles to the contrary, it is pretty obvious to any right thinking person that this is an evolutionary development on a colossal scale, Read Dawkins explanation of it's evolutionary path from it's position in a elongated fish shaped creature through to mammals like ourselves. Because of evolutionary changes the nerve loops unnecessarily around our Aorta, taking it several inches out of it's way, on a Giraffe that unnecessary path takes it around six feet out of it's way.
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

-4 18. 2001cobra commented 298 days ago

JJ, I haven't slithered off to anywhere. Just very limited time to post. It seems that as usual most who defend evolution seem to take liberties in throwing insults and wanting to express their superiority in brain power. Why is that? I don't believe I've insulted anyone here so why the personal attacks? I've asked for proof and still I see nothing offered. Par for the course as usual....
So for the awful lot of work that you say has been done, then it would seem it should be easy by now to prove by nothing more then by the fossil record. Even with just 1 animal that you say evolved over eons of time. You know by starting out with the way it originally appeared to what it is now today. But then with all the life that has lived on earth, by the millions, there should be millions of those links of fossils showing the step by step progression of their evolutionary steps. Right? Right. So where are they? Just one, at least just one should be out there somewhere wouldn't you think? If you know of at least one life form connecting all their progressive changes, lets see it.
Picture of mwak48 achievements

0 19. mwak commented 298 days ago

I'm not sure, is this an Internet troll playing and relaying it on tweeter somewhere. Just look : new account, providing us with countless memes lol. Isn't it simply an admin having a good laugh ? :D

I mean I have never crossed over this kind of behavior in real life before and I have traveled the world (except the USA and some middle eastern countries). If it is for real this is as weirdly fun as the flathearthers lol.
Picture of ringmaster54 achievements

+1 20. ringmaster commented 298 days ago

This comment section proves that evolution can get us almost everywhere / anywhere.
Picture of Austin42 achievements

+2 21. Austin commented 298 days ago

#18. 2001cobra welcome back and thank you for the clarification.

I suggested that you would use an intellectually indefensible position to frame your ’lack of proof’ argument and on cue you have done this by trotting out the well nown and false ‘gaps in the fossil record’ meme.

This is a very common discourse strategy in the Creationist / ID Community. Yes, one can’t find a continuous fossil record from the emergence of multicellular organisms to present day because condition on earth at various times were not conducive to preserving matter in the form of fossils.

Hence we have a gap in the record and 2001cobra and his/her ilk seize on it as proof positive.

The absence of evidence is the evidence of absence may feel like a winning argument in your community 2001cobra but it is a logical fallacy built on a false dichotomy and in the case of evolution falls apart immediately. It fails to understand and recognize that science and discovery are ongoing processes, evolution is a theory that is being successfully tested every day, and more and more evidence is in fact being discovered on a daily basis that validates this theory. What also you fail to accept is that theories and evidence allow for predictions and that is what scientists have done with the existing fossil record with great success. There are literally hundreds of prediction made from Darwin forward that have been realized via the fossil records. Based on X people expected to find, and in due time they did find it. For example Darwin predicted the presence of Precambrian fossils, these were never found in this lifetime, but in the 1950’s they were discovered.

The scientific world, unlike yours, thrives on gaps in our knowledge and this helps to drive research. In fact all good research should in fact exploit a research gap but that is another discussion.

So, we are at an impasse. You can use the gap in the fossil record to try and justify your opinion but you are a) mistaken, b) wilfully ignoring the fallacy of your position and c) demonstrating a basic ignorance of logic, science, and the empirical process.

I know you need this to justify your belief that the world is 6,000 years old but most people, post Enlightenment, have moved on from such retrograde and primitive positions.

So the world is 6, 0000 years old. Check.

And do you also believe in the story of Noah and the flood? All animals in existence have always existed and they survived God’s purge thanks to Noah. It does explain the lack of a clear fossil chain.

So you accept the story of Noah as well, yes?

How are you on taking / making slaves, killing apostates, death for worshiping other / false Gods and multiple wives?

