Added: 1 year ago
From: itnnews
Views: 15,108
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (179)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @candiceevans1 Thanks for the laugh.

  • This is crazy they have not syntheized life, they are merely synthesizing a genome based on the original genome. They spent millions to do this, something that they claim nature has been doing for millions of years, with no intelligent input, for free. Non-sense.

  • @grfield1 The difference is that now that genome can be changed and controlled by man. The potential applications of this are limitless, and this is one of the greatest scientific breakthroughs of all time, it impresses me much more than putting a man on the moon.

  • @5teampunker It took millions of $ and over 10 years and they did not create anything that resembles life which is what was reported in the media. They made a working copy of a segment of the genome.

  • i hope this will not be another hiroshima waiting to happen.

  • @frtk1 I'm fairly sure that our tech is still limited to reality. One day, we may be able to create flying pink unicorns, and imaginary friends who get angry when we have sex... But not yet.

  • Scientist pass tech to gov, gov pass tech to subcontractors, subcontractors pass tech to highest bidder, highest bidder happens to be terrorist...and create new synthetic lifeforms that eat things like steel, plastic, oil, human etc etc.

    Yes, this is the beginning of the end.

  • This is a brilliant man who has done a great deal to help us understand genetics.

  • Sorry for the repeated postings. I thought they were not working.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Im am SO thrilled I am alive in this era!

  • LOL synthetic "life," that's funny. what a sad definition of life you pathetic douches have. if it can't move, eat, sleep, drink, breathe, fuck, feel, taste, hear, see, think, or smell, it's not alive.

  • Biology isn't your strong suit I presume? The definition of life is as follows; the ability to metabolize external resources, react to external stimuli and self-replicate. This includes bacteria, fungi, plants, animals and any as yet undiscovered entities that fit the above criteria. The saddest part of your little rant is that you honestly believe you know better than the whole of scientific community.

  • Are you a retard single cells are alive, they can divide, they can mutate, they carry out functions, also cells Bacteria do not have a mouth. They make proteins called enzymes inside the cell and these travel thru the cell wall into the surrounding medium. The enzymes chop the food into tiny subunits which then come into the bacteria cell by osmosis or active transport. So cells are alive you dumb shit. But i don't expect someone as pathetic as you to understand that.

  • And yes look under a microscope and they can move faggot

  • Has anyone learned!! Sythetic Life is a incredibly dangerous thing, You cannot fuck with life it dosent work that way. Retards

  • You seem to think this has been done before, would you please give me one example of why this is dangerous?

  • @Phyerbyrd

    "A microchip in every person" David Rockefeller. Thats the one and only reason it dangerous.

    We know where this technology is going so cut the bullshit. Your too wrapped in your "science" and ego of superiority that you cant find your way out of a cardboard box.

  • obama, american congress, wake up!

    you are late in passing a law to control experiences with synthetic life.

    the gulf oil-spill may seem like a drop in the ocean compared to the risk of a "spill" of new bacteria.

  • you mean the bacteria that are only capable of producing insulin, or turning the oil you talked about into harmless byproducts? Not all bacteria are pathogenic and it's not as easy as you think for them to become so.

  • I said to "control", not to "forbid".

  • Sorry, I misunderstood.

  • I have a question : Is this kind of technology subject to evolution? I understand that they will encode a suicide gene into the DNA. However if it can self replicate it should also be subject to mutation. Its also a little disconcerting that in order to create the first synthetic cell it had to obsorbe a "normal" cell.

  • This thing has been blown completely out of proportion. Several points need to be addressed here:

    1. Venter did not create life from scratch. He took pre-existing bacterium took the DNA out of it and subsequently replaced it with copied information

    2. The creation of the information was only possible thanks to his own intelligence and the involved scientists

  • Venter has really outdone Jehova

  • This is pathetic for both sides. There is no mention of religion in this entire video, yet so many people want to either criticize or support it. Grow up... if somebody says something against your religion or beliefs, why can't you just let them live their lives?

  • how has this only got 11000 views??? 

  • Make the t-virus!

  • yeh and they will use it in the mylitary first !!!!!nice new game for the next mr hitler GOD SAVE US HUMANS

  • @kw213one thank god it isnt given to u, with ur shit spelling and rediculous accusations, grow up and learn from this

  • No more freezing your sperm, just put the DNA sequence on hard-disk.

