2017 Paul D. Bartlett, Sr. Lecture - What Darwin Didn't Know: Evolution Since the Origin of Species 

I could listen to this lecture for an entire weekend to give my brain the endorphins that gives me pleasure that I require every week because learning gives more pleasure than anything!

In Manchester, England, you know that it is going to rain if you look out and can see the mountains in the distance. If you can't see the mountains.... It's already raining!! (From a Scouser who enjoys laughing at Manchester!!) By the way, a fascinating lecture throwing light on a very complex subject! Thank you for sharing!!

Many thanks for making this available on RU-vid. Really interesting 😀

One of the best lectures I've heard. He's witty and great at formulating understandable jargon free answers.

This should be 3 hours, he was right. I really enjoyed learning about all of this, even if joy wasnt the purpose of this, it still was.

FANTASTIC talk!! THIS is how a GREAT teacher teaches his students!. I only had one pro0fessor (of differential equations, of all things) who was of this caliber at UCLA. Others were good, but great is much better than goo0d!

7:20 "HA! Stupid zebra!" I guffawed 😂😂😂 Can't wait to watch the rest, and really wish it was three hours long!

Thanks for sharing. I really enjoyed this lecture. Would be great if you could name the speaker in the description so I can look for more. If anyone else is looking for his name: They show in in the very beginning: Andrew Berry, Lecturer on Organismic & Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University.

I thought this might be a good sleep aid when I woke up at 3am. Silly me. It was riveting. 😏 Wide awake thereafter. Fabulous. 🥳 Thank you. The writ's in the mail.

I NEED MORE of this man and this subject! 3 hours wouldn't be enough. Thank you.

Interesting to see cellular automata popping up in a lecture on evolutionary biology.

29:49 It was largely because his beloved wife was a staunch religious believer

Wonderfully film segment with great ape dancing and holding hands.......❤

Great lecture.

As I wrote long ago : "About gene and evolution(as defined by small changes(due to natural selection propagated via a mechanism of hereditary transfer (which is genes as we understands it in biology today)) ultimately leading to a new offspring that is different from the original parent); here is my question. As I understand it, genes are on the chromosomes as base pairs (some may be determined by complex relation between base pairs on many chromosomes but there are there on the chromosomes). This means that there are only a finite number of individuals possible. Then now suppose in a thought experiment (Gedanken), we produced all the individuals that a given totality of gene of a given species allows, then now if any two among that sample is combined to produce an offspring (allowed by the rules of the mechanism of hereditary transfer(DNA replication )), but that offspring should be already there in the old sample; so where is evolution? To me it seems that this genetic mechanism forfeits a global evolution; that is to say, this genetic algorithm (mechanism of DNA replication) does not allows a global evolution in a sense that if that mechanism is carried out in perfect precision THEN A GIVEN SPECIES IS A CLOSED SYSTEM, so it can not give rise to a new species as above Gedanken experiment shows. In a perfectly DNA replicating system, evolution can be looked as a local apparent change due to our not seeing the whole assemble of all possible allowed individuals by the whole gene of the species simultaneously."So the only way a new species can arise from an old one is via the inperfections in the hereditary transfer mechanism which is in line with Lamark's idea as pointed out in this discussion.. see link below for my original facebook post facebook.com/dhargyal007/posts/pfbid02v3LM6kHN9auGZJTSrfZM5EC7RxduBe5TYKhUsxV2rEUBL6xEr138Up4XRf82b5mfl

Evolution of skin color is fast and adapts to new latitudes. Evolution is slow metabolically, and has not adapted from eating meat to eating grain. We get obesity, high blood pressure, tooth decay, cancer, heart disease, and mental illness.

I have to say you explained this so beautifully...thank you for this presentation!!! ( 33:22 Hominid Evolution ct 7 mya ) ( 37:50 what happened when Africans meet Neanderthals ct 70,000 ya) ( 39:48 Genetic analyses ct 30,000 ya ) ( 52:00 question and answer period )

Very nice. I've been lecturing and talking about this for decades. This micoevolution is OK but no macroevolution thing creationists go on about has been blown away by developmental biology and the genetics that drive it. Also, nice to see that Andrew Berry is an aluminus of my university.

The argument about carbon-based life in a competition with alternatives like silicon on worlds with vaguely similar conditions to earth is probably true. BUT, if a world has no carbon or very little, then any other material that has a chance , such as silicon, has a chance to substitute, however difficult it might be. There are also planets or other places (?) where electromagnetic effects might allow complexity (like the crystals in crystal radios and somewhat similar later solid-state devices). Living solid-state parallel-processing computing machines, in effect, with bodies using electric and/or magnetic machinery. Totally different, but there was nothing to get in the way like our form of life.

Of course, we had to have at least one creationist intervention from the audience

Delightful.

60 years ago I was working north of the Artic circle. I met a family with a white father and an Intuit mother. They had 8 kids, two looked all white, two looked Intuit and four looked mixed.

Can anyone recommend a source to learn about the shuffling/inheritance he talks about starting at 42:22?

Love this channel

Please contact Seth Andrews from TTA next time you record such lectures as these. These are too important not to be well recorded. Thx regardless.

I was expecting randomness could have ended up creating internet, easier than an ant...

