gimme more o professor, just raise hands.. no need to do any effort of understanding your natural connection with the universe.. just play the drone and upgrade.
If a Big Bang happened materials would have had to existed & Someone/something made those materials and also the gases/heavens & time. That being is GOD. Genesis 1.1
@AmirsDilema Wrong. Before the big bang, there was no time. Therefore no need for a cause/effect. This universe might be the one effect that has no cause.
Homosexual activists understand the power of words.
Please visit my channel to watch a one-minute video clip in which popular atheist author Richard Dawkins admits that homosexual activists "hijacked the word 'gay'".
The word "homosexual" is more appropriate and accurate because it, unlike the word "gay", actually describes the behavior/attraction/relationship being discussed.
The word "gay" helps homosexual activists push their agenda.
Hear what God of Israel YAHUSHUA-YAHUWAH (Son and Father are ONE) saying to our generation by His chosen prophets: Trumpetcallofgodonline. com ; Letter called "Purify Your Faith, and Come to the Father as It is Written": EXCERPT: "Only in the Bible and through these very Letters, of which I have given to My prophet of the end of this age, shall you find Him and know Him."
i dont like this, diseases mutate to be immune from some medecin, also doctors would have it very difficult to cure diseases if there is no specific cure for anything anymore because people are immune to different stuff?
and to make evolution runned by corporations? no..
I have a question for some of you fellow evolution proponents. Fineberg mentioned that humans don't evolve anymore due to medicine and technology-- wouldn't intelligence needed to create medicine and technology be considered a selective force of natural selection? i.e. let's say energy demands and human overpopulation lead to the extinction of humans. Like how giraffes with short necks died off, couldn't the intelligence that brought humans the ability to proliferate freely be natural selection?
It's really interesting how a lot of people are arguing that only a small select group will have access to this kind of biotech. Sure in the first 10-20 years. But think about fx the mobile phones. Even very poor and remote people have it today. And if it's a 1000 dollars in some years, it could be less than a 100 soon and then less and then less. Come on people. expand your minds!
I don't agree with natural evolution. Biological evolution was stopped when humanity started to create so called civilization. Now the process is called 'history'. Are we part of nature? Or are we just cancer on planet Earth, which is a giant superorganism. We'll see.
THERE ARE NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is possible in nature (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). Species couldn't survive if their tissues, organs, biological systems were still evolving? I discuss Punctuated Equilibrium theory. Read my article on Pravda: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss almost everything: genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, biological similarities between species.
Small changes within a species can and will eventually lead to enough changes in the embryonic process to make it impossible. At that point a new species is formed with forced isolation. There are already several types of digs which can not interbreed even if you manually insert sperm into egg.
@neurel111 "There are already several types of digs which can not interbreed even if you manually insert sperm into egg." WTF??? Please support your statement that digs are proof/solid evidence of "evolution into differing kinds" there is no proof ! "Take your 'evoreligious' notions elsewhere."
11:10 there is a fourth possibility, one that is happening now, selective evolution where even the weakest survive and reproduce, this is neither natural or neo, it's a kind of devolution. And I can't believe this is being taught to educated people, it's like a layman's guide to evolution.
can you imagine in the future ppl talking about us as the primitive ancestors that lived at most 100 years, and think when i was 99 yrs i was such an idiot!
@Godbreaker15 Aye, Brain-activated enzymes dispensers to change hair color pigmentation...
we will all eventually be immortal, have awesome regeritive powers, be smart and have great memory, have bomb/flame/bulletproof skin, Wings, Telepathy, Solar-Skin to make food with if we so choose, carbon bones and shapeshifting to non-traditional forms within nanoseconds!
Also, Furries IRL! heheh. deal with it.
Humanity is changing into what it wants, we will no longer be humans, but people in general!
I am absolutely for neo-evolution. We are the only species that doesn't have some sort of natural selection process. The sheer magnitude of idiots on this planet has to be negated by SOMETHING!
@lakid87 Oh cmon, Super-Aryans will be so awesome. Glowing, brilliant, shiny white skin, electric yellow hair, deep blue eyes, muscles, super powers, etc.
;)
But yes, in all seriousness we should augment humans responsibly, in a way that promotes both sides of the brain.