    And reprint the DNA just like a ink-jet printer but with DNA Ink.

  • do you still believe in god now? if anything they are god

  • @teedonster

    Yes I still believe in God. There are number of things that need to be pointed out here:

    1. Venter did not create life from scratch. He took a pre-existing bacterium, took the genetic material out of it and subsequently replaced it with copied information

    2. The creation of the genetic information was only possible thanks to Venters own intelligence and the intelligence of the involved scientists

    3. He has not provided a naturalistic method of abiogenesis.

  • @AlanJacksonisgreat you are ofcourse right... but it is certainly a start along the way of demonstrating mechanisms of abiogenesis

  • @DiosanXaquerry

    Perhaps. However, at the moment it is strongly confirmatory of Stephen C Meyer's argument that abiogenesis is possible with intelligent guidance.

    Additionally, I am more prepared at the moment to believe in ID because that's where I see evidence to be pointing. No offence, but I am not prepared to believe in what might or might not happen at some time in the future, only what is avaliable presently.

  • @AlanJacksonisgreat ok now I am truly curious... what evidence is it that points to ID ?

  • @DiosanXaquerry

    Fair question, one thing might be DNA information. Whenever we find information we mental mind activity. Eg, the messages that you write to me contain specified complexity in that they convey a specific message to me which I can decode only because I have mind.

    Another is cosmic fine tuning. There are a number of constants in the universe which make intelligent life possible. We infer intelligence here because a) it's fantastically improbable b) has an independent pattern.

  • @AlanJacksonisgreat ok... i like your approach to things so i dont want to start a fight.... but, in terms of mutations not adding information, that been shown to not be show so many many times, you can find videos showing examples on youtube... they escape my memory at the moment

    2.) have you ever heard of the bubble hypothesis about different universes existing in a cosmic foam with different cosmic contants analagous to geometic positions coordination in our four dimensional universe ?

  • @DiosanXaquerry

    Good, so we have mutual respect :)

    1. I'v seen those videos regarding mutation. What they say is good, but they don't account for the initial input of DNA information. Additionally, point mutations (which is what they're talking about) do not account for the massive differences in genetic information between phyla groups. They account for a small structural change such as a discolouration in fish or a slightly differently shaped skull in humans.

  • @AlanJacksonisgreat well yes... but when you talk about transitional fossils that bridge gaps between fossils and even some organisms today that are so transitional that there is debate in which phyla they belong, it is clear to you that the accumulation of these small changes gives rise to major difference that allow for categorization in phyla. This is similar to what some people claim about irreducibly complex structures, a favourite is the human eyes, which evolved out of less sophisticated

  • @AlanJacksonisgreat

    I have heard of the bubble universes hypothesis. But to be honest i'm skeptical. The problem here is that they invoke certain fine tunings of their own which can't be explained away except by special pleading.

    Also, the probabalistic resources of mutliverse models are so huge that anything could happen for no reason. Roger Penrose calculates that it's vastly more probable that we should see fully functioning boltzman brains popping into and out of existence for no reason

  • @AlanJacksonisgreat well ok .. now if we are talking abotu something like a boltzman brain... then i would not call that intelligent design in the tradional sense... that would be the kind of god that spinoza, einstein and hawking refers too.... if thats the the kind of thing you are talking about then i am with you on the ID side too.....

  • @DiosanXaquerry

    When I refer to boltzman brains, what I refer to is a fully functioning braining popping into existence for absolutely no reason. It's an obvious absurdity, but is infinitely more probable under multiverse cosmologies.

  • @AlanJacksonisgreat well fully functional i think is a great exaggeration... in any case ti should be obvious that some consciousness arises from inanimate matter... after all this is what happens with our own consciousness, Furthermore if it were an abserdity then it is an absurdity that both Einstein and Hawking adhere to somewhat. I realise that this is an argument from authority.. but given that you are quoting Penrose I see your penrose and raise you one Einstein and one Hawking.

  • @AlanJacksonisgreat how exactly can you even calculate the probability of something outside the realm of the known universe anyway... there must be a non sequitur in there somewhere, probably quite a few.

  • We as humans are much more powerfull then everthought.

