Biologist explains scientific challenges to Darwinian evolution

Why the irrelevant piano music?

Evolution is literally impossible

I appreciate the video may lower the background music on such videos as it would be easier to focus on what he is saying.

I don't think any one is trying to say that life arose (a cell for example) eg 'popped into existence' fully assembled with all the complex processes of the cells just already functioning. I would assume that cells with these processes arose...essentially evolved... from previous arrangements of long-chained complex replicating molecules which were themselves descended from earlier simpler self replicating molecules. At least that's what I would envision happening if I were to guess how life may have arisen naturally. A significant amount of serendipity was involved, but none of it happened randomly...all matter and energy acts and reacts in regular ways. Under certain conditions things happen...atoms come together automatically and then under different conditions and in the presence of other molecules they either change into yet other molecules or are degraded/broken down.

A significant number of 'just so' conditions would have likely had to happen in just the proper sequence for long chained molecules to form that could replicate and mutate. That has been demonstrated in a matter of days in laboratories. Then the conditions likely had to change at just the right moments for these simpler molecules to eventually combine and form longer chained, more robust molecules which themselves had to continue...replicating and mutating and passing on those mutations...long enough to form more robust molecules until actual cell like forms evolved. I would assume these 'cooking pots' of 'just so' conditions existed in literally trillions of locations around the early earth...each one with slightly varying conditions for slightly varying durations. And with each chemical reaction which may lead to a long chained self replicating molecule occurring in a matter of many times per minute, the 'tries' would be almost infinite and this would be going on for 100s of millions of years before the first 'just right' set of conditions resulted in a robust enough complex molecule to call it...life.

Then, lets add another factor. The puzzle seems to be 'how could life arise and evolve to sentience' in the time allotted. It's always assumed we can only talk about processes here on earth. But the complex processes needed to achieve this endpoint weren't just happening here on earth, but on trillions of planets throughout the universe. And if it hadn't have happened to occur here, but DID occur somewhere else, then THAT is were beings, like us, would be peering out into space and looking at themselves and saying, how in the world did WE evolve in such a short time on this planet. IOW we'd be them if life arising spontaneously was such a rare event.

The final factor since we're talking about a natural world without a designer. If universes occur cyclically from an eternal natural background, then this universe is just one in essentially an infinite number of universes. So all the above 'attempts' at life would have been going on, essentially forever, such that all those almost infinite attempts described above in THIS universe can be multiplied by, essentially, an infinite number of universes. And when it did finally happen...a whole series of just so conditions coming together to eventually form sentient life...there we'd be...that would be us. So maybe there was time for life....and us to evolve.

Finally, this guy is talking about how complex the cell is and...seems to be saying THIS makes a difference in whether it is likely/possible that life arose naturally. Well, here's a thought experiment. Let's say that life is as we see it now...all the different critters, plants and life forms...all 'existing away', but on closer inspection there are no complex internal components. No matter what any scientist does, how he dissects, how he disembowels, tears apart ANY life form from the smallest bacteria to the largest whale. there is NO...and I mean ZERO complex internal structure. All life looks and acts, moves, flies, eats, sleeps procreates as we see it now, but there is nothing on the inside of ANY of these critters. When dissected, it's a homogeneous gamish of nondescript and unidentifiable 'stuff.' There are no cells, no DNA, no RNA, no complex molecules with 'information' or a program, no organelles...because there are no actual cells except for unicellular organisms and they are all...everyone of them...with NO internal components, etc. Ok, you have the picture? NOW, do you think we'd be imagining that life like THIS was more likely to have evolved naturally than the life as we see it now or would that be an even greater reason to believe life was created by a supernatural creator? IOW, is it really the complexity that leads you to believe life had to have been 'created?'

1. We have records off transitory fossils for animals and around 6000 for humans these fossils are dated hundreds of thousands of years for humans and millions of years for animals
2. We have observed evolution including bacteria for example annual Vaxiens and we have to make our antibiotics stronger for bacteria over time because they evolve
3. We have observed more complex things evolve like insects and small fish and birds what happens? they change overtime
4. Human Embryos have gills on them, and I don’t think humans can breath underwater
5. Human embryos also share similarities with chicken embryos. The look of them are identical. A lot of mammal embryos are very similar to each other also
6. Human height has changed a lot over the course of history in fact humans have gotten around one inch taller from the 1800s to now
7. Humans have also gotten weaker over time and also have gotten way smarter over time. Brain sizes are also shrinking (skull sizes are smaller)
8. Humans and chimps share a lot of the same social structures. They both have traditions and rituals. Chimps might have religions the evidence is a bit iffy though
9. The similarities with all animals. A lot of animals share of similar structures and most animals have very similar dna structures

I read an article once that said belief in creation does not require blind faith. It actually rests on sound reasoning. When you see a car, a plane, or a house we know someone designed them. Why should we abandon that reasoning when we consider the human eye, a bird in the sky, or our planet Earth? Is it reasonable to think that an airplane was designed, but a bird was not?

l their funding and still creationists can't find a flaw in evolution that creationism can fix. And silence...

