At 0:57 Angela Belcher says 'the organisms learned to make shells', Wouldn't it be more accurate to say the changes in the environment caused the expression of shells. And that's only if you believe that one form preceded the other, which seems to be supported only by evolutionary folklore.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
bioengineering with viruses is untested and the long term effects unknown. we are playing "god" and we aren't being cautious at all. very foolhardy IMHO. The worst part is they put that shit in our food.
No it's not. It's not just viruses, she also uses yeast, or any microorganisms that you can breed selectively. Don't tell me that you object to beer milk products or bread. Unlike GMOs which are created by injecting DNA slices into host organisms using viruses, Belcher's method involves no DNA manipulation of this sort but natural selection. On the contrary this has the potential of environmentally friendly mass production of consumer goods, it could be the key to a sustainable civilization.
Have to agree on the "head's up" about this. The video made it sound one way, though due to your clearification and clarification, one finds out another. Still, given that all living things mutate, change, and adapt, I wonder how these viruses are going to "evolve" and mutate in a few years due to this?? Still, THANK YOU again for the clearification and clarification on what IS what. Peace and Blessings Be With......
the microorganisms only participate in the manufacturing process. Their product although organically produced is not living. If you have concerns about biological products you should be worried about drinking beer eating bread or various milk products. the only difference is that now we can view the process of breeding these microorganisms under very powerful microscopes and get them brew the stuff we want much faster than nature or our ancestors could teach them.
See, this is what people need to know of and about. "Ethical" research, development, and progress. There is so much dis-information and negative reports and research that is being talked of, about, etc.. To know that there IS "ethical research AND progress" IS GREAT!!! And I Thank You for replying!! It's when you read and know about changes in Executive Orders like: 13505 Removing Barriers to Responsible Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells 2009-03-09.....and you can see what I mean.
You can learn more about it: scientists give popular lectures accessible for average people all the time. On MIT's website search for Daniel Nocera, Angela Belcher, Penny Chisholm & Drew Endy.
mitworld . mit . edu/series/view/88
On Aspen Institute or Fora TV search for Richard Smalley and Steven Chu.
@The4LA2Baker0 You're an idiot. Give me one single example of bioengineered viruses or nanobots being secretly put in anyone's food. You're what's called a paranoid conspiracy theorist. You ever use your electron microscope and find any miracles of retroviral engineering in your Corn Flakes? You should be taking lithium for your schizophrenia.
I think that this is great. Hopefully the fear mongers and money hoarders dont kill this technology like the tried to do with stem cell research 8 years ago. The earth NEEDS us to be more responsible and stop living in fear of "what if the worst happens" because the way we are going it already is, what the earth needs is "what can we do thats not like what we are already doing now."
don't hope for anything my friend... nantech is allready monopolized beyond your wildest dreams.
tesla found a way of generating free energy for everyone: the idea was killed and his career was destroyed because it could not be metered and made money off
nanotech will enable people to create anything, wich will make profits of big corps drop. they will kill nanotech or at least all possibilities of it being available for regular people.
You sir are full if @#$%. Capitalism drives innovation. A smart capitalist would take this technology, and profit from it. Oh wait, they already do that. Who do you think funds her research?
Technology should be under the democratic controll of the worldpopulation, not under the controll of a small group of people that will only use the technology to benefit themselves at expense of everyone else.
Awesome research. I've also heard about super capacitors that utilize nanotechnology to dramatically increase the surface area of the plates and store about ten times as much energy as conventional batteries. If they work out as planned, I think they should be more practical than even gasoline engines because they will allow a car to travel further and it only take around three minutes to charge these things on the scale they would be in for a car. Now all we need are efficient solar cells.
This is the very reason i don't understand why the whole world is so concerned about conserving our resources...new technology like this will always combat any shortages we might face in the future...well done..
Technology can only go so far to support our use of resources and can only advance at a certain pace. This is not to mention that over use of world resources is extremely destructive to the environment.
Sustainability of living is extremely important to the long term health of our planet.
if we create a nanobot that can replicate itself, then we can dissolve all matter that we don't need (including the fucking planet), to use as materials for building whatever the fuck we want. matter = resource.
throughout your life you have been programmed with that value, indeed.
so am i.
but nanotechnology makes our values truly customisable, since values/fellings/thought (and our entire consciousness) are just conifgurations of matter.
and so, you wouldn't give a shit if there was a planet or not, because it wouldn't be of any relevance whatsoever to you.
