Craig Venter - Is There Life In Space?

[SamuraixJack]

How can a oxygen-free zone carry and help nuture bacteria that needs oxygen??

[beamerUSA]

He doesn't have a cure for baldness!

[dAcRaZyFroG]

@beamerUSA neither did Picard but he is still awesome. Plus, apparantely this is not an important issue ;)

[winterstellar]

This is a science video, so can't you superstitious/religious morons please shut up?  : (

[keggerous]

prob the weirdest top comments ive ever seen . . . 

[BatteauProductions]

cant unhear the breathing!!! ><

[jamesxoxbond]

"your belief is truly based on faith" .. O'really ?

"faith" has no place in science, science has to deal with "facts" that lead to "conclusions". we dont "believe" that earth is 4.5 billion earth old , we "know" its 4.5 billions of years old coz geology & biology, fossiles, carbon dating and simple logic "all togather" tell us so.

what are "your" conclusions based on ? thats right ... "a blind cluless faith"

[RespectMyHate]

He clearly says we contaminated space.

even if we do find a bacteria on mars its probably from us in the first place.

NASA is a bunch of sick fucks.

[jamesxoxbond]

@RespectMyHate earth is 4.5 billions years old , there is billions of galaxies and billions of billions of stars and planets , life started 3.5 billion years ago. the oldest modern humen fossile found "untill now" is 400,000 years old ,

these r the basic facts that u have to get over with

get real ,get educated and update ur informations ,

other than that u will have to prove ur "fairy tales" claims or keep silent.

[RespectMyHate]

@jamesxoxbond There is no way to know for sure that the earth is 4.5 billion years old, your belief is truly based on faith. I don't think earth is that old.

If you want to believe the most advance information storage systems (DNA) evolved by chance go right ahead,

[jamesxoxbond]

@RespectMyHate plus DNA didnt evolve by chance from nothing , DNA r composed of amino acids that r the building block of life ,

how were they formed ? chimecial elements & compounds had followed thier own chimecal properties in a helpfull enviroment and composed the 1st amino acid , pure organic chimestry that dosnt need any intervension , "period"

bk 2 the main point : there was life on mars and nothing wrong with the possibilty of having life somwhere else weather u like it or not.

[RespectMyHate]

@jamesxoxbond Yes you believe DNA evolved by chance here is no other way it could have happened.

why don't you go and create some life and prove me wrong?

[jamesxoxbond]

@RespectMyHate get a bigbang, stars, a sun, supernovas,an earth like planet and 13.5 billion years then u willl have ur 1st amino acid , give it another 4.5 billion years then u might have space goats, flying monkies or midget elephants all without my intervension.

i dont have to prove u wrong for 2 reasons that are : ur already proved wrong, u never proved ur right

we have evidances , what r urs ?

go get educated before acting smart coz ur embarresing urself .

[Helge129]

@RespectMyHate It didn't happen by chance >.<

[RespectMyHate]

@Helge129 If it didn't evolve by chance then how did it happen absent an intelligence?

[CharkaLafouine]

Craig Venter is to SCIENCE what James Cameron is to HOLLYWOOD

[HybridD91]

@CharkaLafouine I doubt Venter would have a dumb child.

[HybridD91]

@CharkaLafouine I was joking, I don't know if Cameron has kids. I was thinking of Kirk Cameron, the crocoduck idiot. They have nice names lol.

[alienisuntverus]

@CharkaLafouine

Except, when Venter takes several years and millions of dollars to make something, it isn't a complete piece of shit.

[foketesz]

so instead of "shooting stars" they would be... what?.. shitting stars?

[RespectMyHate]

Earth is the only place where we are going to find life. THIS IS IT.

[jamesxoxbond]

@RespectMyHate and thats based on what excatly ?

[RespectMyHate]

@jamesxoxbond Based on what you ask? well based on the 6000 years of human history, of humans probing the heavens.

Don't get me wrong there is a place called heaven where God and the angels live but we will never be able to see heaven.

The type of life we are looking for will never be found.

[jamesxoxbond]

@RespectMyHate 1st of all , the scientific defintion of the word "life" is everything that range between simple monocytes "like bacteria" to complex life forms "like dogs or humen" .

2nd , "6000 years human history(!!), heaven,God and angles " ? ...... *Facepalms*

[BibleWinScienceFail]

venter is a fake.