The music is stupid and unnecessary, could barely hear the audio.

This person explained nothing

It is embarrassing that Douglas Axe does not understand how Evolution works, he is supposed to be a Biologist. There is a reason why more than 90 percent of Biologists know that Evolution is a fact. It is not just about random chance and stuff. Mutations are random, but Natural selection is non-random. Also there are Genetic Drift and Sexual Selection. Genetics and the Fossil Record are two fields that show that Evolution is a fact. There are many other fields that show that Evolution is a fact.

Dude is trynna refute an understanding of evolution people had 100 years ago 😂

Remember to hold fast to this piece of logic that evolutionist never understand. There is a gap between "nothing" and "something", we went from nothing to a complicated universe like the one we live in. It does not matter what process turned atoms into life, it's the fact that this process would have also popped up out of nothing. People say that "a computer CAN program by itself", these people assume the computer is already there for no reason. God, an all knowing and poweful being created this very process. Evolutionist describe the process but do not describe where it came from. have a blessed day.

Not "like" human design..."FAR FAR MORE ADVANCED"... as Bill Gates admitted.
Naturalism FAILED!

Read this man's books...study his papers...then, I dare you to claim the "accident of the gaps"...naturalism... did this!
DNA CODE PROVES design. DNA CODE CAN'T SELF-CREATE and SELF-ASSEMBLE into cells ACCIDENTALLY! CAN'T!😉

What's funny to me is they keep finding out more and more... And still haven't the foggiest idea how to build a cell!... Not really a concern to me except for... The government is stealing my money to pay for their houses and cars! 😭😭

"If you believed everything was cobled together through random processes then there would be a lot of junk. There would be the residue of cobbling."
Firstly nice strawman.
Secondly I would assume that since you are a biologist would have heard of the term vestigial structures. It could be defined as features of an organism that are considered to have lost much or all of their original function through evolution, or as you put it ,"the residue of cobbling." I am uncertain what kind of biologist you are but you look at whales skeleton you would notice that they have leg bones, which is considered to be vestigial (As most would agree you use your legs to walk and modern whales are not known for their maranthon running abilities.)
I will assume as a biologist that you genuinely had no idea of any of these terms, the fact that whales have leg bones and that you did not plan to strawman and mislead since you "...never tend to do that, I always questioned what I was taught."

Symmetry in the design of creatures seem to be evidence against evolution. Just an opinion

A product of "brilliant" engineering? My inflamed appendix begged to differ.

And yet, it’s true. To bad theists don’t have anything of their own to show. They’re relegated to chasing science and pretending it’s not real.

I'm sorry, "a questioning gentleman", about your remark regarding "brilliant design", are you really a biologist? I'm having a hard time believing that it's not just a title, because the only people who propose the notion of "brilliance" in biology are undereducated, uncurious people who only look at puppies and kittens, and occasionally on trees, of course, and even then only paying attention to the surface level, beyond that childish viewpoint, biology definitely does not support such a notion.

For those who are truly skeptical, I recommend to learn about aquatic mammals, and why their design is anything but "brilliant" and only the blind and uncaring process of biological evolution is capable of explaining such phenomenon. If you don't propose that your god is evil, of course, in that case, you can still use "the god of the gaps" I guess, but what is the point then...

"evolution is a fact" 🤓

Evolution is the religion of the atheist.more faith than fact. the atheist denies that there could be a supreme being ...and we are creations(GMO)

I can't imagine how someone could ever deny God exists!! It is more than obvious.
Glad to be a Muslim.

What are the odds of a fully loaded, fighter jet with AIM-120 missiles and a full tank of fuel being formed in pure random chance without involvement of any intelligent being?