I hear what you are saying, but to give you an example. There are people that know a lot about computers and yet, instead of customizing the hell out of them, end up just using the default settings with a few tweaks. So, maybe I'll go for a slightly smaller more stylish planet. Maybe without the tilt. More or less I'm happy with my current situation. We may find that the future shock/singularity event won't be so dramatic as predicted. People take time to change. Nanoscience won't change that.
Oh and BTW there is a sci-fi series called Hyperion, by Dan Simmons. There are a group of people called the Ousters that live in Deep space and have modified themselves inside out. Great books. Also, Charles Stross writes some good books also. He used an idea of a Cornucopia Machine that can use matter matter to construct whatever it is programmed to construct including copies of itself. If you are interested you might check them out. Take care.
watch "the final stage of transhumanism", a little video ( it's on youtube) from a guy that recently deleted all of his video's for some reason. i agree perfectly with what he explaines.
lolol the narrator says orgasms at 1:27
wilmar201 11 months ago 2
At 0:57 Angela Belcher says 'the organisms learned to make shells', Wouldn't it be more accurate to say the changes in the environment caused the expression of shells. And that's only if you believe that one form preceded the other, which seems to be supported only by evolutionary folklore.
seanmPWH 1 year ago
THAT CAr gets 150 to the gallon, but i bet it cant go that fast
xTheDeathSaintx 1 year ago
"The viruses are identical..... except for minute differences.
MrMacSunshine 1 year ago
fuk man, 4 degrees?!
JUKIO01 1 year ago
lmao her names belcher
nemesisnick66 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
bioengineering with viruses is untested and the long term effects unknown. we are playing "god" and we aren't being cautious at all. very foolhardy IMHO. The worst part is they put that shit in our food.
The4LA2Baker0 2 years ago
No it's not. It's not just viruses, she also uses yeast, or any microorganisms that you can breed selectively. Don't tell me that you object to beer milk products or bread. Unlike GMOs which are created by injecting DNA slices into host organisms using viruses, Belcher's method involves no DNA manipulation of this sort but natural selection. On the contrary this has the potential of environmentally friendly mass production of consumer goods, it could be the key to a sustainable civilization.
madashelldude 2 years ago
the video made it sound like GMOs. thanks for info.
The4LA2Baker0 2 years ago
Have to agree on the "head's up" about this. The video made it sound one way, though due to your clearification and clarification, one finds out another. Still, given that all living things mutate, change, and adapt, I wonder how these viruses are going to "evolve" and mutate in a few years due to this?? Still, THANK YOU again for the clearification and clarification on what IS what. Peace and Blessings Be With......
Hawk3766 2 years ago
the microorganisms only participate in the manufacturing process. Their product although organically produced is not living. If you have concerns about biological products you should be worried about drinking beer eating bread or various milk products. the only difference is that now we can view the process of breeding these microorganisms under very powerful microscopes and get them brew the stuff we want much faster than nature or our ancestors could teach them.
madashelldude 2 years ago
See, this is what people need to know of and about. "Ethical" research, development, and progress. There is so much dis-information and negative reports and research that is being talked of, about, etc.. To know that there IS "ethical research AND progress" IS GREAT!!! And I Thank You for replying!! It's when you read and know about changes in Executive Orders like: 13505 Removing Barriers to Responsible Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells 2009-03-09.....and you can see what I mean.
Hawk3766 2 years ago
You can learn more about it: scientists give popular lectures accessible for average people all the time. On MIT's website search for Daniel Nocera, Angela Belcher, Penny Chisholm & Drew Endy.
mitworld . mit . edu/series/view/88
On Aspen Institute or Fora TV search for Richard Smalley and Steven Chu.
agci . org/library/presentations/about/presentation_details . php?recordID=16950
watch?v=nsVMKWzbRWQ
Or just check out UCTelevision and BerkeleyLab channels on youtube.
Glad to be of any help.
madashelldude 2 years ago
@The4LA2Baker0 You're an idiot. Give me one single example of bioengineered viruses or nanobots being secretly put in anyone's food. You're what's called a paranoid conspiracy theorist. You ever use your electron microscope and find any miracles of retroviral engineering in your Corn Flakes? You should be taking lithium for your schizophrenia.
Castigar2000 1 year ago
@Castigar2000 AHAHAHAHAHAH! You are ignorant on so many levels. Conversing with you is clearly a waste of time. Read a book retard.