  • Since humans have now "created" life, that makes us god!  I feel more godly now. but if it is possible for us to create any form of life then it has to be possible for a far more advanced civilization to have created us, probably as slaves, which is pretty much what we are going to use these synthetic organisms as. my oh my how history repeats itself.

  • in millions of years, it wil have evolved into a synthetic human being!

  • c. venter, h. smith, c. hutchinson et al. are the 21st century stooges of "molecular clowning." These charlatans used pre-existing Mycoplasma capricolum to "create" their 1st synthetic cell M. mycoides jcvi-syn." What a comical farce of westernized-american-delusiona­l arrogance at play; joe the plumber can do better than that. c. venter main agenda is to elevate the josef mengele-monsanto-like corporate machines of the g8-nations. YHWH alone is THE CREATOR. Be Blessed, Peace & Shalom,

  • SPLICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!!

  • @SORAROX10 That movie's gonna suck. It's just a complete ripoff of Alien.

  • I'm pretty sure the similarity stops at the posters.

  • @SORAROX10 I hope not

  • @lacolll Hm, agnostic theist? That's one I haven't heard before...

    So if I understand you, you're like a theist who doesn't believe in organized religions? I know several people like that.

  • @purplespottedbunny yes, finally someone smart shows up here, i am an agnostic .. im more like agnostic theist - i dont believe in deity because there is no hard evidence for it, but i give my best to find the evidence if there is any (religions dont count as evidence, they count as bs and i deny them and thier fairy tales)

  • @lacollll So in other words, you're an agnostic.

  • @lacollll - Out of curiosity, what are you if you're both anti-religion and anti-evolution? That was an extremely bigoted remark on your part, so I'm just curious as to what is so goddamn wonderful that makes you think both religious people and evolutionists are scum.

  • @purplespottedbunny im physicist

  • @purplespottedbunny im physicist aka. truth seeker ... both bible(or what ever religion's book) and evolution are full of lies ... do research .. but don't reseach the things that both sides claim why their thing is right ... reseach the things that both sides tell eachother where the opposed side fails

  • @purplespottedbunny so im neither and both .. im still finding out the truth, don't tell me that you know it all ... do you?

    p.s. i spent years researching both sides ... tho it didn't take me long to understand the lie machinery behind religions .. and know that religions and creationism are far apart ... i just dont believe in any religion's story about creation and definition of god and life, but i still dont deny creation itself because i dont know for sure if its truth or not, yet

  • Coincidence is God's way of remaining anonymous. Einstein

    What is the meaning of human life, or of organic life altogether? To answer this question at all implies a religion. Is there any sense then, you ask, in putting it? I answer, the man who regards his own life and that of his fellow creatures as meaningless is not merely unfortunate but almost disqualified for life.

    Einstein

  • @flyingfoo99 life has no meaning, is it that hard to accept it? i think its easier to accept that now than fantasize about god your all life ...

    im not saying that we are not created, i am not a evolutionist, but you are on a wrong path

    you want meaning of life? ill give you something closest to it: joy and happiness ... not joy or happiness but trully both joy and happiness ...

  • @flyingfoo99 Einstein also married his first cousin

  • @Seano71 so your point

  • I am heating my house with cold fusion:-) Silly scientest are always finding great things!!! but they lie lie lie...

  • maybe thats how the first cells were created by alliens!!

  • Mentally challenged creationists.. already polluting a nice video and one of the most important discoveries ever in the history of mankind with their mental retardedness and pseudo philosophical dogmatic diarrhea.

    Shut the fuck up and learn.

  • @ArteTuga  Ok with all respect thats a bigoted remark. that being said u cant disprove any religion where an all powerfull creator with infinite power is capable of anything. no matter what u discover it could have been done by a creator. that being said astrophysics can allways be applied to explain creation, for example the law of relativity can explain that the ammount of power used to creat the

  • @ArteTuga @ArteTuga speed of light which is possible in alternate universes could create the universerse in 6 days where as in our time would move faster thus one day could equal a billion years so u see although this is fun to debate its impossible to prove there is no creator. I hope that whatever scared u that u can look past ur bigotry and show a little tollerance. thank you and god bless u.