If matter cannot be created or destroyed how was it created during the big bang

Evolution happen but random mutations did not cause it it’s 10 to the 200 power for it to happen by chance that’s a number that is in comprehendible how big it is bigger than all the molecules in the universe there than all the molecules in like 100 trillion universes and there’s no natural way to explain how life got started in the first place they are throwing up their hands and give it up trying to figure it out. They can’t even find the molecules in nature to make a living system, so how did the first living system exist when there’s not even a molecules on earth to make one

we are more engineered not sure if there is a god or we were made but we must go with the truth of what we see. And we are more mechanical than we thought. Darwin was esoteric and like many of his age into mysticism. That was how old science was. We must deal with facts regardless if we like them.

Jesus is coming !

Evolution will tell you that religion is smoke and mirrors. Which is just a kettle calling the kettle black. Which is the definition of hypocritical. Only at least with hypocrisy it's usually right not with evolution. So it's more like the black kettle calling the blue kettle black. Science goes against evolution. If anything science points to God. Evolution is the only thing in the room that is smoke and mirrors. They want you to believe that we came from Magic out of nowhere.

Why is the background music this loud? It splits the attention so much. What a pity, this subject is so important. Thx for the video anyway - of course.

They still can’t figure out the living cell

"Science and Faith", what a manipulating oxymoron.

W.o.w.👍!!!!❤

Lol, this guy understands evolution about as well as a dead toad can fly.

Christian "biologist" "explains" dude, you're not a real biologist. You got your degree from a pseudoscience school and you work for a pseudoscience school. My 14 year old niece understands biology better than you and she failed it.

DNA is a holographic information system. It doesn't look like a random accident of nature

Sixty-five million years ago, an asteroid hit Earth and wiped out the dinosaurs and about 99% of the species that lived then. Today, there are 8.7 million species. How did a relatively small number of species manage to grow to such a large number unless evolution occurred? All of them could not have come from Genesis!

Look, it is really simple. as Darwin says, man evolved from apes, if that were true, over thousands of years, why are there still apes on this planet?

Stop yapping rubbish.. if there is the slightest scientific proof, behind your hypothesis, please write. Scientific paper & submit it for peer review… otherwise you are just a clown.

Can anyone provide scientific paper with regards to this.

This guy has too realize Nature has one thing on its side. Time 4.5 billion years of it. From simple chemistry too DNA. Through blind chance through natural selection. The whole explanation is in those two words 😊😊😊😊😊😊

Darwin's research on worms proved Earth is young and therefore evolution is impossible.
Read the book: Darwin v Darwin!

Charles Darwin was a giant of science who conceived of the correct theory of natural selection as being the origin of the species after 20 years of observation and study around the world. A new book published by Austin Macauley Publishers titled From Chemistry to Life on Earth outlines abiogenesis in great detail with a solution to the evolution of the genetic code and the ribosome as well as the cell in general using 290 references, 50 illustrations and several information tables with a proposed molecular natural selection formula with a worked example for ATP.

I tried listening to the podcast but the piano underscore is too loud. When I have my earphones on at night it is too distracting to focus on what the speaker is saying.

To witness the computer animated workings of a living cell and convince oneself it mindlessly flopped together requires ( by mandate) a total lack of critical thinking capabilities.

