As I watching and listening, of J. Crag Venter interviews and his lectures. I believed Crag Venter devoted his works for good. He opening new GATEWAY for scientists in today world a new trail "Evolution Synthetic life...
I believed many others scientists around the world will following he footstep in years to came.
I think all scientists in today world-their will keep eyes on watch this issues.
@qtutoringhelps "So your argument is that since man can understand, decode and re-design DNA, DNA must have had a supernatural man in the sky to come about in nature?"
No my argument is science is proving the easiest way to get specific DNA sequences arranged is by the mind of an intelligent designer rather than any other method. therefore super natural agents are not necessary. Both Venter & Church have stated their work is 100% intelligent selection (design)
@toobsucker Science is "proving that the easiest way to get specific DNA sequences arranged is by the mind of an intelligent designer"? And what "science" would you cite? Better yet, please explain what you mean by that sentence, as it doesn't really make sense. And I don't understand the relevance to evolution. Besides which, science certainly is not showing that the best way to build an organism is to do so completely from scratch. They essentially synthetically reproduced a cell.
@toobsucker But of course you fail to notice a much deeper problem with your thinking. Precisely what enables humans to design things is their complexity. The designer you want to believe in (Jebus) would have to be unfathomably complex to do what you say he did. In which case, by your own reasoning, he would have to have been intelligently designed.
Science is "proving that the easiest way to get specific DNA sequences arranged is by the mind of an intelligent designer"? And what "science" would you cite? Better yet, please explain what you mean by that sentence, as it doesn't really make sense"
You seem to be a bit behind the information. Science (Venter , Church & many others) are using intelligent foresight (I.D. principles) to specifically arranges DNA sequences that evolutionary mechanisms are unable to do.
@toobsucker No. Certainly not what "evolutionary mechanisms are unable to do". Perhaps what evolutionary mechanisms have not done. But so what? It's still not done blind. The knowledge comes from empirical studies. And of course they're making relatively small changes to existing biological systems/structures.
@bcn533 "That doesn't even make sense. What does one have to do with the other? Humans design all kinds of things and Intelligent Design Creationism is pseudoscience. Those are facts. Do you have a point to make?"
Its makes prefect sense. We have no observable evidence of the single cells assembly. Therefore we must deuce the easiest way to get it built. All forms of logic and reason and observable example tell us an intelligence is the ONLY way. Chemical reactions are beyond ridiculous
@toobsucker So because we haven't observed a living cell arise from non-living material God must have done it. That would be God-of-the-Gaps my friend. Also known as argument from ignorance. What's more, logic, reason and observation tell us that the invocation of an intelligent designer is self-defeating. And what is ridiculous is that you think you're in any position to dismiss "chemical reactions" as ridiculous. You're clearly not serious.
@bcn533 "It is precisely the attribute of complexity that enables the capacity to design That's not hard to understand"
I fully understood why. I just wanted you to admit if the cell was intelligently designed what level of intelligence would have been needed to build it. Now that we have established this. You now have the burden of proof that chemical reactions can produce what is claimed. ALL thinking men know this is impossible. Chemical reactions can't create conserved elements within cells
@toobsucker What? Of course *if* cells are intelligently designed we can talk about what properties the designer must possess, but you are begging the question. Do we have any reason to think that cells are designed by an engineer of some sort?
And "chemical reactions" most certainly can "create conserved elements within cells" if by "conserved elements" you mean heritable traits. This has been demonstrated in controlled experiments. I'll give you the reference if you like.
@bcn533 "Perhaps what evolutionary mechanisms have not done. But so what? It's still not done blind. The knowledge comes from empirical studies. And of course they're making relatively small changes to existing biological systems/structures"
How do you think you can get away with claiming a change (evolution) in DNA sequences & proteins when you can not demonstrate the mechanisms ?. That's not a valid theory but an unsubstantiated speculation. The list of 100% conserved elements is huge
@toobsucker Don't know what you're talking about man. There is a great deal known about the mechanisms of evolutionary change. Evolution has been documented in the wild and in the lab, to say nothing of the irrefutable evidence from paleontology, embryology, comparative anatomy, molecular biology, biogeography, genetics, biochemistry, and other sciences. It's clear that you haven't acquainted yourself with the fundamentals of evolutionary theory nor the fundamentals of creationist propaganda.