@lakid87 also think of the implications of not genetically modifying your embryo....black market modification, your child being left behind in a world of the superhumans, super smart, super healthy, strong, good looking, witty, compassionate, wise,,,,who knows how many traits are genetically coded. By waiting on the sidelines you could be relegating your child to a life of inferiority, pain and suffering of the non modified lesser humans who watch as they get left behind???
@shishcabob30 gattaca is slightly flawed in that it plays to a bias that human will over rides genetics. This is partially true but not always. It is heart warming to see the weak triumph because of will power however, a quadripliqic will never run marathons by will alone. they need genetic help. Also a genetically superior person with superior will would surpass anyone with will alone. May be what it really means for humans to reach greatness is to eliminate weakness and let will alone rule.
This is going to be available for about 3% of population while the rest will be crippled mutations because they couldn't afford genetic manipulation...
If it takes 100,000 years so be it....thats like a 15 year old kid jumping in the seat of a NASCAR that hasn't even got his license yet.....This is what we have to do take care of health and are minds try to do things with in reason that may take your life to accomplish it but when you do you will be rewarded spiritually and mentally then you can pass on your wisdom, this is how are genetics progress.... When you run a race you can't cut across the feild you will be diss-qualified....
@daniellucier I highly doubt that we as a species will will last anywhere near another 1000 years, let alone another 100,000 years if we keep going in the direction that we're going, unless we use genetic engineering to help us out.
These choices will be common, one day, and, I do worry, that will bring us closer to a cybernetic class-based society (surely, most will not be able to afford all the latest greatest nano-bio-tech gadgetry to make one smarter)...but so much in this talk reminds me of a POEM I wrote back in 2003 called 'Genomia'. (which you can find on the chaosmosis(dot)net website under the Writing/Poetry link)...in which a question is repeated at the start and finish: 'What sort of people should there be?'
we should probably amend that to say: "mankind messes with itself; evolves with nature; WITH LITTLE OR NO REGARD TO NATURE HERSELF (unlike the rest of nature)"
Not that im against what hes saying but isnt he just promising a cure all, you know dont like your body well we can splice your genes and make you an adonis.
@FutileFreak ... if it remains restricted to people actively choosing these genetic replacements. However, we are uncertain if you change say, 40 different genes to get all of the great results he mentioned, in combination they might produce horrible diseases.
@kokofan50 actually this would solve the gattaca problem, because we could "cure" people with "bad" genes instead of discriminating against them. And BTW Eugenics is much worse than Gattaca.
@kokofan50 as far as I remember, eugenics is about eliminating people with "bad" genes and Gattaca was about discriminating against them. As I said, this(neo-evolution) would actually solve the Gattaca problem. But i'm not saying that that would necessarily be a good thing.
@ZialusPT Eugenics is about removing un wanted genes from the gene pool. Discriminating against the people who have the unwanted genes is one way you do that. I'm not trying to say that the stuff in the video is all bad. I just think he gives good examples of the good things about it, but we just need to think about what could go wrong with it. When we think about that and try to make sure that doesn't happen. This is just so you know I'm not just seeing the bad in it.
@kokofan50 Again "But i'm not saying that that would necessarily be a good thing." I share the same fears as you. I can totally see this being used the wrong way. But anyway; the type of people that would use this wrongly, would most likely destroy the planet before we even get to the time when we can make neo-evolution happen. So we have other things to worry about.
@kokofan50 We don't draw the line...the drawing of that line is personal and individual. Each person must decide for him or herself what is enough. Some may want to eliminate disease others may want to enhance. Freedom, liberty, and human freewill dictate how much we will or won't enhance our genetics. No one has a right to force anyone to enhance or to not enhance them selves or thier off spring.
@TehNewV If your saying that people should think twice about the decisions they make for thier children ...I agree. However, today many people have children with no regard for thier circumstance, they care little about genetic disease, drug abuse, mental illness, and socio-economic circumstance...rather they just have sex and to hell with the consequences. It could hardly go worse then the present experiment. At least genetics can help try and screen out the pain & suffering that is rampant now.
>>> and to some degree it is happening right now. Genetic testing helps to screen for downs syndrom, and other abnormalities. Micro-sort technology lets parents decide the sex of thier child with out need for abortion like in china. There will be much better sorting technology that will come close to the scenarios of Gataca. It needs to be managed but not shut down unless you want black market genetics to flourish because the market always wins when there is a supply to demand issue.
@wateraarde What's scary about it? I find it scary people would object to this. This can put an end to many diseases and truly make us 'equal', nature is cruel and unfair.