All ok?
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

-3 22. 2001cobra commented 298 days ago

I do not believe the world is 6000 years old so you are wrong on what you think I believe.
Getting back and staying on the subject now.
If given the chance which has already happened here, most evolutionist believe that evolution is a fact. But most will not admit that yes there are serious gaps. Again with all the time in the world available to have at least "one" simple example in the fossil record showing all the connective bones or impressions or whatever it would take to absolutely prove that fossil A has finally been proved by evolution to connect it to fossil Z can finally be shown to all doubters. Where is it?
It would seem before one claims this theory to be fact, which you all do and condemn all who say no to it, you should find the proof needed to not seem so foolish. One who finds themselves in this situation should learn the true differences between evolution and adaptation.
For example there are many different looking foxes on the planet. Fact. Many have adapted to their environment. Fact. But they are all still foxes. Fact.
They are not and will not ever turn into another species and the fossil record absolutely proves that. If their food source slowly disappears even over centuries, they either adapt within their physical limits or they die. If there is a constant food source up in the tree tops they can't evolve wings to access that food source. Even if they could do this it would take unknown thousands of years to finally have working wings. Do you not see the foolishness of thinking evolution would be the answer?

Tell me how eyes would have evolved from a blind creature? Just a simple answer will be fine.
Picture of thundersnow58 achievements

0 23. thundersnow commented 298 days ago

I hope we'll soon get more videos!!! :|
Picture of ComentAtor48 achievements

+2 24. ComentAtor commented 298 days ago

ooo .. good point .. i was so into snake vs austin and rooster that i forgot about the videos
Picture of Austin42 achievements

+2 25. Austin commented 298 days ago

#22. 2001cobra ‘I do not believe the world is 6000 years old’

Fine. So you are a proponent of Intelligent Design which is just repackaged Creationism

> most will not admit that yes there are serious gaps.

Actually not true and this is what motives current research. Gaps are not to be feared nor do they undermine the robustness of the theory of evolution. This has been addressed but you still chose to ignore it.

>to have at least "one" simple example in the fossil record showing all the connective bones or impressions

The evidence is overwhelming and abundantly available, your decision to not avail yourself of it or deny it does not make you argument valid or legitimate. It makes it a waste of time.

And you end with yet another classic ID trope of ‘irreducible complexity’. Sigh. If the Snotr community is not up on ID terms this is one of the supposed theoretical linchpins of ID. 001cobra presents it as the following:

>Tell me how eyes would have evolved from a blind creature? Just a simple answer will be fine

The argument is basically this - if you have a single system which is composed of several interacting parts, if you remove of any one of the parts it causes the system to cease functioning.

Show me eyes would have evolved from a blind creature. Ok, not a problem, Here you go.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/1/l_011_01.html

Evolution of the Eye.

Zoologist Dan-Erik Nilsson demonstrates how the complex human eye could have evolved through natural selection acting on small variations. Starting with a simple patch of light sensitive cells, Nilsson's model "evolves" until a clear image is produced. Examples of organisms that still use the intermediary forms of vision are also shown. From Evolution: "Darwin's Dangerous Idea".

As for where #22. 2001cobra is coming from and the weakness of his/her argument for the sake of my time I will use this passage from Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity

‘Irreducible complexity (IC) is the idea that certain biological systems cannot evolve by successive small modifications to pre-existing functional systems through natural selection. Irreducible complexity is central to the creationist concept of intelligent design, but it is rejected by the scientific community, which regards intelligent design as pseudoscience.

The theological argument from design was presented in creation science with assertions that evolution could not explain complex molecular mechanisms. Michael Behe in his 1996 book Darwin's Black Box called this irreducible complexity and said it made evolution through natural selection of random mutations impossible. This was based on the mistaken assumption that evolution relies on improvement of existing functions, ignoring how complex adaptations originate from changes in function, and disregarding published research. Evolutionary biologists have published rebuttals showing how systems discussed by Behe can evolve, and examples documented through comparative genomics show that complex molecular systems are formed by the addition of components as revealed by different temporal origins of their proteins.

In the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial the court found that "Professor Behe's claim for irreducible complexity has been refuted in peer-reviewed research papers and has been rejected by the scientific community at large."’