  • @ArteTuga i am anti religious, but if your a evolutionist, you are same scum as they are ... both versions are just pure bs

  • @lacollll

    I'm not anti religion, i'm anti stupidity and lack of knowledge and education (creationism, dogma).

    I'm anti trolls that do not research anything, that are completely illiterate, and then come and make comments on something they don't even begin to understand, making it appear as if they do.

    There is no "ism" or "ist" about those people who understand evolutionary mechanics. Only knowledge that is available for everyone to test for themselves, read and learn about.

  • @ArteTuga "read and learn" thats where you fail ... i stick to "observe and conclude" ... i hope you understand where you fail .... tho, having a huge capable mind is a necessity for understanding mechanics of everything ... you dont seem to fit the cathegory since great minds "read and judge" and overall "observe and conclude"

  • Do you mean at face value or doing the experiments yourself? The former is unreliable and the latter is impractical.

  • @Phyerbyrd i do experiments that i can ... and if i cant i wait at least 2 opposed sides to come out with results of a same experiment ... if opposed sides come with same results then the results are more reliable than just one side's results ... if they come up with different results then i still trust neither of them

    we live in a word of lies and deception ... people like for money ... even better - people would do even worse things than just lie for money, we both agree on that fact.

  • @lacollll sry for typos im tired, ill retype: we live in a world of lies and deception ... people lie for money ... even better - people would do even worse things than just lie for money, we both agree on that fact.

  • You really think there's some sort of huge conspiracy in the scientific community? It sounds like paranoia to me. If a scientist is found to be lying he loses credibility, and do you know who finds out that they're lying? Other scientists. If there was some huge conspiracy why would people who are in on it discredit evidence for their own position? Scientists follow the evidence, for most of them money is the last thing on their minds. Biologists don't lie about evolution, they don't need to.

  • @Phyerbyrd i can name you over 50 biologists that faked evidence ... you are an idiot if you dont about any of them ... last lie was ida ... dont tell me you never heard of jorn hurum ...

  • 50? There are thousands of biologists alive today and you think you can judge all of them based off of 50 frauds? And another thing, do you know who busted them? Most likely other biologists, who accept evolution by the way. The scientific community is self-correcting, and a huge conspiracy wouldn't throw away any findings if it supported their ideas.

  • @Phyerbyrd listen young man, you must understand that life is full of turns and twists ... as chilred we all grew up with religion ... easter, christmass, all things that bring you joy as a kid ...

  • @Phyerbyrd i was just like you, and i wanted some ultimate proof, just to show it right into the face of a religion, but all i found was another dissapointment. theres no proof for evolution, evolutionary idea is based on dna improvement and there is no celuar mechanics that can change dna. only natural process capable of changing dna is mutation (aka tumor/cancer) and its out of our control usually caused by certain chemistry and radiation

  • Mutation is also caused by copying errors that occur during reproduction. Look up "Examples of beneficial mutations and natural selection" on google. Simple copying errors during cell replication result in mutations. Did you know that people with only one copy of sickle cell are immune to malaria? They also show none of the symptoms of people with two copies. I highly doubt you're in any position to judge weather or not evolution is true.

  • @Phyerbyrd do you ever think about things you learn? if evo is true, whats benefitial about that most land species lost ability to breathe underwater .. and once mutation happens, weather its benefitial or not, it can not be passed onto offspring, because you sperm will still produce unmutated dna, andif there was some major change in you sperm, you will be unable to have kids, the womens egg will not let in faulty sperm

  • One general rule in evolution is that if you don't use an organ, it usually is repurposed or disappears. This is because it no longer contributes to how likely a given individual is to reproduce.

  • What you described is only true of somatic mutations, not of germ line mutations. Somatic mutations occur after an organism is born, and cannot be passed on. Germ line mutations, which are what fuel evolution, occur in new zygotes and are present in the organism before it is born. These also affect the gametes of the new organism, meaning that the mutant's offspring will also be mutants. An egg will accept the sperm as long as it still contains compatible DNA and can link onto the egg.

  • The sperm's structure is also affected by the organism's genetics and will not change unless the specific genes that regulate their creation are altered as well. Any other mutation will not impede the sperm's ability to latch onto the egg.