I think we are presently gathering the tools necessary to conquer outer space...even if we don't know it or believe in it yet. Inspiring talk, specially for all scientists out there. I love living in a discovery revolution era. Get inspired to learn more every day !
THIS IS SO FREAKING AWESOME HARVEY FINEBERG HAS BEEN MY HERO FOR FOREVER AND NOW HE HAS HIS OWN BREAKTHROUGH VIDEOOO!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS IS D000P333!!!!!!!!!!
After all this talk, I can't believe, people still don't believe someone, somewhere is creating "super-soldiers".
Yes, it's all hapening right now. But, a great problem I see, in society, is that this will create is even higher class separation. Those with money will have "best"-children than those wihtout.
Cuz, technology is great, but someone has got to pay for it.
this is bullshit. good changes will be for rich elite and their children who will still spend their super health on consuming more drugs... for normal people medications for infertility will be administered
If the tech becomes feasible, then the subject matter of this talk is an inevitability.
To those rallying against it - banning such tech will only deny its access to the poor. If there is a significant benefit in accessing it, the rich will get it no matter what the law says.
The use of the wrong caduceus pretty much represents my view on Neo-Evolution.
The Medical Caduceus, wich is the symbol of Hippocrates, patron of medicine, is a single snake coiling around a stick and secreting venom on a tiny plate on the top.
The caduceus in the video, the one with the two snakes coiling a winged stick, is the symbol of Hermes, god of Commerce.
Yet the video prefers to utilize Hermes' caduceus to promote Neo-Evolution.
@charmander4533 Genetic diversity will always exist, even if you are changing a few genes to emphasize certain characteristics because of processes like meiosis, chromosome cross over and the like. This is more of what could come of human evolution or what we are doing or will be doing to augment evolution on a human time scale.
The idea that we are going to have the technology to select this stuff is naive. Artificial selection of humans will create bad humans. Select for longevity and you get idiots who could live a long time, only they will cause their own unnatural death. Selecting for traits we want will always bring on traits we don't want. Need I point out the Russian foxes?
@christo930 - Very true, you do have a point, but we won't know till we try. Many people die from various diseases. Wouldn't you want there to be a cure cancer without shooting concentrated radiation on people? I'd take that risk. So what if we end up with 3 heads and no arms? It's a risk we must take, it's the risk that the first vaccine took, and now, we're protected against disease that wiped out populations in the past. (except for those who refuse to get them and caused their kids to die)
@Altearithe We could easily wipe out cancer and get a worse disease. In other words, we may pick genetics that are less susceptible to cancer and end up susceptible to some other disease. I suppose it's worth trying, but I don't think it will work the way we want it to. We could also end up with very poor genetic variability and have the entire population susceptible to the same virus, for example.
@DurexDurpaneu2 Either way will yield the same results! we will eventually be immortal, have awesome regeritive powers, be smart and have great memory, have Huge metal bricks/flame/bulletproof skin, Wings, Telepathy, Solar-Skin to make food if we so choose, carbon bones and shapeshifting to non-traditional forms within nanoseconds! Although I think computers are sweet, they will only lead the charge towards more secure and quicker bodies.
I feel this talk, while nice, didn't add anything to the average TED viewer. It'd be a good talk for those unaware of these subjects, the average person.
WE"RE ALL FUCKING DOOMED. not because of anything in this video, but because this video only has 9,000 views in 3 days while ray william johnson's video's get like 5 million views a day, and they consist of cats flushing toilets and people falling into pools. No, it's not "are you ready for neo-evolution" it's "are you ready for Brawndo?, it's got what plants crave"
@Raxarax Fucking love this. Very true. Most people don't give a shit about what's truly important. The majority of people are just lemmings who wander from distraction to distraction without taking a single moment to contemplate anything deeper than a fart joke.
