Mankind Rising
Mankind Rising is a computer animated re-imagining of the biological evolution of humanity, beginning with the genetic makeup of the first primordial cell and ending with the emergence of the first bipedal species, Homo erectus.
Beginning 4,000 million years ago, the evolutionary timeline is illustrated here in great depth, tracing the first instance of cell division through the appearance of the first water worm 550 million years ago. The development of the first brain enabled early species to gain sight, one of the first major milestones in early biological development. The first segment of the film takes viewers underwater before emerging onto land, where the story turns to our reptilian and mammalian ancestors.
In addition to the many miracles of biology that have enabled our existence, the film highlights the other factors that have made humanity's survival so spectacular, such as numerous predators and natural disasters of immense scale. A volcanic eruption 225 million years ago lasted half a million years and eliminated 95% of the species on Earth, yet our ancestral species prevailed. Small, shrew-like mammals that superseded the dinosaurs traveled across the continents, spreading seeds and therefore food sources and life across the planet.
This ultimately lead to the appearance of primates, perhaps the greatest turning point in our evolutionary history. Over the course of the next ten million years, however, climate changes decreased the size of forests and impacted the availability of food, creating yet another shift in the biological makeup of Earth and its inhabitants. The need to travel greater distances and obtain a broader variety of nutrients required yet another step in evolution, paving the way for Homo erectus, who demonstrated an ability to problem solve, use tools, communicate, and manage fire. From here social constructs such as family and competitive behavior came forth.
Mankind Rising uses computer graphics and voice-over storytelling to create a dramatic narrative that is on par with the videos one might watch in a high school science class. It walks the viewer through the entire early history of mankind, shining light on the countless challenges and obstacles that were faced along the way.
It seems clear people believe what they want, be it one thing or another. Who is hurt by believing the truth, that we don't actually know. To claim we do is the lie and the harm.
Why is it so important to think a theory, if evolution can be considered a theory rather than a hypothesis, is a fact?
That is very important to those who want to enslave the world, the collectivist globalists.
They arrogantly claim "evolution is a fact" or "science supports evolution" in their schools.
And what good is that claim if other parts of science DOES NOT support evolution? It is good for them because you will likely believe the rest of their propaganda which stems from the false premise that certain men should rule over other men and that govt is how to do good. Most evidence demonstrates the contrary.
Propaganda is often limiting information in support of an agenda.
One thing is for certain. The "evolution" of Arrogance and Ego benefit the world how?
So what if you prefer one THEORY (not fact) over another. Does that preference give you license to belittle others? No more than someone else's preference for a different theory, to belittle the others.
Going to a university class does not make your preferred theory more valid. It clearly makes people more arrogant and think they know much more than they do.
A real scientist would know that the more they find out, the more questions they have. Some after many years of slice and dicing and looking in microscopes come to realize that there must have been a creator. Others have egos which prevent them from learning all sorts of things that are beyond the physical world.
The two (or more) theories are not mutually incompatible. "Creator" + "Evolution" why not? Infact they are both taught in schools. And people are people. Arrogance is just one of our species many wonderful "gifts". :)
I really enjoyed this. Amazing to read through the comments though. How many people object to the subject of evolution who obviously do not understand or refuse to understand the mechanics/process . The visual morphing is to display transition over large amounts of time. The specific naming of species throughout was great to see. Based on palaeontology and real life research over the years. Great stuff. One day (hopefully) this will be common knowledge. There are a few bits and bobs that are speculative, such as the lucky bringing together of cells-come-genes covered in a blob of just as lucky oil, however we will know for sure one day...unless we revert back to gods and such like ideas.
Lost me at the outset when it foisted abiogenesis as an accepted, proven theory.
I guess it was a way to explore the evolution, how else would you have explained it in 2012? I think it is not perfect, but it is visually provoking, like a visual introduction to evolution and natural selection.
My only real complaint with the documentary was how the narration treated natural selection. It was almost treated like a wheel of fortune that just randomly boosts your stats at the end of an epoch. In reality, natural selection just means that the people who are more likely to reproduce will do so, thus increasing their chances of having their genes passed down.
Less than 2% of all scientific capacities are actually proven. Evolution is plausible but by no means answers all the questions. There are too many events that occurred well beyond of which a scientific explanation can provide... an absolute is, if we were formed, then there are duplicate formations elsewhere.
When you actually read what Darwin wrote about what he didn't prove, when you read it then get back to me.
There is no proof of evolution (of one specie developing into another). Zero. If you actually read Darwin, he didn't prove it at all. Left it "for others to prove." Which they cannot. Those who promote the evil of collectivism(Marxism, Communism, Socialism, Progessivism, Corporatism, etc) justify it with and heavily promote the fraud of evolution. It isn't even an actual theory, it is a failed or unproven hypothesis.