  • @Phyerbyrd your sperms sturcture is not affected, but its defined by your genetics, and its defined moments after you mom's and dad's dna reorganized into yours. if you mutated organs for night vision, your sperm's dna will remain unmutated, i hope you realize that, and your offspring wont have night vision

  • @Phyerbyrd if error occured in proces of making of your sperm, giving it "dna for night vision" ... the mother's egg will accept the sperm only if the egg has that mutation itself

  • @ArteTuga

    Has absolutly nothing to do with Creationism and everything to do with freedom of MIND.

    Wait until the technology is finalized, probably within your lifetime. You'll be the first to stand up and say, "your not putting a microchip in my body"

    "A micro chip in every person"- David Rockefeller.

    Youtube" North american v-chip. The newer versions will control your DNA, thoughts, emotions, intuition............it now belongs to the STATE.

  • Microchips?! Lay off of the bad science fiction novels and conspiracy theories, and pull your head out of your ass. You claim to know better than people who do this for a living, and have actually done hands-on research. By comparison, your scientific knowledge probably stops at high school level, and since you most likely didn't major in science, you've probably forgotten a good deal of it. All you have left are paranoid fantasies of technology gone awry.

  • @Phyerbyrd they do this for a living, MONEY and not rarely, blind ambition, which puts ethical issues at the back seat.

    we, the people, have the right to question what they are doing.

  • Unfortunately my hand slipped and I voted you up, but back to the topic; you, being ignorant of science, have no say at all in what they do. The last I checked scientists create this sort of stuff to help humanity.

  • @Phyerbyrd It was your subconscious voting for you, as i’m afraid it is smarter than your "rational" mind. ok, leave it for the holly experts, then. like the bp oil drillers. by the way, the iranian experts assured they are developing nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. you certainly trust them.

  • Actually, no. I didn't even see what I clicked on. Right, because those evil doctors and biochemists that make all of those antibiotics, vaccines, cancer treatments and the like are doing this purely out of desire for profit.

  • @Phyerbyrd I'm afraid you've never heard of the pharmaceutical industry lobbying and unethical marketing.

    anyway, the white house has created a presidential commission for the study of the issue and the eventual risks posed by it (it can be easily found on google).

  • @efex2007 I am studying Biochemistry, I hope to go into research into cancer out of a genuine want to have a career that also contributes to society.

    However, it is a career, naturally I want to earn a living. That doesn't mean we are all bastards running around to f*ck everyone over like efex2007 and would have you believe.

  • @sbi9jbm Why is the u.s. so worried about iran, north korea or the taleban obtaining nuclear weapons?

    certainly there is not even one scientist in the whole world with so low moral standards to help them, no matter how much they can pay.

    moreover, scientists don't make mistakes: chernobyl, the thalidomide victims, the space shuttle challenger can't teach nothing to the world.

  • @efex2007 Couldnt quite understand what you where trying to get across with that message? What are your views then- we should censor science? or just stop using it? Without industrial nitrate production the worlds food production would be 2/3rds less, without antibiotics we would all be victim to plagues. These greatly outweigh the effects of tragedys like chernobyl.

  • Oh also the concern about creating biological warfare. That's an incredibly scary con to this, but don't forget that we have nuclear weapons. They're just as deadly and much easier to manufacture.

  • *picks nose* and the idiots come out of the woodwork...lol...as a student in cell biology you people screaming "unnatural" and "you're playing God" make me laugh so hard.

    The only valid concern I have heard so far was "if it gets out into the environment" yes...if we created an organism...this is just a synthetic cell...it doesn't do much yet.

    To all the people supporting this effort thank you bunches...more people need to be able to see the pros.

  • @Anastasius37 plus, if it's not already obvious. In the labs we ensure that these kind of cells are grown in such circumstances and environments that they would never survive to live a day outside the laboratories. ;)

    With synthetic lifeforms it can go either way...

  • I agree with the person below me

    U and all u retards are seeing this only for negative purposes

    They said the same god damn thing u just did when heart transplant surgery became a reality

    Look where we are now and stfu

  • This needs to stop NOW! If this gets in with nature, who knows what imbalances will happen! Just STOP. We, as humans, don't even know the full capabilities of one basic cell. Even our knowledge of cells and it's organelles functions are "theorized" meaning we don't know if that's what that cell does.

