WOW! She barely took a breath but I could listen to what she was saying for hours. HOURS! Thanks Derek for bring her to our attentions. (And now I got more binge watching to do!)
@@Sportliveonline Where does water come from or more specifically, the water molecule? Both seem to be just properties of chemicals to come together in set ways. One can argue a cosmic deity set up our universe so space dust gravitates together to form bodies and the biggest ones start fusion to become stars, and on and on, and planets over time have the heavier elements sink and the lighter ones on top, all spontaneous without further intervention, even if it takes millions and billions of years. If we could set up experiments starting with planet-sized collections of similar chemicals, over the same timeframe, we might find DNA or equivalent eventually arises in each case.
Gave me goosebumps at the end. How can anyone deny the truth of evolution? People who say: "It's just a theory" have no understanding of science and CHOOSE to remain ignorant. I used to be one of these as you were also. We realised that what we believed was nonsense and rejected it.
I was raised in a Christian doomsday cult and didn’t even get to finish school. The things I’m learning since I left at the age of 45 is astounding. So sad my earlier life was wasted living in a fantasyland. Religion is a plague on humanities ability to think, learn, explore and be authentic!
@@crhu319 Buddhism is nonsense non-science too... no evidence for any of their BS. No evidence for past life, reincarnation blah blah blah... I have seen Buddhist Monks speaking in tongues; called it something else, looked like the same delusional crap.
WOW! Totally enjoyed this. She has a knack of explaining things really clearly. I'm now waiting for when she starts to write books. Thanks Derek for NOT interrupting her while she's going into detail.
Exactly - Derek is a master, as opposed to the guy from Gnostic Informant - he is the worst interviewer I’ve ever seen, he basically asks a question and interrupts to talk about 9/10 times. It drives me insane.
@@Sportliveonline I am sure there are plenty of sources to get a full and better education on that topic outside the comment section on RU-vid. Maybe in a book.
Wow! What a little bundle of energy! She went at the same pace the entire program! Incredible ability to pass on this very important information. Thank you.
One witness to a crime who saw everything is far less satisfactory than 7 witnesses who all testify to different parts of the same crime, all of which cross corroborate each other. That is why the many many areas of science that can speak to evolution ALL, without fail cross corroborate each other.
they will just cut up the clips, rationality rules has a good video a few weeks back demonstrating them doing the exact thing in a response video to him.
Damn. I'm gonna have to watch this multiple times and really internalize what she's saying. I'm new to the world of evolution, so I got a lot of catching up to do.
I watched Erika's doc about her visit to the Ark museum (whatever it's called) a few weeks ago when it randomly showed up in my feed. It was FANTASTIC, and she herself has a very funny, engaging personality and presentation. Wonderful to see her on MVP! Cheers!
Erika! My favorite gutsick primate! I'm so tickled that you use the word critters just like I do, LOL! Oh, and we could easily listen to you wax poetic about these critters for hours! Well, we sorta have, while listening to Contested Bones, etc., in fact. And we enjoy it so much - it's really great to see someone so passionate about what they are studying! Can't wait to call you Dr. Erika!
She did destroy him, I can't ever describe anything that Kent hovind is in as easy to listen to though. Just his voice irritates me and the way he talks to women is atrocious.
I would love to see her debate Kent covid. Although in a way I wouldn't wish that Nightmare on anyone LOL. You have to keep him from drifting off topic like an attention deficit disorder child. She would thoroughly mop the floor with him.
She does debate him. Absolutely destroys him in the most friendly way. It's on the channel "modern day debate". It's kind of hard to watch, because it's Kent hovind, and I hate the way he talks to people especially women.
She knows her stuff -- you ought to have her on again. For me, the best proof of evolution has to do with ERVs -- Endogenous Retro-Viruses. Those which we share with Chimpanzees were part of the genome of our common ancestor, and those which humans and chimps don't share became part of our respective genomes after we split apart into separate populations. I'm betting she knows all about ERVs, but in the 23 minutes she had she could only cover so much ground. Love her enthusiasm!
ERVs are not evidence for evolution. HINT: making and placing assertions *UPON* the ERVs is not evidence for evolution. You evolutionists have not figured that out yet. Assertions are not evidence. Observations, tests and then repeating the tests and coming out with the same results can be considered as evidence not assertions, guesses, assumptions and speculations (evolutionisms).