There is proof that if a specie modifies too far from the original, it reverts back or dead ends. A mule is an example of a dead end. For those that don't know, a mule is a cross between a donkey and a horse. Mules cannot procreate. If evolution were true, why not mules procreate themselves just like donkeys and horses?
@DustUp, There are literally hundreds if not thousands supporting evidence in favor of evolution from the following disciplines:
1. Anatomy,
2. Molecular biology (DNA),
3. Biogeography,
4. Fossils,
5. Direct observation.
Look at the actual skelital remains which are easily accesable (if you dare) and try to imagine the odds. Yes, you are correct that some variations do not work. This is the whole point. Mules will not take over the universe sorry.
@SeeUat Videos: Can only suggest reading Darwin much closer toward the end .
Prove that one specie can naturally become an entirely different specie which can reproduce. That very process is required for the hypothesis of evolution to be valid.
Just because people WANT to believe something supports a theory, doesn't mean that it does.
There is no more proof for apes evolving into humans than there is for supreme beings which came here, modifying the ape DNA to include more brain matter, to make humans, even though that is what the cuneiform tablets claim. In other words, similarities in creatures do not make for proof, it just makes for similarities; which is only logical if you are working with a carbon based chemistry set.
If humans evolved from apes. Apes would be considered to be closer to the primordial swamp. Yet apes still exist. What did the apes come from that still exist? And so on down to the swamp?
One can only point to speculations since no one has observed an ape which became a human. Same for the other species down the line towards the swamp.
Years of indoctrination and false claims does not make for proof.
Similarities "supporting evolution" would make sense to anyone who has designed and built things, even computer code. However, if you want a different function, such as a hawk vs. a bear, the claim that a diversity of natural selection caused those very different functions, only makes sense up to the POINT where actual observations show that a specie always reverts back towards its origins or dead ends.
Other areas of science call it reversion to the mean. Which does Not support evolution, only limited deviation. Some much more than others.
What about a morphing bacterial-fungus-thing which can convert itself into about 12 different stages of things, which fooled scientists for many years and some believe to be one of the major causes of cancer? Even mere humans can camouflage themselves in various ways but they are still a human just like the morphing bacterial-fungus thing is what it is, rather than 12 different things or something that becomes a different specie of things.
So called scientists have even claimed that mammary glands came from (evolved from) sweat glands, citing the similarity. There are "hundreds of examples" of similarities in many directions. It does not prove anything other than similarity. And why wouldn't there be similarities in things created from the same elements?
@DustUp, your ignorance is astounding. I've stopped reading at "If humans evolved from apes... yet apes still exist". You really need to do your homework and exit from your dark and depressing world of ignorance.
Humans DIDN'T evolve from apes. Great apes and humans share a COMMON ANCESTOR that lived between 8 and 6 million years ago. Apes and humans branched off from that ancestor. On the human evolutionary path from that point forward there were 15 to 20 different species of early humans.
The reason that mules can't procreate is that they come from a horse (which has 32 chromosomes) and a donkey (which has 31 chromosomes). The fact that mules ultimately have an unpaired chromosome causes issues in their sex cells that prevent sexual reproduction in offspring. This has nothing to do with discrediting evolution. Evolution occurs over a timeframe of hundreds of thousands of years, not over the gestation period of a mule.
Yes Gunnar, WE are the problem. We ARE the sixt extension. An evil, intelligent and
resistant bacteria, taking over every inch.. Time to wipe us out!
I can believe the immaculate conception more than this "documentary!" And I'm not even a creationist! I'd even believe aliens over this! Who wasted their valuable time and resources to make this?
speculation and supposition passed off as fact can only be detrimental to true scientific study.
More crap about us coming from the sea and so on...."Dovid Witkowski" awesome comment man!
I used to think that belief in a deity was irrational. The more I learn about things the more I come to understand that atheism is irrational. Too many questions remain unanswered and the basis for the theories just become even greater stretches.
The primordial ooze ... It seemed a sure thing as the theory was advanced but in spite of all our technology, we as humans have been unable to create life. We can mess with it but we can't even create something as simple as a virus from scratch.
Do not do LSD
why not?
The initial stages of life, the suggestion that genes were spontaneously formed and then engulfed in a lipid envelope sadly lacks scientific credibility. Simple self replication molecules are more likely to have predated the even as described.
EXACTLY! And the fact that whoever published the video says "Coincidentally" or "Defying the laws of Probability" Makes this documentary incredibly hard to watch. The part neat the begging where he said that "Lightning struck at the exact right place at the exact right time" had me laughing out loud.
cool doc. An overview of some of the adaptions of our evolutionary past, encapsulated in a watchable condensed chunk.
Don't watch this documentary if you're older than 10 and have some knowledge of biology and etc.
It was very disappointing, what happened to Noah's Ark ? Obviously Jesus came from Montana, essentially ~ Sex is basic ~ so there's no reason for an age of consent ~ sheeeesh; How are we gonna evolve if we don't have sex with our family?