@Raxarax no....they the ordinairy people that are needed for diveristy are doomed..we the humans are doomed by birth..doomed to to die..nothing to do about it...but the human ras will became something els..but is it the human evolution or is it what we create....the human ras already has the power to create...
it wil create evolution in a rate faster then any of us can imagine today...but is this evolution or ceatism?
we create bots cyborgs that wil evolve...is this evolution or creatism?
if evolution is supposed to be the 'natural' progression/emergence of traits over time, then I suppose engineering life wouldn't quite make the cut--since it is artificial (the traits gained wouldn't necessarily otherwise emerge; though they might).
but if evolution is any kind of emergence of traits over time, then perhaps?
but my guess is the traits wouldn't mostly emerge otherwise since what makes them coveted by humans is the fact of their rarity not already present in us xD
though stilts are a rather brutish implementation of the idea, is genetics to be exempted from the example?
do genetic, invisible stilts count?
though, it's possible the limit of a function (in this case: how close our genetically modified traits approach some kind of evolution) is NOT the function evaluated at that point (actually evolved)...
is genetically modified traits continuous or discontinuous!?
@Raxarax Why are you suprised? people in general are stupid, they want to be entertained not taught. Just look at the news, world events, leaders, and poloticians are more of an after thought (if not becoming an after thought) compared to celebrities.
@Raxarax those 9k views (now 20k) may have more power to change the world than the millions combined who don't get interested into this short of things. So I worry not. Also, I do enjoy seeing cats flushing toilets from time to time.
He just repeated exactly what David Pearce has been saying for many years, albeit in less thought-provoking terms, and added nothing. Why doesn't TED just invite David Pearce? This guy Fineberg is eloquent and all but Peace is waaaaaayyyy more interesting.
31 creationists have switched off their hearing aids or plugged their ears aimed for the thumbs down and closed their eyes before scurrying back into the dark ages.
Scenario: one group has their intelligence augmented for their kids. These kids have 1 or 2 kids. Another group doesn't spend that money of genetic wazzoos and gets lotto scratch offs instead. They bang out 4 kids and these non-augmented kids have 4 more kids. Result: Enjoy your idiocracy, bitches! Biology FTW! Hubris FAIL!
Genes alone won't make an Einstein, you dummy. A person's mind is the product of nature and nurture - genes, environment, upbringing, infinite little things you wouldn't even dream of.
I believe this *is* a part of our evolution, whether it works or not, it's something that we as a species will explore, and who knows - it may lead to us being a stronger more successful as a species - but there will always be haters... until we breed them out, that is. ;)
i think manipulating genes to produce disease-resistant individuals is ethical but manipulating genes to create hyper-functional characteristics is unethical
@johndoe77774444 I think you should shut up! Who or what gives you the right to impose your views and restrict behavior. Do you believe man to be superior to nature?! WE ARE NATURE!
@johndoe77774444 Why? I would argue that the distinction you draw between disease resistance and hyper-functionality is arbitrary. You know what makes people way more functional? Being still alive.
What's unethical about taking an injection and gaining some extra IQ points, say? How is that any more unethical than giving a child a good environment and a good school with supportive parents and teachers? It's a hell of a lot cheaper, that's for sure.
@Jotto999 I guess what I really object to would be parents thumbing through a catalog and thinking "lets have one athletic kid and name him andrew and one musical kid and name her michelle" which would totally mess with expectations and limit individuals. As far as an injection that boosts IQ, i think it may suppress other functions that may be beneficial. Intelligence isnt so much of a linear concept as the IQ test would suggest, however I'm not completely against the idea.
How is disease resistance is not a "hyper-functional characteristic"?
Are you fine with dumb fucks flying planes into buildings? Smarter people = less religious fucktards, less Afghan "kill teams", LESS AFGHAN WARS, less Sarah Palins, etc.
This needs to be seriously thought over, not just discarded for no good reason.
@celticphrog Children don't make the choice now either. You think children are happy to be born with genetic diseases from their parents? I'm sure little Tommy is glad that he will have diabetes when he is older and would have chosen to have it if he was given the choice beforehand.
There is little evil done, that is not done "for someone's greater good". I can't see this remaining solely the decision of the parents. Soon society will have its say. Diabetes will disappear along with other perhaps genetic disorders, then it will be genes that make people less "fit" for society, such as the ones that give certain people a predisposition for addictions, or taking risks, or rebelling against the norm. Then it will be people who aren't smart enough and so on.
It isn't about being smarter, but about taking the next step in ethical development to thinking about the community first instead of the individual or corporation. Right now the profit motive is enshrined in law in most of the world. That means that companies are required to seek profit regardless of the consequences. Think BP Oil. Can you imagine putting the kind of decisions we are talking about in those hands?
This has been flagged as spam show
Some people want young white females to mix with non-white males.
I made a one-minute video highlighting a very small sample of race-mixing advertisements.