@bcn533 "Don't know what you're talking about man"
Of course you don't. Because the problems in the theory are not allowed to be taught. First you must understand what evolution predicts. It predicts a system starting with constantly changing chemical reactions, will through continual incremental changes create a cell and all the different species. This means that everything in an organism must be subject to change (evolution).
This is not the case. Study Ultra Conserved Elements (UCE)
Many in science know Darwinian evolution is already falsified. Most evolutionary scientists in biology know most of the genome and protein folds are highly conserved. Conserved means "no evolution taking place" . . All of the molecular machines are highly conserved. and many DNA sequences are also.
Conserved [evolutionary frozen] elements are not subject to the mechanisms of evolution. Element that are not subject to the mechanisms of evolution have no way to get precisely arranged
@bcn533 "ur thinking. Precisely what enables humans to design things is their complexity. The designer you want to believe in (Jebus) would have to be unfathomably complex to do what you say he did"
Tell me why do you believe the intelligent designer of the cell would have to be " unfathomably complex" to build the species ?
@bcn533 "So because we haven't observed a living cell arise from non-living material God must have done it. That would be God-of-the-Gaps my friend"
Yes that's exactly what it means. You fail to understand something ares just patently impossible. By your reasoning just because we have never observed monkeys randomly typing creating complex PC programs does not mean it must take an intelligence. ?
Chemical reactions have no way to create proteins with specific functions. I.D. does have a way
@toobsucker If you can compose a sentence that I can understand I will respond to the point you try to make. Your third sentence here I cannot understand. As for the last sentence, you have shown you have no understanding of the central concept of evolution: natural selection. Look it up.
@toobsucker What? That doesn't even make sense. What does one have to do with the other? Humans design all kinds of things and Intelligent Design Creationism is pseudoscience. Those are facts. Do you have a point to make?
That's it; there's noway that he can guarantee that people who will use these tools will do safe and intelligent experiements. Should he be doing this then?
What is this? 10 seconds of information and then commercial break??? Have they found out that american people's brains can't candle more information than that or something?Horrible and totally unwatchable!
Why did u have to drag god into this...it got too political towards the end. O well what do you expect from CBS.
muffinman1 1 month ago
So far i seen 2 commericals. 3rd one i'm going to punch the screen.
muffinman1 1 month ago
Craig Venter like Steven Jobs Apple?
As I watching and listening, of J. Crag Venter interviews and his lectures. I believed Crag Venter devoted his works for good. He opening new GATEWAY for scientists in today world a new trail "Evolution Synthetic life...
I believed many others scientists around the world will following he footstep in years to came.
I think all scientists in today world-their will keep eyes on watch this issues.
Dalat Vietnam June 02, 2010
louielamson2000 1 month ago
it is good ot know he is already rich! i just hope it does not hinder him to search with noble heart
TheRogueMonk 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
can someone explain to me .. he makes a chromozone that is added to an already existing cell?
so he didnt make life entirely out of syntehtic things ?
he is still not god
TheRogueMonk 5 months ago
But who designed the designer?
Jesrael1986M 7 months ago
How long can the atheists in science get away with practicing intelligent design in the lab while telling the world intelligent design is not science?
This Its quite laughably ironic
toobsucker 7 months ago
@toobsucker
So your argument is that since man can understand, decode and re-design DNA, DNA must have had a supernatural man in the sky to come about in nature?
qtutoringhelps 7 months ago
@qtutoringhelps "So your argument is that since man can understand, decode and re-design DNA, DNA must have had a supernatural man in the sky to come about in nature?"