I second the vote from Thunders et al that we get new vids and move on. #22. 2001cobra will never be convinced. If he/she wants to remain wilfully ignorant that is his/her choice. He/she has not chosen to evolve in his/her thinking and like all such species who run down selective dead ends – this example of sham science (ID) will almost certainly die out with its dead ending proponents.
Picture of Judge-Jake51 achievements

0 26. Judge-Jake commented 298 days ago

#22 Snakey I think I am speaking for everyone on this site, with the possible exception of Austin who seems to have endless patience dealing with people like you. I am now officially bored with your comments and will not be commenting again after this entry. I asked you a simple question in the last paragraph of comment 12 above which you have not replied to. Applying your system of disbelief by default of evolution due to lack of evidence, I am applying the same to your lack of supplying an answer to a simple question and proving the point that you are indeed highly biblical in your thought process.

I've tried to imagine any person in this world that isn't blinded by some religious belief, waking up in the morning and deciding for no good reason, to take a stance against evolution just for the fun of it (Although I do agree everyone should have a hobby) I think this is highly unlikely. I am reminded of the comment by Johann Hari which apply to you perfectly "I respect you too much as a person to respect your ridiculous beliefs" As for your request to understand the beginning of the eye I submitted an excellent video only a few weeks ago but watch this You tube video of the same https://youtu.be/fzERmg4PU3c After watching I dare in fact I triple dare you to come back on this forum and say A) You didn't understand it B) You don't believe it and C) It couldn't happen like that... I absolutely dare you!!!
Picture of thundersnow58 achievements

0 27. thundersnow commented 298 days ago

#24 Of course my #23 comment did not by any means imply that I was bored with this conversation, it was more like a general statement. I really enjoy intelligent conversations like this. Even though I don't always participate in them, I sure like reading and following them. I am astonished how someone can reject evolution, but it sure makes for a great conversation piece.
Picture of Judge-Jake51 achievements

0 28. Judge-Jake commented 298 days ago

You and me both Thunders.
Picture of thundersnow58 achievements

0 29. thundersnow commented 297 days ago

#28 <3<3<3
Picture of Geekster80 achievements

+2 30. Geekster (admin) commented 297 days ago

Wow it seems I'm late to the party again :'(
Sorry guys... I was really busy these days...

Btw Austin, let me know if you want me to increase the comment length limit :D

How are you guys lately ?
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

-3 31. 2001cobra commented 297 days ago

Again over 50 years waiting on some simple proof that evolution actually happened and is still happening today........ You can throw all the writings, all the experiments, all the dreams, ideas or all that you can dream up. Where is the proof?
I'll be coming back from time to time just in case someone actually takes the time and thinks they have proof and shows it.
It's kinda like someone has a pile of lumber and their telling you that it will someday become a house. So check back later and I'll prove it has indeed become a house. But I do and it's still just a pile of lumber. Why didn't it become a house? Oh yeah, it takes someone to build it. See it's really that simple. Show me how evolution works in the real world of proof, not theory.
Picture of mwak48 achievements

+1 32. mwak commented 297 days ago

#30 : welcome back, life first, stay safe :)
Picture of Austin42 achievements

+1 33. Austin commented 297 days ago

#31. 2001cobra [someone has a pile of lumber, tells you it will someday become a house, I check back later it is still a pile of lumber. Why didn't it become a house? ]

Oh oh I want to play!!

Pile of lumber, into a house. Wait… Jebus was a carpenter's son (Matthew 13:55) and he was also referred to as a carpenter (Mark 6:3). To convert the pile of lumber into a house… I need Jebus.. who is the son of God, or perhaps God himself in human form —God in human flesh (I Timothy 3:16)… so I need God.

Sweet mother of self-reflection and discovery, God is in fact the one true and only answer!!!!!

Thank you for leading me down this true and righteous path. I know see the error of my ways, the errors of my arguments and the light.

It was Jebus / God all along… wow!! But you already knew that. Thickies like me need to be shown the way.

Thanks for the patience and when you get to the pearly gates you can claim my conversion on your CV.

