Debunking Darwin? Unraveling Controversies in Evolutionary Science #darwin #evolution

Explore the intriguing realm of evolutionary science with our latest video, Debunking Darwin? Unraveling Controversies in Evolutionary Science. In this thought-provoking discussion, we delve into controversial viewpoints challenging Darwin's established theory of evolution and reveal why it may not hold up with new scientific discoveries. Join us as we analyze the work of renowned scientist Gregg Braden, questioning scientific norms, and encourage open-minded exploration of evolutionary concepts. This video aims to foster a deeper understanding of the ongoing debates within the scientific community. Embrace the spirit of inquiry and join the conversation—let's navigate the complexities of evolution together. Subscribe, like, and share your thoughts in the comments below! #EvolutionDebate #DarwinCritique #ScienceControversy

[RMWestcott]

"Darwin admitted there wasn't enough evidence to prove it"
Yeah, like you said, 160 years ago. We've been building evidence since then that continually shows that evolution makes the most sense.
This is the dumbest thing I've ever seen.

[FlyingFridge]

This is just religion trying to sound scientific... and failing.

[weltschmerzistofthaufig]

This is completely bogus. Irreducible complexity is a pseudoscientific proposal by creationists, and is refuted by all rational biologists.

[AA-eumx]

Irreducible complexity is a concept often used to challenge evolution, suggesting that certain biological structures couldn't function if any part was removed. However, scientists explained that evolution can explain such complexities through gradual, step-by-step processes, with each intermediate stage conferring some functional advantage. It's important to consider the wealth of evidence supporting evolutionary theory.

[AA-eumx]

We must remain vigilant against misleading psudoscience! Videos that misrepresent scientific concepts are trying to blind you from the truth. It's essential to see the amazing, complex, and extraordinary nature of our universe through the lens of real knowledge. Remember, knowledge is power. Stay curious, use common sense, and be aware of the importance of discerning credible information in our exploration of the wonders of the universe.

[TheDdavis]

Lol the chances they evolved at the same time were exactly 100%

[aguyiguess]

You always say mainstream academia, and my brain dies
Aside from the spiderman across the spiderverse reference, spinning discovery institute garbage is a big no-no

[concos]

Many components of the systems served other, simpler functions before becoming more complex. Like primitive eyes being used to detect that its day time or for the orientation of a fish. Over time systems can become more complex and begin to synergize with other simple systems, making a more complex system.

[Mando-wxpn]

Science does not confirm irreducible complexity. It most definitely demonstrates that irreducible complexity is pure bunk. Just because a human needs a complex structure to function as it does doesn't mean that its predecessors were just as complex. We see this reflected in the evidence we find.

[Pemmont]

But.. none of these things happened at the same time. Every system you mentioned developed over eons.

We didn't appear out of thin air: Humans are a product of hundreds of millions of years of Evolution.

[ShrekGrunge]

Well they didn’t happen at one they evolved over time?

[lmoelleb]

Irreducible Compexity is one topic where I agree with Behe: It is not scientific. Too bad he forgets to tell people this when he is not testifying under oath in front of a judge who can throw him in jail for lying.

[Mando-wxpn]

No, darwin said there wasnt enough archeological evidence to prove it yet, but he correctly predicted that there would be fossil evidence of transitional species in the fossil record and he was proven correct in his life time. You don't know what you're talking about.

[magorostravsky]

Name one problém with human body Wich don't have Slow evolutionary progress behind. I'll Wait.

[vigbjornblaskeeg]

The argument being its incredibly unlikely so it couldn't happen? Yeah we only have a sample size of one the maker of the video has no clue how likely it is or isn't. It also kinda seems to give importance to it rather than accept that as unlikely an event may be, its still not special. It could just as likely have not happened and so what.

[GeoPePeTto]

Who are these people debunking the theory of evolution by natural means? Or evolution itself, which is a fact by the way.

[lillianreid]

I prefer the idea of conscious adaptation evolution, where an organism is having troubles surviving and reproducing, so it makes a variety of changes to solve the problems within itself, with the aid of its environment (microbes and such).

[murdock]

I love the comments. All the pagans freaking out by facts and logic. 😂 Another proof that evolution is just another dogma that you need to take on faith.