[iplayrb1]

I'm glad God gave me the ability to listen to, appreciate, and understand what progress these people are making with science, a gift he gave us all when He or She set off the Big Bang or whatever He used to create all of life and existence.

[JesusChristRulesYOU]

Craig Venter is playing god and he is very ignorant because you can't prove that the BigBang is real it is just a lie and doesn't make sense. God created the universe 6,000 years ago. Give your life to Christianity or you will burn in hell for eternity and that is a fact.

[Craigipedia]

@JesusChristRulesYOU I hope you're joking, it's hard to tell on the intarwebs

[sgntslaugh73r]

@Craigipedia the big bang created god

[judemcg]

@sgntslaugh73r What!?!?!

[DarkAntiU94]

@sgntslaugh73r

I loled out my ass!

[rohankg88]

@JesusChristRulesYOU

I would rather burn in hell for eternity (IF it exists) than believe in anything and everything i'm told blindly.

[0ssandon]

@JesusChristRulesYOU and who exactly r u? Craig is a scientist, so he is considered an authority on the topic. Actually the BigBang was already proven real u moron. Now, u can't say God created the world coz u can't prove it. I respect ur opinion but be careful with what u say, u r not an authority in anything.

[DarkAntiU94]

@JesusChristRulesYOU

prove the existance of hell with out reffering to the bible.

BTW people thought that they where playing god when they invented the fuckin fire.

That just what u chistains say whenever humanity breaks threw bounds preveusely thought unbreakable.

Ur a turd.

[meyerjac]

@JesusChristRulesYOU

@JesusChristRulesYOU

Sounds like some one is a little hurt by the fact that their fairy tale religion is falling apart before their eyes. And how dare you read an ancient book and run around telling 5/6 of the world they are going to suffer forever, you arrogant wangshlurper.

[dinomuhovic]

@JesusChristRulesYOU Big bang is proved. Darvin proved that there is no god. Venter proved that man can create life. earth is 4550 years old.And life could survive in the outer space but would be diferent.Life goes on

[smb12321]

@dinomuhovic Why is it that the most rabid posters are utterly convinced of their complete rightness and say so using awful grammar? First of all, science now believes there was a Big Bang (well, not a bang but you understand) but a few decades ago, it would have been laughable. Same for the age of the Earth or creating life.

Darwin's work may lead some to deny the supernatural but he repeatedly refused to join a crusade against religion. He was too much the gentleman.

[MumblingMickey]

@JesusChristRulesYOU Venter was already asked if he was 'playing god'...his reply was that he certainly was not 'playing' he was in fact 'serious'

Next the Big Bang is not only proven... it has been proven using four separate scientific disciplines... including mathematics.

Next there are cities in this world older than 6k years!

Please also explain the procedure you carried out to confirm that this 'hell' is indeed a fact? If something can't be validated...then its an opinion, not a fact!

[MumblingMickey]

@JesusChristRulesYOU

And lastly....erm... not to put too fine a point on this...but why are you viewing vids on genomics and genetic discovery? You do realize you'll find nothing but the opposite of your current model of the world in science... It doesn't have one book of absolutism or hijacked morality... it has several million of data which cannot be interpreted or apologized to suit preexisting ideas.

You'll only ever find unyielding factual data that you won't like in science...

[MumblingMickey]

@JesusChristRulesYOU Basically science is a collection of observations...conclusions...a­nd questions... its not the realm of absolute answers with no facts... its the realm of absolute facts with more questions!

And lastly... Venter did in fact prove one thing... that 'life' does not require a God to come about... in this case it required 'Venter'...so you can scratch the bit in the bible where it states that 'only God' is capable of creating life...since obviously that cannot now be true!

[HybridD91]

@MumblingMickey These people are a waste of time but the dangerous part is that these idiots are our politicians. They know very little about science and what they do know, they retard it with Genesis, which is completely out of order. Water wasn't the formation of the planet. The Earth didn't come before light or the Sun. Plants can't live without the Sun. Genesis is just horribly wrong. A basic Geology class refutes it. These people are either extremely ignorant of willingly ignorant.

[harlon2u]

@HybridD91 Genesis wasnt written in modern time. Therefore, if you were in those days, and told of DNA, no one could automatically know the formulas/have equipment to even see DNA molecules. But in a sense you would explain it more in simple terms for those people to understand. The problem is that these chapters were not intended to give us an account of the creation that would answer all of the scientific problems and phenomenon. It would simply be too much for us to comprehend even now.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@harlon2u

No, just too much to comprehend for a close minded Creationist.