Best

Austin
Picture of cretu22 achievements

+2 34. cretu commented 296 days ago

and here I thought religion was a bunch of what ifs... my bad :P
Picture of Austin42 achievements

+2 35. Austin commented 296 days ago

# 30. Geekster (admin) Btw Austin, let me know if you want me to increase the comment length limit :D

Dear God no. ;-) .. said the newly converted and enlightened Austin. O:)

The last thing I need is additional space to comment. The limits force me to organize my thoughts and arguments ... if you can believe that. ;)
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

-3 36. 2001cobra commented 295 days ago

To number #33. It would seem that you would be taking this opportunity to do the research in trying to find the simple proof that should be out there somewhere on this planet that proves that the fossil record does in fact support this theory you so much defend. But instead you seem to get some satisfaction in attacking God and his son. I don't get that but I see diverting from the subject is still a popular response from evolutionist .
Picture of ComentAtor48 achievements

+1 37. ComentAtor commented 293 days ago

geekster , tell us.. when was the last time a video had 37 comments on snotr :D
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

-2 38. 2001cobra commented 293 days ago

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/what-did-charles-darwin-r_b_166521

It would seem that evolution is a religion after all? Well not really, considering all the godless ones in the past couple of hundred years who finally found something to believe in instead of the bible. It's actually for ones who are too proud, too stubborn, too defiant, not humble enough to admit that they owe their very existence to a God on any level and to not have to answer to a God with crimes they commit against humanity.
And certainly not willing to get to know him on a personal level and to be willing to filter out all the false religious teachings that make him into some cruel spiritual being that he is not.
But Gods comment on human wisdom says this: "that mans wisdom is foolishness to him. And that earthling man who says there is no god is foolish and stupid." God ask this: " Where were you when he founded the heavens and laid the cornerstones of the earth?"
Who here on this forum with your man made philosophies and tiny little books of human wisdom was there? Anyone????
Picture of thundersnow58 achievements

0 39. thundersnow commented 293 days ago

#38 If so, then who created God?

#37 The answer to your question: https://www.snotr.com/video/20039/Legs_for_the_Piano_moon_light_sonata
Picture of ComentAtor48 achievements

0 40. ComentAtor commented 293 days ago

#39 we can beat that!
Picture of Austin42 achievements

+1 41. Austin commented 293 days ago

# 40. ComentAtor ‘#39 we can beat that!’

Who doesn’t like a good beating? I want to play.

#38. 2001cobra ‘ God ask this: " Where were you when he founded the heavens and laid the cornerstones of the earth?" Who here on this forum with your man made philosophies and tiny little books of human wisdom was there? Anyone????

My former scientific friends who I now shun and eschew thanks to my conversion would blasphemistically suggest that no one was present…. But of course that cant be because well God so I think it is rubbish but still – here is the link.


How Did Life Begin?
Untangling the origins of organisms will require experiments at the tiniest scales and observations at the vastest. By Jack Szostak on June 1, 2018

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-did-life-begin1/

Ps. I think I just invented the word ‘blasphemistically’. Can one say that? I just created a word… that makes me a creator in my own little way. I feel so empowered. And spiritual. What a fantastic start to the day.
Picture of Judge-Jake51 achievements

0 42. Judge-Jake commented 291 days ago

#36 It's impossible to attack something that doesn't exist. It's a little like pissing into the wind, you'll just get your own back. Well at lease you've FINALLY admitted that your objection to evolution is God based. Took you a while though didn't it. :D
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

-1 43. 2001cobra commented 291 days ago

#40 Read this quote a little closer................

"Once a planet like our Earth—not too hot and not too cold, not too dry and not too wet—has formed, what chemistry must develop to yield the building blocks of life? In the 1950s the iconic Miller-Urey experiment, which zapped a mixture of water and simple chemicals with electric pulses (to simulate the impact of lightning), demonstrated that amino acids, the building blocks of proteins, are easy to make. Other molecules of life turned out to be harder to synthesize, however, and it is now apparent that we need to completely (((((((( reimagine ))))))))) the path from chemistry to life.

The central reason hinges on the versatility of RNA, a very long molecule that plays a multitude of essential roles in all existing forms of life. RNA can not only act like an enzyme, it can also store and transmit information. Remarkably, all the protein in all organisms is made by the catalytic activity of the RNA component of the ribosome, the cellular machine that reads genetic information and makes protein molecules.

This observation (((((( suggests))))))) that RNA dominated an early stage in the evolution of life.

Today the question of how chemistry on the infant Earth gave rise to RNA and to RNA-based cells (((((( is the central question))))))) of origin-of-life research.

Some scientists ((((((( think ))))))) that life originally used simpler molecules and only later evolved RNA.