Republicans are still at the level of Homo Erectus except for the Predator class like Hillary and Cruz. We must stamp out this spike in the evolutionary chain before they prey on us... amen
i used to beleive that is was possible for a human soul and afterlife to exist and that we couldn't have came from monkeys "why would there still be monkeys?" , "why is there no beings on the cusp of being human today" i was at the point becuase of gaps in my knowledge i hadn't been taught in school a comprehensive overview of our current state of knowledge regarding these issues and even though it was only a few big gaps in certain disciplines i was ignorant of it made every difference for my world view, as i began self researching the topics of biology and dna and archaeology as well as other scientific areas i couldn't believe how ambiguous our society is regarding of educated to children regarding the facts but when you look at the implications of such knowledge it destroys the world religions and spirituality of all types andd it began to make sense why the truth is more hidden then it should be.
we are star dust that over billions of years went from simple bacteria through all life forms to arrive where we are today there is more evidence of this then things everybody accepts without question.
I found the documentary easy to watch but simplistic. It left me with the impression that there has been a lot of guesswork as to how we have come to be in our present form. My gut instinct tells me that there was more than a tiny chance of life developing on earth and I suspect that species evolve in similar ways at times and in almost opposite ways at other times depending on a number of factors. The question that isn't answered at all by this documentary is what gave life (i.e. a single cell) the drive to multiply itself in the first place. I'm not religious but there does seem to be something missing from this picture.
I find it hilarious that Gunnar would say that "we are the only species that threaten the existence of all life", and completely ignores the fact that we are the only species that has the perception and power to save the Earth. No other animal on this planet has a moral drive to protect the planet, or if they did, they couldn't do anything about it.
This visual documentary is more then adequate by providing broad strokes of evolution that focuses on key milestones that eventually leads to the end game that is currently modern man. If you find it has short comings, I suggest delving further into other source material, be it books, detailed documentary's, etc. that may provide extensive detail as this documentary just whets the the knowledge appetite of this genera.
I love this doc.
...we're spoiled with graphics these days...it's not that easy to produce a thing like this...
What I'm not crazy about is the apparent "homo sapience" worship if you will...we do not have the largest brains, at all...but even with the large brain we do have, we are the only species that threaten the existence of all life, on the very planet that spawned us...
So for that reason, humans are an insult to Planet Earth
The only thing that matters...is the integrity of the biosphere...and the only problem is an out of control human presence...
For a low cost independent film I thought that doc was interesting to watch. While not a biologist or evolutionary biologist, I thought the inclusion of academics in the credits gave this film a high degree of scientific basis in fact or least what we know so far. It does not get into the details of evolution but provides a big picture and key turning points in our own evolution.
I really didn't think this doc had an over emphasis on sex as one viewer pointed out and calling it "garbage" just underscores ones lack of appreciation of how knowledge is summarized in broad strokes.
As a Coles Notes of human evolution I think it very good, perhaps it's just that I haven't evolved quite as fast as those with the above comments and I'm not sure I want to. Give it a look, it's a 45' video doc, not a 4 year post grad doctorate.
Frankly, I think this is perfect fodder to counter the creationist garbage aimed at say 8 to 10-year-olds. Simplistic perhaps but a lot more understandable and logical than the 'seven day event' espoused by deists.
I was wondering why the ratings were so low. I'm pretty interested in this stuff myself, and throughout the whole doc, I kept giving it the benefit of doubt, but somewhere around the halfway mark, morale just dropped below critical levels... Mann!! The narrator was so robotic, and he just kept talking about SEX! This doc looks like it promotes species to species evolution when he keeps saying, "we're this, we're that", but that's not true, each species is located at the end of an evolutionary node. I don't like how the narrator keeps on bringing in vaguely-relatable points like hic-ups and goosebumps, and the "next time you squash a bug". It's not funny, it's just childish. there are so many stupid things he says, it's not the narrator, it's the script obviously, but "humans have pound for pound the largest brains?? are you kidding me? There are quite a few animals more encephalized than humans, rats for example.. omg, this doc is garbage. very deserving of such a low rating.
There's more intellectual gravitas in a Tom and Jerry cartoon than this load of baloney!The voice over commentator contradicts himself right at the beginning by asserting that the narrative he is describing is in fact highly improbable! This type of pseudo science is ideally suited to an generation of adults who have been rendered entirely stupid having been subjected to a system of mind numbing indoctrination in the guise of education. It is well known that in the 1850's a Prussian form of mind control was imported to America as described in the book the Leipzig Connection specifically NOT to produce a nation of well educated, well informed critical thinkers. The reason being that such a population would never have willingly submitted itself to a mind crushing regime as demanded by the endless repetitive processes of the factory production line.
Yes we come from under a rock ;)