  • @Sk8ordieknarlysk8er your'e a fucking retard.

  • I subjugate the role of Crake.

  • Some of you have childlike optimism. If this were only about religion, we'd be very lucky. This is a VERY bad thing. You'll see.

  • @Winter077

    Only in the hands of the religious is this a bad thing.

  • didnt they do it by programing dna and puting it into a cell which later did what they wanted it to do? but doesnt that mean that they would have to be able to read the dna and translate the codes and completely understand what every code means? this could be a miracle because they could design bacteria that could do things like eat up oil spills. or it could be the end of the world because if this technology falls into the wrong hands, they could create a super virus.

  • @MyFilthyQuadSport

    true , swine flu is just test .

    new virus = Immune cant stop it

    and only way to life spend all your money to have cure from who made it .

  • This is misleading, it is not synthetic life. They haven't created 'synthetic' life. This is genetic engineering. With the sequencing technology they are combining sets of genes together to get a new genetic code, and then insert it into a new cell so it can be expressed.

    They haven't created life from scratch or understood the physics of the DNA molecule and how it reproduces and mutates.

  • @SuperFinGuy that's well said ...

    i hate: Theologists, biologists, meteorologists, environmentalists and climatologists ... why? ... because they all lie ALOT

  • Always gotta be religious fanatics. "oh god didn't make it, so it's evil". c'mon man.

  • Youtube: North American V-chip.

    youtube: Aaron Russo reveals 911 truths. (discusses Rockefeller's plan to implant this chip in every U.S. citizen).

    How do you bridge the gap between synthetic microelectric transducer life forms and biological human DNA? With the technology this man is creating.

    This man pure evil in disguise. Your children and grandchildren will be controlled by the help of Craig Venter. He is a monster.

  • GATTACA here we come lulz (no really though, in the next ten years if this goes anywhere)

  • Not natural - not normal. This is bullshit.

  • @srbija357

    True that.

  • @srbija357 This can lead to curing spinal cord injuries and paralysis so... deff. not bullshit.

  • @vdub350 That is not going to happen

  • @srbija357 haha, you're hilarious. Where did you get your amazing education that you can make such claims.

  • @vdub350 In school.

  • Come on people, stop debating religion in the comments.

    About this breakthrough, I'm still torn. Man is inventing more and more ways to wipe himself off the face of the planet. Creating all these modified life forms is great until natural evolution kicks in and the life forms have traits we never knew they could - all because of the changes humans made to them. The zombie apocalypse draws nearer everyday :D

  • an "original [complete] [synthetic] cell" in due course ~ coming soon!

    .

    "a self-reprogrammable, self-reproducing biological robots", anyone? I'll take 10 ~ *aahh* what a life! ;)

    .

    facebook [.] com/grata

  • by publishing the sequences free online. This prick wanted to own and commercialise the human genome.WTF kind of perverted society would even allow that possibility, only in America could such a dehumanising prospect be entertained. BTW, the human genome project is a commercial flop, no new drugs or drug leads what so ever. To date, only one disease ,cystic fibrosis, can be treated,to a small extent by gene therapy, and that's a simple 1 mutation disease, and that was done before hg project.

  • @mister18cm

    Because this monster is no damn different than Monsanto who wants total control of the world's agricultural seeds. He can then sell it to the Gov. to expand the North American V-chip technology to interface with human DNA. Total control of humans.

  • the same in the synthetic copy. It's just like If I were to burn a cd of Mozart, and then claim to have composed the fucking music. Venter is such an arrogant clown that he coded quotes from Richard feynman and James Joyce. From Feynman"what I can't build I can't understand. Venter, u created fuck all, and u know fuck all. This lad is a bad cunt. He tried to patent your dna. He wanted to own your genetic inheritance, but a global effort , the human genome project put him in his place ,,,

  • What a load of fuckig bollix this is , and how very fucking stupid u cunts are to to think anything really new is happening here. This new microbe is just a facsimile of another microbe. Those dumb fucks who say this is really a creation need to take their heads out of their fuckiung arses. This is how Venter's team did it. [1 Strip dna from a microbe using uv radiation [2] Read and copy the dna of another microbe using PCR machine. [3]Copy back into microbe. So accctgg in original is .....;

  • Yay! God is Obsolete!!