Other researchers, however, are tackling the origin of RNA head-on, and exciting (((((((( new ideas )))))))) are revolutionizing this once quiet backwater of chemical research. Favored geochemical (((((((( scenarios)))))))) involve volcanic regions or impact craters, with complex organic chemistry, multiple sources of energy, and dynamic light-dark, hot-cold and wet-dry cycles. Strikingly, many of the chemical intermediates on the way to RNA crystallize out of reaction mixtures, self-purifying and potentially accumulating on the early Earth as organic minerals—reservoirs of material waiting to come to life when conditions change.

(((((((( Assuming )))))))) that key problem is solved, (((((((( we will still need to understand how )))))))) RNA was replicated within the first primitive cells. Researchers are just beginning to identify the sources of chemical energy that could enable the RNA to copy itself, but much remains to be done. If these hurdles can also be overcome, (((((((( we may be able )))))))) to build replicating, evolving RNA-based cells in the laboratory—recapitulating a (((((((( possible ))))))) route to the origin of life.

What next? Chemists are already ((((((( asking ))))))) whether our kind of life can be generated only through a single plausible pathway (((((( or whether multiple routes might lead )))))))) from simple chemistry to RNA-based life and on to modern biology. ((((((( Others are exploring ))))))) variations on the chemistry of life, ((((((( seeking clues as to the possible diversity of life )))))) “out there” in the universe. ((((((( If all goes well )))))), we will ((((((( eventually )))))) learn how robust the transition from chemistry to biology is and therefore whether the universe is full of life-forms or—but for us—sterile.


So.... do you see the admitted pattern here? My favorite is the first, " reimagine". Lol. this is classic. He's even admitting that all that they thought was based on this: "how, maybe, could have, assumed, etc, etc, before, was being "imagined" and now they have to "re imagine" how it all happened. I thought all you guys say evolution was real???????? Oh my! Find facts my friend and we will talk then.
Picture of ComentAtor48 achievements

+1 44. ComentAtor commented 291 days ago

you have a filter inserted in your perception that reads all the data but filters possible connections.. and i can only hope it isn't contagious..

what also worries me is that what was once an isolated communist (read equally bad experiment) country , now has a percentage of people that finished schools in the US, that watch all those empty TV shows and want to be like Kim and Kanye

it makes me depressed.. i want future for my two boys.. and i don't see it... mars maybe
Picture of cretu22 achievements

+1 45. cretu commented 291 days ago

Seems like cobra has all these arguments against science YET not a single point or argument to backup his opinion or theory on life and how we got here lol!

One sided much?
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

-2 46. 2001cobra commented 291 days ago

#45. Against science? I think not. I love science. But I love true science. Yes there are some things in our universe we don't have the answers too. There is no way as humans we will ever know it all. But sometimes when we don't know, that's where just plain old common sense comes into play. When the proof is just not there and with open eyes we see nothing that connects the dots, such as with evolution one has to use common sense first of all, and then just maybe give credit to all that we see with the complexities involved that we will never understand and give God his due respect and admiration for the beauty of all he's created and to this very second gives life to all of us.
Unless of course if one refuses to accept that God is real. Then one would never find the answers in their search of life's questions and that's when one finds themselves falling into this evolution theory as an answer which it is not and never will be. If it were true it would be easy to prove millions of times over in the fossil record...
Picture of Austin42 achievements

+2 47. Austin commented 290 days ago

Sigh. When this thread started I suggested that it was a waste of time to argue with a Fundie / Creationist / ID proponent and here is the best proof to date why this remains sound advice.

Look at #43. 2001cobra’s missive. He has emphasised specific verbs and constructions that suggest possible answers or conclusion (as opposed to definitely starting that X or Y is an indisputable fact) that are completely commonplace and expected in scientific literature and reporting because THAT IS HOW ONE SPEAKS ABOUT TESTNG A HYPOTHESIS. The empirical method and testing of hypothesis are ongoing investigations that make claims and statements with degrees of statistical probability. Caution, scepticism, posing possible limitations on the findings, suggesting future avenues of research, and describing what an experiment of finding can and can’t say about X or Y is what ANY good scientific paper does. Scientists are not scared by gaps or what is not immediately known or understood – that is what inspires them to do more work. Science is a collaborative diachronic endeavour. As in our collective human knowledge.

Contrast that 2001cobra #43/#46 statements. When you believe that God is infallible and can explain everything there is no doubt in your world because you have none. Can’t explain X or y? Ok, God’s will. Why does / did X or Y happen? Because God wanted it to be. End of story.