@@MaryAnnNytowl LOL You are hilarious.. I have science. I have truth. Both have power anywhere... I am not embarrassed at all. You do not intimidate me with your Darwin dancing.... You kooks are fools. You need help. Poofology (evolution) has to be the dumbest religion ever made up by mankind.
Wonderful to hear such well-articulated knowledge and enthusiasm for the subject - I didn't know about the example of prediction, fantastic, I feel inspired!
Bi-pedality - children's brains mature in relation to how much they get around. That's why when I see these kids ensconced in these seats and strollers I cringe. I did "bike pedals" on both my infants and they tended to walk and talk earlier. AND then older folks can hang onto cognition better if they're out walking or biking and not shut in with a TV.
Wow! Another great episode, Derick. Gutsick Gibbon is amazing. I’ve watched her before, but she absolutly outdid herself on this episode. What a treat. Thank you Derick, for continually providing wonderful content.
@@Sportliveonline here’s a great layman’s rundown of what is currently known. Enjoy wonder fuller. ;). ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-8T3bN2k28_E.html
Brilliant scholar! And with a great populist ability. I suspect we will soon be ranking her amongst the great science communicators like Stephen Jay Gould, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Carl Sagan. And this was a superb off the cuff delivery of the science of evolution. Wonderfully articulated.
Yeah I'm thinking get Erika and Neil on any stage together or co host anything about primate evolution. Good excuse to get Erika to meet Jane Goodall, and other gods of primatology and public education.
Yes! This is the crossover I needed! Listening to Erika go on with such passion about evolution just makes me hate creationism even more lol creationists are missing out on so much cool stuff!
One of the positive aspects of the current pandemic is daily talks about variants. Virus variants are, very literally, an accelerated phenomenon of what usually takes thousands of years to be observable in other creatures, that must procreate to pass down genetic mutations to another generation. Viruses do this incredibly rapidly due to the nature of their spread, sometimes producing hundreds of millions of copies of itself in a single organism. Random mutations are produced, and while some (usually most) die off because the mutations are not beneficial, a minority of the mutations makes the viral cells better adapted at infecting a host, making copies of itself, inducing symptoms that enable it to spread faster, etc. So, when a creationist says "I don't believe in evolution," you can simply ask, "Do you not believe in virus variants?" Then, smile and wait. It's a beautiful sight to behold.
yeah i had to explain in basic terms how viruses evolve and mutate because my mom (a fundamentalist) thought that some people were purposely creating these variants in a lab and spreading them >.>
@@LoftyOasis Oh wow. Reminds me of conversations I sometimes have about carbon-dating, as some people in my family claim that scientists purposefully rigged the technology to make it seem like objects are older than they really are, to fit with the timeline of evolution. It's so exasperating...
It is truly mind blowing to realize that untold millions of people believe the earth is 6000 years old! As a ten year old child I went to Field Museum in Chicago and when I saw the fossils and dinosaur skeletons I immediately knew that the bible stories were not true. I didn't become an atheist then, but I knew the origin stories were lies.
She's a person that talks fast but is actually smart unlike somebody else that talks fast but does so to make himself seem smarter than he is (ahem Ben Shapiro) lol
Why are theists, particularly YE creationists so obsessed with evolution. It makes no claim on life's origin, it simply provides the best explanation for diversity of life we see. Even if evolution were not correct, it does not mean God.
@@absquereligione5409 I do wonder, though, where that particular explanation comes from. I think ivrecall something in one of the pseudepigraphic Pauline Epistles. But it seems to be putting yourself on a theological hiding to nothing. If one believes in such things, there are still sins that people commit, regardless of the "taint of original sin". My understanding of some really early Christologies is that Jesus-worship was one way around the fact that sin offerings could no longer be made since Titus had destroying the Temple.
@@simongiles9749 Red herring. - Sin is a religious thing. It is a Christian doctrine. Adam and Eve brought sin into the world and ever since that day everybody carries this original sin with them. This is what separates us from god. - That is if you believe the story of course but there is no reason to do so. - Sin has become the word for ‘bad’, but it has nothing to do with ‘original sin’. - Christians like to think it does of course, but they can’t even demonstrate that their god exists so why should we care what they think?