  • @yld629

    lol god give human tools and mind ... human can use tool for good or bad .

    btw synthetic cell is 10000 times worst if use as weapon ( as virus ..elc )

    if u want to know how that is so easy to happen .. try search about PCR DNA

  • @Ahlwwy Oh really god gave humans tools and mind? when? How do you know that.

    Lets face it your god is an idiot, making aids, viruses, earthquakes, WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW?

  • @alexander33345

    u miss it !! what human do is changing not creating lol

    god made systum perfect

    the true is so simply is u face what u done

    Global warming (soon earth map will change ) done by human

    cancer and these diseases which come from chemical Fertilizers or Medicines

    done by human

  • @Ahlwwy Thats such a poor argument, why dont you type "the worst parasites on the planet" on google? why would that evil bastad create those? LOL

  • @Ahlwwy You mean Prometheus or Athena? =p

  • Very exciting potential for micro biology! I cant wait to see wait this develops into with a gradual evolution of this new breakthrough

  • Maybe now we can scap the Bible as well as all those bushit ideas and believe in actual science.

  • The human archetype of a solitary anthropomorphic creator god or hero fixing the world is parting and will crawl out of literature onto the streets as surely as Anne Rices vampires. Of course a travesty of life is being promulgated as life, whether previous life is/was designed or not. This crude impressario will be market driven.

  • As a biologist, this is kinda frightening. The implications of this technology are tremendous.

  • We'll detroy the world....

  • jow can anyone give this video a thumbs down!!? This the one otf the most awsome things ever to happen to this race! And we are lucky enough to live through it!!!

  • Maybe we can develop a human/cow.....intelligent enough to do simple labor(slave labor)....attractive enough to have sex with....then at the age of 18...can be slaughtered and eaten...tasting like prime rib!

  • So we no longer need God to create life? Finally!!!

  • Bring on the T virus and rage infected monkeys!

  • oh my..."linear increase in negative potential" - u head it hear first people - don't say u weren't warned ;-?

  • This just goes on to prove that it takes intelligence to create life!

  • Awesome. We can now see how God did it!

  • I wonder what kind of bad uses is he talking about? He might be one of those aliens looking to take over our planet.

  • God is clinically and finally Dead .A new Age has begun whithout God .

  • @elasetti yes at last science has won.

  • @elasetti Then you haven't met Horus (satan), the God of musicians, movie stars, freemasons, and corp america!

  • I also do not se what this has to do with religion. So long as they are doing it for human development, even if they made man, that is fine. Scientists have transplanted organs, reconstructed a face, produced IV kibs for families who want kids, etc, and that is fine. Please can you be open to human progress and keep your religion to yourselves?

  • scary. its like the film terminator becoming reality

  • This is not creation of life from scratch because the synthetic DNA has has to be inserted into a living cell.

  • The species that it turns into is man-made, therefor it's synthetic.

  • @Aprogalypse

    yes but its more controlled. just think if its controlled and they implated into you and you controle it, and you can make it do anything you want and imgen if you could make it do anything you want, just think of the endless possibilities. it could cure probably anything

    I'd be happy to help out if they ever need a human to test this to see what effect it will have on us. I would have to be alive obuvis cos it needs a liveing cell.

  • Awesome news. I too eagerly await the god-botherers response.

  • Mankind has created LIFE !!

    In every religous book on this planet, God has always been the "creator of life".

    Today Humanity is one step closer to GOD-hood!

  • This is truly scary, we have seen how every technology with dual uses have been used for both good and bad. You can put money on the bad uses for this far outweigh the good as the military will plough far more money into something that can destroy an enemy without the need for war. Remember the film "the day the earth stood still" well if they could create that swarm, they would. Beware what thyn covert as it may one day be yours to control.

  • @eyeswideopennimrod This is the definition of Paranoia! Nuclear bombs were long said to be the machines that would destroy Humanity. 60 years later, we are further away from a global nuclear war than ever before.

    We all need to have more faith in Humanity, even if Humanity as a whole is pretty stupid.

  • I just wonder how far will this technology will go, and how much it will change our everyday lives.

  • @BIGBOY2TON It wont go far at all, everything will cease to exist in the way we all seem to think it currently is. Come 2016 nothing will matter anymore.