I love white people, and I am opposed to race-mixing. But I do not hate non-whites.
If you click on my name “awhitesoul2012” highlighted in blue below this comment, you can watch my video.
Thanks.
awhitesoul2012 3 weeks ago
gimme more o professor, just raise hands.. no need to do any effort of understanding your natural connection with the universe.. just play the drone and upgrade.
e3ovuziotica 3 weeks ago in playlist Robotics, Transhumanism, Singularity etc
Are we ready for neo-evolution? I am!
Leifthrasir 4 weeks ago
If a Big Bang happened materials would have had to existed & Someone/something made those materials and also the gases/heavens & time. That being is GOD. Genesis 1.1
AmirsDilema 1 month ago
@AmirsDilema Who says, Pinocchio's father? Go read some Hawking!
lunadogwoof 2 weeks ago in playlist Origins of Man
@AmirsDilema Wrong. Before the big bang, there was no time. Therefore no need for a cause/effect. This universe might be the one effect that has no cause.
jonisaok 2 weeks ago in playlist Origins of Man
This has been flagged as spam show
Homosexual activists understand the power of words.
Please visit my channel to watch a one-minute video clip in which popular atheist author Richard Dawkins admits that homosexual activists "hijacked the word 'gay'".
The word "homosexual" is more appropriate and accurate because it, unlike the word "gay", actually describes the behavior/attraction/relationship being discussed.
The word "gay" helps homosexual activists push their agenda.
lightandbeautiful 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hear what God of Israel YAHUSHUA-YAHUWAH (Son and Father are ONE) saying to our generation by His chosen prophets: Trumpetcallofgodonline. com ; Letter called "Purify Your Faith, and Come to the Father as It is Written": EXCERPT: "Only in the Bible and through these very Letters, of which I have given to My prophet of the end of this age, shall you find Him and know Him."
Watch:
"youtube.com/watch?v=INH-lNUQQZg"
"youtube.com/watch?v=lutJYDxP6ys"
"youtube.com/watch?v=R9ike7PKd8U"
Regards.
TrumpetCallofGodLT 2 months ago
even if somepeople wont take the bioshock example seriously, they should.
and this guy should play through that game
spaik007 2 months ago
i dont like this, diseases mutate to be immune from some medecin, also doctors would have it very difficult to cure diseases if there is no specific cure for anything anymore because people are immune to different stuff?
and to make evolution runned by corporations? no..
but maybe i just got it all wrong
spaik007 2 months ago
I have a question for some of you fellow evolution proponents. Fineberg mentioned that humans don't evolve anymore due to medicine and technology-- wouldn't intelligence needed to create medicine and technology be considered a selective force of natural selection? i.e. let's say energy demands and human overpopulation lead to the extinction of humans. Like how giraffes with short necks died off, couldn't the intelligence that brought humans the ability to proliferate freely be natural selection?
herpderpmonkey 3 months ago
this guy hasnt seen GATACA!
omarrichardson 4 months ago in playlist More videos from TEDtalksDirector
I would go for photosynthesis
profjaykay 4 months ago
This guy sounds like Jeff Goldblum except what he's saying makes sense
halcyonyear 4 months ago
man I just need a cure for my streach marks!!
angrywinds 4 months ago
I am already super human or above human
emotrainer4444 4 months ago
It's really interesting how a lot of people are arguing that only a small select group will have access to this kind of biotech. Sure in the first 10-20 years. But think about fx the mobile phones. Even very poor and remote people have it today. And if it's a 1000 dollars in some years, it could be less than a 100 soon and then less and then less. Come on people. expand your minds!
mkmohr 5 months ago 2
People did not evolve. Mutations are not able to order anything
watch?v=qZev7hb40uk
JungleJargon 5 months ago
made me think of bioshock ^^ "everything will be so great" then everything turns to shit..
adanko 5 months ago 2
I never asked for this
EatitAlive 5 months ago in playlist More videos from TEDtalksDirector
I don't agree with natural evolution. Biological evolution was stopped when humanity started to create so called civilization. Now the process is called 'history'. Are we part of nature? Or are we just cancer on planet Earth, which is a giant superorganism. We'll see.
Zalanoid 6 months ago
THERE ARE NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is possible in nature (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). Species couldn't survive if their tissues, organs, biological systems were still evolving? I discuss Punctuated Equilibrium theory. Read my article on Pravda: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss almost everything: genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 6 months ago
@Mogley52
Wrong.