@@absquereligione5409 Well, I don't, particularly. If their doctrine makes them blind to scientific fact, its no skin 8ff my nose. But my point is that this whole notion of the apotheosis of Jesus providing some kind of mythical closure to the Fall narrative is an extra-biblical notion at best, so they're hanging their faith on something that's not even in their holy book.
I worked at a vet, assisted in operations, did autopsies on dogs, for the vet, all at 13, I loved animals to much to continue, now I couldn't even consider doing an autopsy on any dog, it breaks my heart. Couldn't go near there operating theater anymore. I despise this fallen broken smelly world.
She is one of my favorites and her zeal and love for teaching is inspiring. Glad you got to interview her. She also makes the difficult parts understandable. I could listen to her for hours on end and not be bored or overwhelmed. Great interview!
I am a 50 odd year old bloke, and I never understood evolution till this year, thanks to GutsyGibbon and AronRa. I am an engineer by trade and never done biology. I think tge issue is the language used by actual evolotionists. Survival of fittest etc, while assuming ppl understand what they mean. 👍
Love how our ancestors walked up right to free their hands to make tools, and to change their diet which played a big role in the evolution of the brain.
@@Sportliveonline you decided to spam this question to see how many you could get to bite. Shameful. Either way, I already answered your question elsewhere.
I watched 40 minutes of Dr. Stephen Meyer the other day, and this lady is just what I needed to recover from that experience. Thank you...thank you so much.
@@Sportliveonline go learn about it. No one knows for sure yet, we may never. I'll tell you a little secret though. When someone says "I don't know" it doesn't mean you automatically get to stick your God into that gap of knowledge.
@@Sportliveonline are you unaware that abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution, itself? It doesn't matter if one subscribes to the DNA First hypothesis, the RNA First, or some other hypothesis, whichever one is correct is irrelevant to evolution. Completely.
I think the name "Dr Erika" rolls perfectly off the tongue. Best of luck to Erika on her PhD! So glad to see her here on Mythvision too, it's always great listening to her when she comes on
One of the factors that could drive speciation (one specie becoming two) involves sexual display. Consider a large swath of one animal across a large geological area. It would only take a minor genetic change, including perhaps only learned behavior, for one group to not be as sexually attracted to members outside that group. For instance, a mating ritual that some animals perform might be seen as less attractive to members of the same species separated by some factor such as geographical. Even in humans, there are some cultural differences that begin to form separate breeding groups. However, we mix and mingle so much, this doesn't seem to have taken place in homo sapiens to the degree to drive toward speciation. But even though we could and did breed with Neanderthals, we might have found them less sexually attractive - in general - and they, us. If Neanderthals had existed for long enough, we might have separated far enough to prevent intermingling whatsoever. It does seem to take a very long time for true separation to happen so we still have horses and donkeys able to mate and produce mules. Lions and tigers can breed in exceptional cases. But part of what drives this is not just the actual sexual characteristics but a fluid sexuality itself. So heterosexual men might be sexually attracted to women but not to the same degree to ALL women. Hence one's sexual orientation, not just in terms of gender, but within gender (or cross gender) is why, I believe, we have the Kinsey 1-6 chart of sexual orientation. A fluid sexuality is better to allow evolution (in that rigid orientation would tend those individuals to not be able to adapt). And nature is blind so some orientations, on the face of them (i.e., homosexual) might be seen as less productive in creating offspring. (In complex animals, it isn't just the number of offspring that count but how much attention can be given them. In other words, a gay couple can take care of, in part or totally, the children of related family members.)
There's the case where the couple of male penguins that kept trying to steal eggs from females who were given their own egg that was abandoned by a young female (pullet? That's what they are in chickens), and last I heard, they were doing an excellent job of incubating the egg! It's something that everyone should look for and learn about. I think just type gay penguins into your favorite search engine (mine's Ecosia) and it should come up for you.
If you believe in evolution then you can't be a Xtian as Adam sinning is a central concept in Xtian mythology, not only that but it would also disprove Noah's Ark and Jesus says that the flood actually happened.
Long before I learned more of the scientific evidence for evolution I found the very idea of evolution to be so logical and evident just by observing the plants and animals alive today. I absolutely hate it when creationists call evolution a position of faith without evidence. The evidence is plain to see and not really that hard to grasp.