Inquiry and questioning and doubt is to be feared in 2001 Cobra’s world unless it leads back to and thus is explained by on easy answer – God.

2001 Cobra you see lack of certainly in grammatical constructions and verbs as evidence of weakness of argument or evidence. It couldn’t be farther from the truth. But it is part of a truth that you will never accept because of your devotion to the one true answer and what He decides to reveal, or not, to us humans.

So again – you have shown over and over again with your refusal to accept evidence as evidence, and you wilful or more likely deliberate misunderstanding of the scientific method, lest your worldview get utterly destroyed, we really have incommensurate positions … and any further discussion is just a waste of our respective time.
Picture of thundersnow58 achievements

+1 48. thundersnow commented 290 days ago

#40 We just did ;)

#47 Austin, I really appreciate your carefully thought through analysis of topics that are of great importance. They are interesting and a pleasure to read. Please keep it up. You will make a difference in someones thinking.
Picture of cretu22 achievements

+1 49. cretu commented 290 days ago

#46 ya cause religions are FULL of common sense right? lol!!


and god will give me all the answers i need in life!? hahahahaha!

Its a sad world that people can't see we are just highly evolved animals. There is no meaning of life and that just makes everything easier (ie accepting death and other inevitability's in life) :D
Picture of Austin42 achievements

+1 50. Austin commented 290 days ago

Thank you Thunders for the kind words and encouragement.

#46. 2001cobra-kai [you may claim] ‘to love true science’ but you don’t understand, accept, or trust it. And therein lies the root of the problem
You don’t accept science and its discoveries preferring to believe in and turn to God for answers.

And that is your right but please don’t try to slide such a vacuous and empty statement by as if it is a legitimate counter argument because it isn’t. [I love true science]. Please. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. You just don't. Just read the posts in this and other threads. Your willful ignorence and delusion is ... remarkable but not unexpected. You can't conceptually handle any other truth than the existence of God. And that leads you down the dead end ally where you currently find yourself. Unwilling, and if you accept the directives in His book, unable and forbidden to question His existence under all kinds of horrible pains. You would think that an all-powerful and omnipotent God would have more confidence in himself and his believers to stick with him but that is another matter.

Anyway, you may feel content knowing that there are questions that, at present, seem unresolvable or unanswerable but thankfully as a species we have moved beyond that and use curiosity and inquiry and investigation to make our lives better.

Given your expressed positions, your passivity is to be expected. As is your surrender and acquiescence and obedience and servitude to a higher power and authority. Because that is what worship is all about. You are willingly subordinating yourself to an entity and a force that you can’t claim to understand but accept that is it greater then you are. And it guides your life and destiny. And makes demands for some final reward that YOU can't prove exists. Pointing to His book doesnt count, I want video evidence. That is the threshold that you set for evolution, same rules apply for heaven. Show me the evidence.

Anyway, Imagine where we would be if your mind-set was still dominant in society… probably still fearing the dark, the seasons storms and earthquakes, worshiping eclipses, making human sacrifices and not advancing into any sort of industrialized state. Luckily a fair number of us have moved on – much to your benefit BTW. You are welcome.
Picture of ComentAtor48 achievements

0 51. ComentAtor commented 290 days ago

#48 WOOOOHOOO

#50 the proof of heaven is everywhere you just have to OPEN YOUR EYES https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7Dp2ogOspo

#46&47 what do you think about LGBT adoption ?


P.S. as one mislead straight sheep wrote:
Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy? Caught in a landslide... No escape from reality
OPEN YOUR EYES.. Look up to the skies and seeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

my kid had a nightmare i put him back to sleep.. and now what.. who will put me to sleep?!?
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

-2 52. 2001cobra commented 290 days ago

“Because, knowing God, they did not glorify Him as God, neither were thankful. But they became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man, and birds, and four-footed animals, and creeping things” (Romans 1:21-23 MKJV).
Picture of Austin42 achievements

0 53. Austin commented 290 days ago

#52. 2001cobra-kai

You are an utterly predicable and a dreadful bore. And by simply quoting gospel and not expressing any genuine or original thoughts of your own you have demonstrated that you have nothing left to contribute and thus your capitulation, while always immanent, is now complete.