No my argument is science is proving the easiest way to get specific DNA sequences arranged is by the mind of an intelligent designer rather than any other method. therefore super natural agents are not necessary. Both Venter & Church have stated their work is 100% intelligent selection (design)
toobsucker 7 months ago
@toobsucker Science is "proving that the easiest way to get specific DNA sequences arranged is by the mind of an intelligent designer"? And what "science" would you cite? Better yet, please explain what you mean by that sentence, as it doesn't really make sense. And I don't understand the relevance to evolution. Besides which, science certainly is not showing that the best way to build an organism is to do so completely from scratch. They essentially synthetically reproduced a cell.
bcn533 6 months ago
@toobsucker But of course you fail to notice a much deeper problem with your thinking. Precisely what enables humans to design things is their complexity. The designer you want to believe in (Jebus) would have to be unfathomably complex to do what you say he did. In which case, by your own reasoning, he would have to have been intelligently designed.
bcn533 6 months ago
Comment removed
toobsucker 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bcn533
Science is "proving that the easiest way to get specific DNA sequences arranged is by the mind of an intelligent designer"? And what "science" would you cite? Better yet, please explain what you mean by that sentence, as it doesn't really make sense"
You seem to be a bit behind the information. Science (Venter , Church & many others) are using intelligent foresight (I.D. principles) to specifically arranges DNA sequences that evolutionary mechanisms are unable to do.
toobsucker 6 months ago
@toobsucker No. Certainly not what "evolutionary mechanisms are unable to do". Perhaps what evolutionary mechanisms have not done. But so what? It's still not done blind. The knowledge comes from empirical studies. And of course they're making relatively small changes to existing biological systems/structures.
bcn533 6 months ago
@bcn533 "That doesn't even make sense. What does one have to do with the other? Humans design all kinds of things and Intelligent Design Creationism is pseudoscience. Those are facts. Do you have a point to make?"
Its makes prefect sense. We have no observable evidence of the single cells assembly. Therefore we must deuce the easiest way to get it built. All forms of logic and reason and observable example tell us an intelligence is the ONLY way. Chemical reactions are beyond ridiculous
toobsucker 6 months ago
@toobsucker So because we haven't observed a living cell arise from non-living material God must have done it. That would be God-of-the-Gaps my friend. Also known as argument from ignorance. What's more, logic, reason and observation tell us that the invocation of an intelligent designer is self-defeating. And what is ridiculous is that you think you're in any position to dismiss "chemical reactions" as ridiculous. You're clearly not serious.
bcn533 6 months ago
@bcn533 "It is precisely the attribute of complexity that enables the capacity to design That's not hard to understand"
I fully understood why. I just wanted you to admit if the cell was intelligently designed what level of intelligence would have been needed to build it. Now that we have established this. You now have the burden of proof that chemical reactions can produce what is claimed. ALL thinking men know this is impossible. Chemical reactions can't create conserved elements within cells
toobsucker 6 months ago
@toobsucker What? Of course *if* cells are intelligently designed we can talk about what properties the designer must possess, but you are begging the question. Do we have any reason to think that cells are designed by an engineer of some sort?
And "chemical reactions" most certainly can "create conserved elements within cells" if by "conserved elements" you mean heritable traits. This has been demonstrated in controlled experiments. I'll give you the reference if you like.
bcn533 6 months ago
@bcn533 "Perhaps what evolutionary mechanisms have not done. But so what? It's still not done blind. The knowledge comes from empirical studies. And of course they're making relatively small changes to existing biological systems/structures"
How do you think you can get away with claiming a change (evolution) in DNA sequences & proteins when you can not demonstrate the mechanisms ?. That's not a valid theory but an unsubstantiated speculation. The list of 100% conserved elements is huge
toobsucker 6 months ago
@toobsucker Don't know what you're talking about man. There is a great deal known about the mechanisms of evolutionary change. Evolution has been documented in the wild and in the lab, to say nothing of the irrefutable evidence from paleontology, embryology, comparative anatomy, molecular biology, biogeography, genetics, biochemistry, and other sciences. It's clear that you haven't acquainted yourself with the fundamentals of evolutionary theory nor the fundamentals of creationist propaganda.
bcn533 6 months ago
@bcn533 "Don't know what you're talking about man"
Of course you don't. Because the problems in the theory are not allowed to be taught. First you must understand what evolution predicts. It predicts a system starting with constantly changing chemical reactions, will through continual incremental changes create a cell and all the different species. This means that everything in an organism must be subject to change (evolution).
This is not the case. Study Ultra Conserved Elements (UCE)
toobsucker 6 months ago
@bcn533 Do we have any reason to think that cells are designed by an engineer of some sort?"
