Darwin’s Biggest Problem | Long Story Short: Evolution

What drives me insane is not so much that Darwin's theory is full of problems, but that people including scientists believe it so wholeheartedly and call you an idiot for even daring to question it.

So why we still have those pictures in our textbooks?

have you ever noticed the ratio of fossilized soft creatures vs fossilized hard creatures? and then notice the ratio of older fossils to younger fossils. it makes perfect sense that we have so few pre-cambrian fossils. and "suddenly" means tens of millions of years. which is quick in terms of the timescale of evolution. there was likely a lot of pressure to evolve during that time. new niches were suddenly opening up due to a shifting climate.

If the question of life that you are referring to is, how life started. Then you should probably know that evolution doesn't answer that question, because evolution doesn't even attempt to answer that question. Evolution is just the change of life after it already exists. The beginning of life is abiogenesis, not evolution. They are two different things

Its hard for skeletons to fossilize. There need to be specific requirements for animals and other life to fossilize and last millions years. People point to animals with little transitionary fossils and claim that evolution isn't real, but ignore animals that do have transitionary fossils (like horses, humans, elephants, primates, ect.)

Baylor Christian University In the Department of Biology, the science we teach and the science we research are all about understanding our world. I think you might even say that we have a Biblical mandate to understand God’s world. We are supposed to be stewards and care takers of the world that we inherited. We don’t own it and so we must understand it in order to preserve it and care for it. This goes for all of humanity as well as for the planet. Evolution, a foundational principle of modern biology, is supported by overwhelming scientific evidence and is accepted by the vast majority of scientists. Because it is fundamental to the understanding of modern biology, the faculty in the Biology Department at Baylor University (Waco, TX) teach evolution throughout the biology curriculum. We are in accordance with the American Association for Advancement of Science’s statement on evolution. We are a science department, so we do not teach alternative hypotheses or philosophically deduced theories that cannot be tested rigorously.

Darwin was NOT the first to hypothesize evolution. The idea that humans descended fro some other type of creature dates back to Miletus, a Greek philosopher who lived in the 500s B.C. In the early 19th century Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and others proposed his theory of the "transmutation of species", the first fully formed theory of evolution. Charles Darwin's contribution has to do with natural selection which greatly advanced the mechanism of speciation. Darwin's contemporary, Alfred Russel Wallace, also developed the theory of evolution by natural selection. .... but Darwin was the one who wrote the book that became well known.

"They remained unchanged" Anomalocaris went extinct during the Cambrian and it's relatives that remained where quite different, with the main thing connecting them being, guess what, homologous traits. Also, although not necessarily reflecting if the overall accuracy, that anomalocaris is highly inaccurate.

This has to be the most well animated, cutest, and completely dishonest strawman I've ever seen constructed.

Folks analyzing / critiquing evolution seem to be focused only on one part of the evolutionary narrative, seemingly oblivious to the fact that evolution has TWO interactive components, not just one. ... i.e., biology is only part of the evolutionary dance, while environment is just as absolutely necessary as biology is. Biology provides the variations, while environment determines which of those variations survive long enough to pass their genes on to the next generation. So ... what was the environment doing during the Cambrian explosion? Was it static / unchanging? Or was it varying at a fairly rapid rate -- i.e., repeated volcanic events (every few tens or hundreds of years) would affect temperature / circulation over the entire planet over periods of hundreds or thousands of years, a fairly rapid change that would repeatedly change the selection criteria for any biology in that loop ... resulting in relatively rapid biological changes as a consequence. The resolution / granularity (i.e., error margins) in radiometric dating has been no finer than a few million years until fairly recently -- enough time for whole new species to emerge and become extinct -- but not fine enough to establish a chronological sequence of events that would demonstrate transitions. Some recent measurements claim an accuracy of 0.1%. But even 0.1% accuracy -- in 575 million-year-old samples -- is +/-575,000 years, and even 575,000 years is long enough for whole species to come and go. So -- it's not as if that record isn't there, but rather that the instrumentation necessary to analyze the record more precisely just hasn't been available.

When creationists talk about "how small of a chance" there is for life to develop like it did, I always wonder if they missed the existence of an insanely amount of planets in the universe that are lifeless

Yep, Darwin's problem - spoiler alert, Darwin is long dead and the problem long solved. You IDs need to get up to speed.

Darwin wrote his book in 1859. He took his voyage on the Beagle many decades earlier. If you can't get basic details like that correct, I cannot trust you on more important facts.

Thank you

Theory's do not die just their proponents do.

I'm trying to find the source for Stephen Jay Gould's quote "I have been reluctant to admit it..." Please reply with that reference. Thanks for the cool videos!

Your final speculative question is exactly what I was internally asking. Thanks for the good work and in sharing this information.

Who was waiting for the last...trillion 😂?

Great video !!

Hey LSS my brother has been trying to find your channel for a while and I sent him the link recently. He said your stuff was buried under about 300 other videos from random content creators. I think that YouTube is trying to stifle your information and ability to get it out to people. I will do what I can to promote your content. God bless you brother.