So, using your logic, Genesis would be a scientific journal on Cosmology for the Layman? Thinking in reverse like that will only cloud your vision on creation even further than it already seems to be.

Nature is so much more beautiful and mysterious when you can begin explaining to your eyes what they see, with less wonder.

Let your brain evolve.

[harlon2u]

@ScienceIsKnowledge Science is yet a cape of learning in search of man-killing weapons. That is what the struggle is in its entirety. If it were "just the nature" of anything that pleases the eye (or mind) we would leave it alone. And to think that the world is much more explainable with scientific terms. Explain dark matter without creating some sort of weapon. That is really what it will be used for.

Suppose we created creation in the hadron. What will happen to our own? Ponder on that.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@harlon2u

Because a military's budget is the most likely candidate for such research.

Man sent three men to the moon, strapped to what could have potentially, been a nuclear warhead. It furthered our understanding of relativity and triggered the end of the cold war. So, leaving things to "circumstance", can sometimes pay off for everyone.

It seems, science (definition:"to know"), intimidates you in some way.

Why be afraid of something that has given so much, in terms of human understanding?

[harlon2u]

@ScienceIsKnowledge That is a great point. But nothing about mans knowledge intimidates me. Maybe you have an assumption that some men are greater than others. I do not. What I do know is that man never perfected anything nor will. Never the less it does not matter. Anything that man may find does not interest me. It is in my opinion is that if man could travel the universe, it would only be converted to his flaws. Or if he knew of how it were created, he will destroy it after the fact.

[winterstellar]

@harlon2u WTF is wrong with you? Have you escaped fom a mental hospital or something?

[harlon2u]

@HybridD91 Correcting your false statement about Genesis; With bits of verses (they are in order as written). The 1st verse was a statement of who created what and in what era the earth was created. Not what details were first

2. The earth was without form and void; (not created yet)...God moved over the waters (the earth is not yet formed, so water is not on earth yet)

3. God created light (sun before earth).

9.He said let the dry land appear (creation of earth; after heaven,water,sun).

[HybridD91]

@harlon2u The Sun was created well after the Earth. You need to read your Bible more.

[HybridD91]

@harlon2u Thanks for agreeing that land came after water which is wrong. Before you try to correct someone, read what you're defending first.

[stewartx5]

Your numbers are flawed. To simplify (ignore variables), look at difference in our own temps (equator v. further N or S - a difference of not relatively many miles) as a rough guage. A few hundred miles closer to sun & much of planet would see temps similar to equator, with equator much hotter. Few hundred miles closer & most life along equator would cease. Few thousand miles closer & most life on planet would cease. Same with colder temps & further from sun. Doesn't require your high numbers.

[Stalkerlein]

those are not my high numbers. Their from wikipedia...written by people who study such things...They simply show that a few hundred miles wouldn't change a thing...NOTHING.

[MumblingMickey]

@stewartx5 erm... the earths orbit of the sun is not a circle... its an offset ellipse... and for that reason the distance does vary... which means the difference between perihelion and aphelion is a few 'million' miles!

But then you knew that already, since everyone can simply observe the sun over time.

The earth isn't a sphere either it's an ellipsoid. The atmosphere is thinner at the equator. Again I'm sure since you can work that out with a stick in your garden you knew that!

[stewartx5]

@MumblingMickey > '.. orbit of the sun is not a circle ..'

I'm well aware of Earth's orbit. My comments addressed differences (a few million miles closer at closest point, a few million miles further at furthermost point, etc) in that orbit. Those relatively minor differences would have significant impact on the possibility of life on this or another planet. And, as stated before, that's only one factor of many which together establish the likely statistical uniqueness of this planet.

[MumblingMickey]

@stewartx5 Erm... the earth does vary by a few million miles... and it doesn't have any impact other than regulating life... and if we were closer? well for sure life might look different...since 'current' life would not be suitable for such an environment... but there would more than likely still be life... suited to 'THAT' environment.

Those few miles your looking for are in fact about +/-15 million miles. Which is a 30 million mile swath...it represents about 23%.