Demonstrate a protista turning into (evolved) a dog, whale, pine tree or cat.... Let's *OBSERVE* macro evolution ism in action. And no, micro variations and micro adaptations are NOT macro evolution. You cannot use *ANY* of the magical words or your religion's magical ingredient of evolutionism (time) for evidence either.
@@ColonelEmpire Genetics. You need to get a real education. Evolution was discovered, not made up like the gods of ignorant tribes in ancient times. Just like the truth that the planet is a globe and not flat. It was a discovery that ancient peoples were ignorant of. Same for the discovery that germs cause disease, not demons. I could go on and on but choosing to cling to an ancient peoples tribal culture only shows you are willfully remaining ignorant of what your fellow humans have DISCOVERED about this planet and the universe.
@@rhondah1587 Let me help... You obviously are only parroting what you have been programmed to believe... You need help... You said: "Genetics." Response: Genetics have been used to debunk Darwin's silly "simple to complex" (molecules to man) evolutionism. *Genetics* is evidence of a Designer not a "poofer". (big bang) You said: "You need to get a real education." Response: Said the indoctrinated evolutionist. You said: "Evolution was discovered, not made up like the gods of ignorant tribes in ancient times." Response: The religion of evolution was made up. There is absolutely no evidence for evolution. The "gods" are indeed "made up". Almighty God has always existed. Your silly and futile attempt to lump all religions together is a demonstration of your ignorance and indoctrination. Jesus is God. He walked with mankind. There is more evidence of His existence than there is of yours. You said: "Just like the truth that the planet is a globe and not flat. It was a discovery that ancient peoples were ignorant of." Response: The religions of the world, like the religion of evolutionism, have always come up with silly ideas. The Bible is very clear that the earth is a globe, circular. But you, being ignorant of the Bible, would not know that. All you can do is regurgitate what you have been programmed to believe. Try getting educated *BEFORE* you spew your silly propaganda about Christianity. You said: "Same for the discovery that germs cause disease, not demons." Response: Christians have never taught that demons cause disease. You are not doing so well. You are a rube. Get educated. Get informed. You will be better for it. You said: "I could go on and on but choosing to cling to an ancient peoples tribal culture only shows you are willfully remaining ignorant of what your fellow humans have DISCOVERED about this planet and the universe." Response: *THAT* ^^^^ Is one of the biggest examples of psychological projection that I have ever seen! LOL LOL LOL You are a hoot! Christians and specifically creationists have discovered and researched as well as having helped in *EVERY* major field of science. The religion of evolutionism hinders and has *NEVER* helped science. Try harder. Get educated *FIRST*
how did the earth come about? Rocks banging together from the big bang, spinning and clumping together through accretion eventually giving us this magnificent earth doesn't cut it for me no more than the primordial soup. Help.
@@ThatGirl0930 The religious faithful to evolutionism use many silly magical words in order to make their dogmas sound "scientific". Evolution's "magical" words: "appeared," "emerged," "arose," "gave rise to," "burst onto the scene," "evolved itself," "derived," "was on the way to becoming," "radiated into," "modified itself," "became a miracle of evolution," "was making the transition to," "manufactured itself," "evolution's way of dealing with," "derived emergent properties," or "was lucky."
True ring species tend to be seen in obscure (to the general public) animals. There is sort of a ring species effect going on with dogs (although not a closed ring and not separated by location). In theory, all dogs can breed with each other as they are part of the same species. But size plays a part - breeds of a similar size can easily breed but those at the limits, such as teacup poodles can't or rarely breed with great danes. So imagine if the mid-sized dog breeds dropped out of consideration. The really large dogs would separate more and more from the tiny ones until there was a true speciation event.
I discovered Gutsick very recently, but I love listening to her. She is very sharp minded, and very passionate. There is nothing more beautiful in this world than an intelligent woman speaking excitedly about something she has achieved by means of streunuous, consistent mental effort.
Hooray!! I love when some of my favorite youtubers talk to each other! I found Gutsick Gibbon with her video about the Ark Experience. Such a great video
How do we know that there is any relationship between our sense perceptions and the beliefs that we have about those sense perceptions? How can we reasonably justify reason in this matter or any other area of knowledge? How do we justify the assertion that evolution is “undirected?”