The4LA2Baker0 1 year ago
Great Keep working on this this is a rational possibility
JIGSAW4LIFE 2 years ago
I think that this is great. Hopefully the fear mongers and money hoarders dont kill this technology like the tried to do with stem cell research 8 years ago. The earth NEEDS us to be more responsible and stop living in fear of "what if the worst happens" because the way we are going it already is, what the earth needs is "what can we do thats not like what we are already doing now."
chargeboy 2 years ago
don't hope for anything my friend... nantech is allready monopolized beyond your wildest dreams.
tesla found a way of generating free energy for everyone: the idea was killed and his career was destroyed because it could not be metered and made money off
nanotech will enable people to create anything, wich will make profits of big corps drop. they will kill nanotech or at least all possibilities of it being available for regular people.
but that's capitalism for ya
MrMincer 2 years ago
You sir are full if @#$%. Capitalism drives innovation. A smart capitalist would take this technology, and profit from it. Oh wait, they already do that. Who do you think funds her research?
Srath79 2 years ago
Technology should be under the democratic controll of the worldpopulation, not under the controll of a small group of people that will only use the technology to benefit themselves at expense of everyone else.
MrMincer 2 years ago
MrMincer, you're a fucking retard and understand nothing about research. Telsa was a fucking loser and inventing shit.
Xelbiuj 2 years ago
Tesla is beside the point.
MrMincer 2 years ago
Look who's talking. Did you do one percent of what Tesla did? Tesla was a genious, you are the loser
Archimedes555453525 2 years ago
I like the batteries the Asian man built, well done
eyethesuicide 3 years ago
Awesome research. I've also heard about super capacitors that utilize nanotechnology to dramatically increase the surface area of the plates and store about ten times as much energy as conventional batteries. If they work out as planned, I think they should be more practical than even gasoline engines because they will allow a car to travel further and it only take around three minutes to charge these things on the scale they would be in for a car. Now all we need are efficient solar cells.
tree6014 3 years ago
They have no idea who they work for
pastorofpain 4 years ago
A battery-powered motorcycle doing 0 to 60 in less than a second and a half. Ho, lee, CRAP.
ELuhn 4 years ago
This is the very reason i don't understand why the whole world is so concerned about conserving our resources...new technology like this will always combat any shortages we might face in the future...well done..
sexualchocolate06 4 years ago
Technology can only go so far to support our use of resources and can only advance at a certain pace. This is not to mention that over use of world resources is extremely destructive to the environment.
Sustainability of living is extremely important to the long term health of our planet.
iggy4323 3 years ago
if we create a nanobot that can replicate itself, then we can dissolve all matter that we don't need (including the fucking planet), to use as materials for building whatever the fuck we want. matter = resource.
MrMincer 2 years ago
I for one, kinda like having a planet.
McConsumer 2 years ago
throughout your life you have been programmed with that value, indeed.
so am i.
but nanotechnology makes our values truly customisable, since values/fellings/thought (and our entire consciousness) are just conifgurations of matter.
and so, you wouldn't give a shit if there was a planet or not, because it wouldn't be of any relevance whatsoever to you.
MrMincer 2 years ago
I hear what you are saying, but to give you an example. There are people that know a lot about computers and yet, instead of customizing the hell out of them, end up just using the default settings with a few tweaks. So, maybe I'll go for a slightly smaller more stylish planet. Maybe without the tilt. More or less I'm happy with my current situation. We may find that the future shock/singularity event won't be so dramatic as predicted. People take time to change. Nanoscience won't change that.
McConsumer 2 years ago
Oh and BTW there is a sci-fi series called Hyperion, by Dan Simmons. There are a group of people called the Ousters that live in Deep space and have modified themselves inside out. Great books. Also, Charles Stross writes some good books also. He used an idea of a Cornucopia Machine that can use matter matter to construct whatever it is programmed to construct including copies of itself. If you are interested you might check them out. Take care.
McConsumer 2 years ago
watch "the final stage of transhumanism", a little video ( it's on youtube) from a guy that recently deleted all of his video's for some reason. i agree perfectly with what he explaines.
MrMincer 2 years ago
Not to mention how bad the corporate big wigs are fighting eco-solutions just so they don't lose their 10,000 square foot house.
RealxxShin 2 years ago 2
very good video
magnoliasltd 4 years ago