[MumblingMickey]

@stewartx5 That said life on this planet is probably unique... you would be unlikely to find a rabbit or a blade of grass on another planet... but thats cos grass and rabbits evolved on this planet...with its environment.

In fact I'd hazard a guess that some religious dude on a different earth like planet somewhere is likewise trying to explain how their planet is unique and therefore must be the only one with life since it'd be written in the holy Zogmeister book or something!

[MumblingMickey]

@stewartx5

"Those relatively minor differences would have significant impact on the possibility of life on this or another planet"

erm.. no... it would just have an impact on the life and its form not on its possibility of forming...which would remain inside a standard deviation... some think thats 20% others think its higher... I'd actually veer towards the lower 20's...

Civilizations would be a different matter.. that is a chaotic mathematical formula with no current variables available.

[MumblingMickey]

@stewartx5 BTW... do you know what a blind test is?

lets say I gave you a key and five boxes. I told you to try the key in each box.

The key opened only one...well what does that prove?... that the key opens only one box?

now lets say I had you do that... but didn't tell you that the only four locks in the world it DIDN'T open were in front of you NOW what does it prove?

To ensure an unbiased test you couldn't know that!

Well such is the testing carried out on ALH 84001

[stewartx5]

@MumblingMickey > '.. do you know what ..'

I do know our discussion (now requiring several comments with each exchange) is getting too complex for this forum. So, instead of continuing, I'll end by pointing to my earliest messages, reminding you the existance of a planet orbiting a sun is only one factor of many which together sharply reduce the likelihood of life elsewhere (subject of video & my comments). Take care.

[MumblingMickey]

@stewartx5 you lost me how does the presence of a plant like earth automatically negate the chance of others like it?

You'll be disappointed y'know.... in fact since keplers launch...had you looked at its findings you already would be.

Thankfully for you the most common mechanism used by the religious is to ignore anything that questions 'current' data, which is why that info never changes.

I refer you to common sense, millions of work hours and findings SINCE this video was posted in 2008!

[rainbowofhazes]

The odds of life on other planets is fairly decent since the number of systems is so great. Look up Drake equation, numbers were originally just guesses but as we now understand the formation of star systems better the odds are more accurate, some such as the odds of intelligent life forming in the evolutionary tree or the odds of the intelligent life causing itself to go extinct are still pure speculation.

[MumblingMickey]

@rainbowofhazes For the most part Drakes equation is the laughing stock of probability... there simply aren't enough variables known...and even if there were its toosimplistic.

There are better models based on 'known' variables. see Verschuur, Sasselov, Duncan Forgan et al

Forgans model is interesting in that it relies on current observation and was initiated 'before' we found earth like planets. It estimates 361 civilizations in the Galaxy. More if life can move planet after forming.



[razord93]

it's so many planet in space the chances of it's life in space a pretty pretty big some % of them can subtain life on so i belive it can be life like on earth million billion people on some planets looking for life also in space u never know :) if u don't believe it's life on earth that's like saying u don't see a tree or a person walking on the street if we exist more would exist we can't be the only life form in the universe. Bad grammer i know and english ^^

[stewartx5]

Actually, if you speculate the odds of a body (planet, etc) in space this distance from a sun (a little closer or further could not support life), the materials (chemicals, etc) neccessary to substain life present on that body, those materials randomly mixing into the things (water, etc) needed to substain life, life actually starting, and that life evolving into anything we might recognize, the odds against life elsewhere is probably far greater than the odds in favor.

[Stalkerlein]

@stewartx5 ...well...i'm tired of this argument, if the earth was a little closer or further away life wouldnt work...looking at the distance you are referring to, well were talking about a few hundred thousand km to the peak of each of these distances...thats a whole lot of little...

[stewartx5]

Stalkerlein > ".. a few hundred thousand km .."

Got news for you, buddy. A few hundred miles closer and points on our planet closest to the sun would not support most life at several points of our orbit around the sun. Same with further away and points furthermost from the sun. A few thousand miles (not a "few hundred thousand") would impact entire planet in a similar way. Again (disregarding all else said), the chances of that (necessary distance from sun) happening again is very remote.

[stewartx5]

stewartx5 > ".. Actually, if you speculate the odds .."

Those giving me a "thumbs down" are doing so to the scientific realities. The circumstances leading to and supporting life on this planet were/are extremely complex, based on a host of factors & events coming together in an very unlikely way. As such, life developing on this planet was in fact unlikely. Since it's doubtful those factors & events would be repeated elsewhere, it's even more unlikely life exists elsewhere.