On behalf of the Snotr community we accept your surrender and consider this thread closed

Moving on.
Picture of thundersnow58 achievements

-1 54. thundersnow commented 289 days ago

#51 All for LGBT adoption, they often take parenting much more seriously than conventional parents, and also do a wonderful job of raising their kids. (No need for anyone to get upset, there are exceptions to everything of course). :)
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

-2 55. 2001cobra commented 289 days ago

#54. Oh, OK. Didn't know you were the owner of this site or thread. So is this your way of saying you won? Really? Well not on the slightest spec of dust in the universe. Oh wait!!!! You say all things evolved from some spec of dust and muck and that something finally wiggled out and finally became you? Lol. Lol. Lol.
Take care but do be aware. You will meet your maker someday. He'll set you straight. :(|)
Picture of cretu22 achievements

0 56. cretu commented 289 days ago

#55 I already know my makers, they are my parents lol!!! its called reproducing. "god" didnt "make" me. My parents made me haha

Try proving that god created all this lol i dare you, please, prove us wrong
Picture of Austin42 achievements

0 57. Austin commented 289 days ago

# 55. 2001cobra '#54. Oh, OK. Didn't know you were the owner of this site or thread'

I said good day sir.
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

0 58. 2001cobra commented 289 days ago

#56. We both know that no matter what I'd say or show you it would be useless. Either one is aware of their spirituality or their not. Either one has a relationship with God or they don't.
I's just a sad thing to know that many humans don't, as it adds such depth and meaning and purpose to their life's. When one does have a relationship with God and open themselves up to learn from him, then one can begin to see the wisdom and perfection in all he's created.
But it's imperfect man and their really bad actions and decisions that are influenced by Satan that has made so much about God seem either bad or that he's not real.
But the proof you ask for is from the insects at your feet to all the universe that is out there. Every spec of it he created.
Picture of thundersnow58 achievements

0 59. thundersnow commented 289 days ago

#55 Huh??? What does that have to do with LBGT adoption??8-)
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

0 60. 2001cobra commented 288 days ago

Sorry I didn't know you were asking me. I basically see no problem with that because every child should have parents or a stand in person in that place but I would hope from my perspective that the teachings in the bible were available to any children no matter what their parents practice or believe in themselves. If a parent does not believe in the bible that is their business, but I would hope that they would expose the child to it ( on an unbiased level ) so as they age the child could eventually make their own choices on what the bible offers.
But I would probably guess that it may not happen......
Picture of cretu22 achievements

0 61. cretu commented 288 days ago

#58 you dont need meaning in life to be happy or have a good life lol!

Wait did you just say satan?! bahahahahaha this is getting ridiculous hahaha!!!!!!!



soooo did god create all the millions and billions of other planets with life forms on them too? no wonder he doesnt grant peoples wishes, he's too exhausted from doing all that "work"!


#60 to believe and to read the bible, you HAVE to be bias to that side lol. You arent winning any arguments here buddy... but keep trying haha
Picture of 2001cobra11 achievements

0 62. 2001cobra commented 288 days ago

#58 I'm not trying to WIN anything. Is this a contest? Anyway true you don't need that or the belief in evolution to be happy. Don't think I said that. But speaking from this side of the fence as apposed to being on the other side, you know the evolution non god side, I think me believing in a God and praying to him daily and from time to time asking him for personal help and sometimes I actually get it without a doubt, it's just sad to me that so many reject him on all levels and never get to have that relationship that really truly fills an empty void in a spiritual sense that evolutionist don't experience.
But what's worse is when evolutionist condemn ones who believe in a God and love him and praise him for his love and care. Plus the biggy is he promises in the bible that someday soon all the wickedness will be gone and all of our sicknesses will be gone. I know you are probably scoffing at this very second. But time will tell huh on if he and his words are real. He also says he will do away with all who refuse to believe in him and acknowledges his God ship.
No sinful human or government will ever come close to fixing the earth that God has promised to fix for those who love him. So sorry you and others here can't understand this.

And yes God has created every thing in the universe. The bible does not say that there is or isn't life on other planets. And God does not get exhausted.

So hope this all this gives you another good laugh.... How sad dude!!!
Picture of thundersnow58 achievements

-1 63. thundersnow commented 288 days ago

#60 The only way that the bible should be taught is as a piece of history, or history of religion, never as a manual for how to live life!