“Black is beautiful.” That was a slogan of the civil rights era that is actually a scientific statement of truth, This lecture did not go into how choice of mates becomes part of natural selection such that traits like skin, hair, and eye color, features of the face, etc. become favored over time in different locales. We, all of our types, (notice, “race” is not used in this lecture because it doesn’t exist in the scientific language anymore, it’s been debunked) are beautiful people.

DNA pretty much knocked evolution off the saddle

Wonderfully entertaining presentation, and I even learned one or two new things.

I wonder if subconsciously as a lecturer he tries to sound a bit like Bertie Wooster.

Theory of evolution is the best we have, even if it ends like majority of science theories from past, for now, it is all we have that makes any sense.

Where's subhutti

Interesting lecture.

The argument for speciation (isolated populations) is absurd.

Who is Linda Hall ?

Charles Darwin didn’t know that small gradual adaptations, don’t accumulate for transformations, between the Chromosome Family Kinds. Adaptations within existing Genomes, are already programmed for variety, within the Chromosome Family Kinds. Mutations means losing varieties, it doesn’t create new varieties. It’s a degenerative and destructive process, not creative. Natural Selection means in certain circumstances, certain varieties prosper, while others flounder. Long hair on cold climates and short hair in hot climates as obvious examples. Circumstances change and migrate, so the prosperous Species migrate and change. But they return to previous sets of circumstances, as they’re revolving back to previous arrangements. Summer turns to Winter and Winter turns to Summer. Everything revolves around the circuits of Nature. So nothing can arise from nothing, Evolution. Or degenerate to nothing, Devolution. Everything gets recycled and reformed into preexisting forms.

As you chose not to publish my comment, you have been deleted. Stress R Us

That's such a perfect question and was it inspired by the talk. Anyway. Yes. How many species or examples of crabs are there.. Universally.. Given the, yes, ubiquity of worlds where at least a handful could be at least as marvelous as earth.. Or even better. The universal physics and chemistry and biology but not necessarily the same cake recipe of ingredients or mixers of planetary orbit, plate tectonics, atmosphere, magnetosphere etc. We don't express much of the same characteristics as crabs, we know of no crab hyperintelligence, but we probably share enough crab DNA to assume a similar lineage may exist somewhere. An offshoot question would be we don't know how many other humanoid and intelligent creatures have existed gets who've expressed biologies that would leave anything in the fossil or genetic record. Do we have ways of detecting some of those lost branches through only the living genetic record. Can we use that record totaled up to generate a prefect earthling. And once certain genetic complexity is reached in a given lineage does it become impossible to achieve certain adaptations.

Like Dawkins said , there is no good or bad in this material world.

I am the master and the first and only human to know life and how to create life. The gnome is the effect, not the cause. See you in 200 when you catch up to the QNav of the conscious universe as understood by my model, the UFU.

Duh . . . What if there are non-material causes that account for it? [1:04:014]

21:37 Dogs didn't descend from wolves. Wolves and the different breeds of dogs were separately created.

According to the Molecular Clock theory, humans and chimpanzees are diverting at the rate of 5 nucleotide bases per year. This means going back in time human genes should be closer to chimpanzees at the rate of 2.5 bases per year, i.e. Pharaoh's mummy should be 7500 bases closer to a chimpanzee. Anyone can realize this is not a reasonable theory.

Darwin was a life long Christian.

"Darwin is still HOT AS HELL"! Indeed!

top conference!

Can you put subtitles please

Now that they discovered that we're part Neanderthal we suddenly find Neanderthals were smart, well dressed, educated, handsome, artistic... Really?

Cells possess intricate molecular machinery discovered by microbiologists which has dramatically challenged Darwinism, and evolutionists have had no success at explaining it. During Darwin's time, cells were considered to be relatively simple structures, primarily composed of a protoplasmic substance enclosed by a cell membrane. Darwin's ideas about evolution and natural selection were based on this simplistic understanding of cellular biology. This guy completely fails to mention anything that is current that challenged Darwin's ideas, and there are plenty of examples which are unresolved with Darwin's ideas.

Mmhhh I don’t know, I still leaning towards humans being created by Sumerian gods as a better theory.

The little fish is eaten by the big fish °>🐟>🦈. Case closed!

deep = an even lower level of deception

I was waiting for someone to bring up God (intelegent designer)

entertaining

This guy is talking nonsense. Biology has nothing to say about evolution.

What Darwin didn't know: He was wrong. Animals were created by an unobservable genius.

That randomness can create information is stretching possibilities beyond mathematical impossibilities!

Mutations are almost always harmful.

It's not funny

😂🤗🤗

This is the dunning-kruger expect he gets some things right but the big picture is all wrong

Meanwhile, Alfred Wallace, crying about Darwin, has a hand on a skull trying to argue why that skull had anti-social behaviors based on the length from the eyebrow to the crown….

👁️👁️⚖️✝️🩸👑🕯️🍞💧🌡️😡🌪️🌋👀👂🙏⏳, ain't nothing that old either

information does in fact come from an intelligent mind. we made up the whole concept of information. it's not a thing in the world. a spider doesnt have eight legs because it or nature know how to count.

What ever is behind this all is rather elusive. No GODS but something else that does not want to reveal its self. Complete opposition to religous beliefs.

Holy Quran : Chapter 39 Verse 62 "Allah is creator of all things, and He watches over all things"

Theory with such arrogance