[Stalkerlein]

well..actually...a few hundred km wouldn't effect earth at all...the ecosphere, the habitable area in which life on earth won't fry or freeze to death lies between (closest to the sun)0,95AE and 2,4AE( furthest from the sun)

1 AE = 149,597,870,691meters

that's 149,598 * 10 high6 km....you do the math

[MumblingMickey]

@stewartx5 Yep the odds 'against' life are massively against its formation...and if there was only one star and one planet the odds would be well stacked against any life starting... but thats not the case... in fact our planet is just one of hundreds of billions of 'earth like' planets in this galaxy alone.

So just in this solar system we 'know' that life started on one planet 100% and we have this -> ALH 84001 from Mars... and thats one solar system in this galaxy...300 billion to go!

[stewartx5]

@MumblingMickey > '.. our planet is just one of hundreds of billions of 'earth like' planets ..'

You're simply assuming there are many planets similar to Earth. There's no evidence of that, and I'll reserve belief or faith for church. Instead, I've previously tried to describe, as simply as possible, the incredible odds (all factors together) against even one other planet similar to Earth, much less 'billion and billions.'

[MumblingMickey]

@stewartx5 I'm not making any assumptions at all... I'm pointing to the findings of the Kepler Observatory... which is turning up new ones as I type...

There is in fact evidence of that... thats what the Kepler observatory does... And its it ONLY purpose... Which was nothing special since it'd be amazing if earth was the only planet of its type... that would be unlikely!

So reserve judgment all you like so long as you don't reserve it despite the evidence. That would be just fooling yourself.

[MumblingMickey]

@stewartx5 And in all honesty I still don't see how life on or near another planet...or even a whole delegation of aliens from another civilization landing on the white house lawn would do anything for or against the notions of Gods or anything...

If the biological need to have a 'superdaddy' looking after humanity can survive things like modern human science...then even if religions were provided with cast iron conclusive evidence they were wrong... the notions would still persist.

[cobrajitsu]

Beware of the bearers of

FALSE gifts and their

BROKEN PROMISES.

Much PAIN but still Time.

There is GOOD out there.

We Oppose DECEPTION

conduit CLOSING

(BELL SOUND)

[ronskifin]

I dont belive either that there would be life in mars but maby microscopic bacteriums. But I do believe that somewhere in space is life. Wtch movie Knowing coz there is one scene what tells how possible it is.

[VoteClaypool]

Bacteria is life.

[topdogg1988xx]

me personally i do not believe its possible for there to be life on mars i do believe it may have supported basic life forms when it was 1st forming but by the look of it died in the process of forming but to say there is no life ne where else is crazy space is endless and its a proven fact that space can create life under the right circumstances just cause we havent seen it does not mean its not ther' it may b billions of light years away but it has to be there thats what space does it creates

[mikezephyr]

i don't know if all you saw the same ad banner but it's a "scientology-get the facts" thing. really freak me out. but then again if ever i am in a car crash. scientologist to the rescue! lol

[EweTubee]

are you some kind of turd... scientologists dont help you when you are in a car crash... Scientologists speculate about space and other beings in space, doctors help you when you are in a car crash, they study the anatomy of the body, just as biologists do, and teaching about the the functions of the human body isnt speculation because we know thats how it is... everything to do with space is speculation because we dnt know for sure that that is how it happens.

[mikezephyr]

...once again proving sarcasm cannot be conveyed on the internets.

[desiiii420]

indeed. the tone of voice is integral to sarcasm. the internet fails in this respect.

[ThePipersNicks]

Just a note, scientology is just a religion. It has nothing to do with real science.

[MumblingMickey]

@EweTubee Scientology doesn't do anything of the sort... they waffle on about a creature in space who is supposedly several times older than the known universe becasue the guy who started Scientology was an uneducated con artist...

Scientology is not to be confused with anything thats actually scientific... its not... its another bullshit money grabbing con. If it were anything else...then the 'church' of Scientology might actaully own something like a telescope... but they don't!

[WhyNotTruth]

Thanks. I'm going to try pissing on my wounds while I watch shit stars fall from the sky.

[RuthieWeLoveYou]

Thanks

[slivermoon22]

THANKS - INTERESTING