Of course, CTD,
What's strange is that you think you can convince folks "Some videos are dishonest, therefore all videos are dishonest" is anything other than a pathetic logical fallacy.
And the way that you refute such fallacies is to demonstrate that the video in question is honest.
Perhaps you would like to do that? The "lecture" is full of false quotemines, and it uses the logical fallacy of appeal to authority to justify using the quotemines. It uses two different false definitions of evolution, neither of which represent any definition used in any university. He also uses the fallacy of argument from incredulity.
RussT has referenced this video before, and it has already been shown to be full of falsehoods. We've been over the Gould quotemines before.
His "new definition" of "evolution = natural selection" does not match what is really taught in evolutionary biology. That is a falsehood. He's full of malarky, not reality.
His division of change in biological traits into horizontal and vertical is also a falsehood: genes are not transmitted horizontally but vertically from parent to offspring, the same exact process that results in speciation and the diversification of populations after speciation.
The facts remain that evolution - the change in hereditary traits in populations from generation to generation - has been observed, and speciation has been observed. Claiming otherwise, as this "false profiteer" does, is dishonest.
Proving a false representation of evolution to be false is not proving that the correct representation of evolution is false. It is just proving ignorance of the proper definition of evolution.
Once again you are stuck with showing that the definitions of evolution
as used by evolutionary biologists to do evolutionary biology is false or all you are doing is making a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.
And IF you think the definition of evolution has changed since Darwin's formulation - as claimed in this absurd video - then you need to
demonstrate that his "descent by modification" is not completely covered by the change in hereditary traits in populations from generation to generation OR that there was some OTHER element to Darwin's theory that has been removed.
If you remember, this is a previous assertion of yours that you have been challenged to support and so far you have yet to substantiate in any way, even though you have complete access to the full works of Darwin on line.
So yes, you are right that this does not prove that
all videos are false, it just demonstrates that the videos that RussT has posted are false.
Enjoy.