The fraud of Evolution:
In this theory, an animal is said to evolve in order to better survive its changing environment. To have its form change to provide a better ability of the animal to continue, all by randomly occurring mutations that are without direction and purpose, as all would be without a consciousness 'steering' the mutations which is what the evolutionists avow. There are two questions that destroy the evolutionary theory. 1) Where did matter come from, nothing? Not just appearing from nothing, but appearing as an example of the universal patterns God has established. The new matter must have contained atoms that were bonded into molecules, then multiplied billions of times to bring what they produced to a size that could be seen. And not just seen, but being composed of EVERY ATOM THAT EXISTS TODAY so their eventual movements (randomly) would be able to produce forms of matter now that didn't exist in the beginning. No. 2) How can lifeless inert matter demonstrate intentionally patterned goal oriented behavior randomly? The physical attribute needed, that was brought about by the evolutionary process, must appear between the cause and the effect that triggered it to form. Triggering would be an act of reaction, which would require an awareness that recognizes something to react to. Unless one is to believe inert lifeless matter can intentionally react cognizantly, then deductively to figure out the needed attribute, then construct this attribute, randomly. No. The evolutionary process must play out as follows if it was a reality. The individual atoms that form the body (that is lifeless matter) of the animal must possess a consciousness to be aware of what the body is, and be aware of the 'life' that is within the form/body. They must be aware of not only themselves (self aware), but their fellow atoms within the form/body. They must be aware of what life is and perceive the life within the form they compose. They must also be aware of what a healthy life is and what a life under stress is, and care whether it survives or not. They must also be aware of the external environment, what it should be in order to be healthy for the life within the body, and what changes it must have gone through in order to cause the stress of the life within the body, which means the atoms must also be monitoring both the life's condition, and the changing conditions of the external environment (and its effects on the body and life). The atoms must also be aware of what changes they must make to the lifeless atom-made form/body in order to restore health to the life, like growing fur in reaction to a colder environmental change. Now for the body to change form its DNA must change within its reproductive system to bring the corrective change. New information, new atoms for new genes, need to come from somewhere and be put in the right sequence within the reproductive DNA strand to bring the corrective change of growing more fur, needing to know what fur actually is in the first place, or why they are acting in a pro-life direction with the mutations, which requires, as does the rest of this, a consciousness present. ************************************************************************************************* One strand of hair does nothing to insulate the animal. So to understand that a great number of strands of hair are needed to produce fur is to be cognizant of how there can be a different attribute for something if it is used in a different way. More hairs produce insulation, more molecules produce a greater mass that itself can be used for different purposes, custom formed to the purpose it has been DESIGNED for. Multiple examples of differently produced masses (Organs, bones, veins, muscles, tendons. All integrated) can function together as a system only if directed by an external force knowing what it is creating. Not to mention keeping the initial creation together while the rest is building when there is no conscious perception of what the finished product will be. No thought present as to what is happening makes it impossible to continue an established pattern or direction of connection. Pretty simple. The external force that knows what it has created is God, and his "breath of life". All of the systems in the body are without purpose by themselves, so why would they form all together during any forward progression of an evolutionary process? They wouldn't. It is as if without any direction the inert matter somehow produced an entire automobile that could do nothing without the gasoline, just waiting for the gasoline to have a purpose. Without the breath of life giving them animation, the systems of the body are inert lifeless matter that could not have formed for no reason. The body was formed to be given life, it was the purpose of God. Genesis 2:7 KJV "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul." This is the point that renders the evolutionary theory extinct, and shows the character of abortion as an abomination because it must be now considered that pregnancy is a miracle of God." Again, it is impossible for lifeless inert matter to demonstrate intentional patterned goal-oriented behavior, randomly. ************************************************************************************************* It is obvious that all of these necessary conditions are not just impossible, but far and away from reality. Atoms do not possess their own consciousness, they cannot move, they cannot find new atoms for new genes somewhere and plug them into the correct position within the DNA strand, they are not self-aware, and they cannot engage in deductive reasoning. But this is exactly what they must be, and be able to do, if the Evolution theory is to play out. Impossible, impossible, impossible. To bring forward a new attribute like adding fur to a furless individual in order to survive a colder environment is goal oriented behavior. The fur isn't coming into existence for the fur's sake, it is added because of what it does for something else, the life in the individual. This is true cognizance and cannot be ignored, even by the most die hard evolutionists. Adding another nail to the evolution theory coffin is the fact that the change in the DNA blueprint must occur during the life of the parent DNA contributors to the offspring. This would allow its offspring to have the added safety modification to survive a threatening environment. The living, thinking, FIRST, complete individual, that spontaneously came into existence, had to be able to cognizantly change its own DNA to help its offspring. Unfortunately the DNA of the parents is set and could not offer the new gene, the offspring received all of its genes from the parents, so where did this new gene come from? Nowhere. This 'theory' inadvertently proves God's existence. When it is run backwards, and ends up arriving at the first atom in the evolutionary progression, the only two answers explaining where it came from are 1) coming from nothing, which means the matter that suddenly came into existence must have millions of molecules come together to form it first, coming from nowhere, themselves made up of atoms that came from nowhere as well, and still lined up in order, or, 2) It had to be created by God operating from the spiritual plane of existence. Since something cannot come from nothing, let alone because of its own actions, while it didn't exist, the answer must be it was created by God. Ending the existence of the evolutionary theory.

I'm irreligious but I've always found it funny how some atheists will mock creationists for believing in miracles and yet believe in things like abiogenesis. There are just as many, if not more, holes in the theory of evolution than there are in creationism. For instance, if you enquire about the origin of consciousness, the response is typically an evolution-of-the gaps argument. "No idea how it's possible but here we are so it must have happened by chance". Even when two things are diametrically opposed. E.g procreation and abortion. Both are supposedly evolutionary advantages. The fervour they then defend these takes is akin to an indoctrinated religious zealot