Yes
Bruce Alberts president of the National Academy of Sciences from 1993 to 2005
In an article titled "The Cell as a Collection of Protein Machines: Preparing the Next Generation of Molecular Biologists."
He suggest in order to get to the next level of understanding they should adopt design engineering principles in to the biology curriculum
Conserved elements exist in biology and engineering
toobsucker 6 months ago
@bcn533
Many in science know Darwinian evolution is already falsified. Most evolutionary scientists in biology know most of the genome and protein folds are highly conserved. Conserved means "no evolution taking place" . . All of the molecular machines are highly conserved. and many DNA sequences are also.
Conserved [evolutionary frozen] elements are not subject to the mechanisms of evolution. Element that are not subject to the mechanisms of evolution have no way to get precisely arranged
toobsucker 6 months ago
@toobsucker ooh shut up. go to church. evolution is a fact,
Atheist603 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bcn533 "ur thinking. Precisely what enables humans to design things is their complexity. The designer you want to believe in (Jebus) would have to be unfathomably complex to do what you say he did"
Tell me why do you believe the intelligent designer of the cell would have to be " unfathomably complex" to build the species ?
toobsucker 6 months ago
@toobsucker I just told you why. It is precisely the attribute of complexity that enables the capacity to design. That's not hard to understand.
bcn533 6 months ago
@bcn533 "So because we haven't observed a living cell arise from non-living material God must have done it. That would be God-of-the-Gaps my friend"
Yes that's exactly what it means. You fail to understand something ares just patently impossible. By your reasoning just because we have never observed monkeys randomly typing creating complex PC programs does not mean it must take an intelligence. ?
Chemical reactions have no way to create proteins with specific functions. I.D. does have a way
toobsucker 6 months ago
@toobsucker If you can compose a sentence that I can understand I will respond to the point you try to make. Your third sentence here I cannot understand. As for the last sentence, you have shown you have no understanding of the central concept of evolution: natural selection. Look it up.
bcn533 6 months ago
@toobsucker What? That doesn't even make sense. What does one have to do with the other? Humans design all kinds of things and Intelligent Design Creationism is pseudoscience. Those are facts. Do you have a point to make?
bcn533 6 months ago
That's it; there's noway that he can guarantee that people who will use these tools will do safe and intelligent experiements. Should he be doing this then?
NorthNorth2009 8 months ago
@NorthNorth2009 Should physicists exist? Better yet, should scientists exist?
HybridD91 7 months ago
@HybridD91 Only if they have a conscious but a lot don't. Greed is a bad thing.
NorthNorth2009 7 months ago
these ads are causing my I.Q to drop
breerex123 9 months ago
oh fuckin sweet ads every 30 seconds
fuck your shrimp eat shit red lobster.
tjsmith249 10 months ago
oh fuckin sweet ads every 30 seconds
fuck your shrimp.
tjsmith249 10 months ago
oh fuckin sweet ads every 30 seconds
tjsmith249 10 months ago
What is this? 10 seconds of information and then commercial break??? Have they found out that american people's brains can't candle more information than that or something?Horrible and totally unwatchable!
winterstellar 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Darwin is his dog?!
lol
genesqaured2 10 months ago
Darwin is his dog?!
genesqaured2 10 months ago
J. C. Venter is a real PLAYAH.
siemensnokiasiemens 10 months ago
J. C. Venter is a real PLAYAH.
siemensnokiasiemens 10 months ago
GOD DAM THESE ADS!
ClamCrunchy 1 year ago
ads suck
booomhauer 1 year ago 6
About time Craig got some mainstream exposure.
To get a great look into Craig's life, read his book "A Life Decoded"
It's an outstanding read and you should be able to find it in most libraries.
NickInDetroit 1 year ago
nice job with all the commercials pissed me off
joeygras8 1 year ago 9
10:00
Its pathetic people would consider him destroying something when manipulating our DNA.
If we have EVOLVED to the point of great thinking, the simple fact we have the ability to modify DNA is evolution in itself.
The evolution is natural, because we ourselves are natural...
knoose 1 year ago 2
Finally news posting more about science.
Thank you.
knoose 1 year ago
video doesnt work, just so you know..
Big090Red 1 year ago
Where is it?
AspenNomad 1 year ago
Comment removed
AspenNomad 1 year ago