Small changes within a species can and will eventually lead to enough changes in the embryonic process to make it impossible. At that point a new species is formed with forced isolation. There are already several types of digs which can not interbreed even if you manually insert sperm into egg.
Take your religious notions elsewhere.
neurel111 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@neurel111 "There are already several types of digs which can not interbreed even if you manually insert sperm into egg." WTF??? Please support your statement that digs are proof/solid evidence of "evolution into differing kinds" there is no proof ! "Take your 'evoreligious' notions elsewhere."
JonathanSeagullUtube 6 months ago
11:10 there is a fourth possibility, one that is happening now, selective evolution where even the weakest survive and reproduce, this is neither natural or neo, it's a kind of devolution. And I can't believe this is being taught to educated people, it's like a layman's guide to evolution.
LowleyUK 7 months ago
I want to be engineered into Batman
HatterMadigan 7 months ago
What are the side effects of messing with genes that we fully do not understand yet.
ranasingh 7 months ago
@ranasingh The answer is implied in the question. We don't know.
jacksawild 7 months ago
can you imagine in the future ppl talking about us as the primitive ancestors that lived at most 100 years, and think when i was 99 yrs i was such an idiot!
alexander33345 8 months ago
@Godbreaker15 Aye, Brain-activated enzymes dispensers to change hair color pigmentation...
we will all eventually be immortal, have awesome regeritive powers, be smart and have great memory, have bomb/flame/bulletproof skin, Wings, Telepathy, Solar-Skin to make food with if we so choose, carbon bones and shapeshifting to non-traditional forms within nanoseconds!
Also, Furries IRL! heheh. deal with it.
Humanity is changing into what it wants, we will no longer be humans, but people in general!
TehNewV 8 months ago
sooo... plasmids?
asadasad1010 8 months ago
14:20 am i the only one that laughed?
bestplugins 8 months ago
Comment removed
bestplugins 8 months ago
I am absolutely for neo-evolution. We are the only species that doesn't have some sort of natural selection process. The sheer magnitude of idiots on this planet has to be negated by SOMETHING!
brettygood 8 months ago
They should have laughed at 14:27!
JamesTR4 8 months ago
Think of all the implications this means?!?!
People, please use judgment when genetically modifying your embryo
lakid87 8 months ago
@lakid87 Oh cmon, Super-Aryans will be so awesome. Glowing, brilliant, shiny white skin, electric yellow hair, deep blue eyes, muscles, super powers, etc.
;)
But yes, in all seriousness we should augment humans responsibly, in a way that promotes both sides of the brain.
TehNewV 8 months ago
@lakid87 also think of the implications of not genetically modifying your embryo....black market modification, your child being left behind in a world of the superhumans, super smart, super healthy, strong, good looking, witty, compassionate, wise,,,,who knows how many traits are genetically coded. By waiting on the sidelines you could be relegating your child to a life of inferiority, pain and suffering of the non modified lesser humans who watch as they get left behind???
DK0526 8 months ago
Hasn't this guy seen Gattaca?
shishcabob30 8 months ago
@shishcabob30 gattaca is slightly flawed in that it plays to a bias that human will over rides genetics. This is partially true but not always. It is heart warming to see the weak triumph because of will power however, a quadripliqic will never run marathons by will alone. they need genetic help. Also a genetically superior person with superior will would surpass anyone with will alone. May be what it really means for humans to reach greatness is to eliminate weakness and let will alone rule.
DK0526 8 months ago
This is going to be available for about 3% of population while the rest will be crippled mutations because they couldn't afford genetic manipulation...
SektaJePrijatelj 8 months ago
If it takes 100,000 years so be it....thats like a 15 year old kid jumping in the seat of a NASCAR that hasn't even got his license yet.....This is what we have to do take care of health and are minds try to do things with in reason that may take your life to accomplish it but when you do you will be rewarded spiritually and mentally then you can pass on your wisdom, this is how are genetics progress.... When you run a race you can't cut across the feild you will be diss-qualified....
daniellucier 8 months ago
@daniellucier I highly doubt that we as a species will will last anywhere near another 1000 years, let alone another 100,000 years if we keep going in the direction that we're going, unless we use genetic engineering to help us out.
FutileFreak 7 months ago
These choices will be common, one day, and, I do worry, that will bring us closer to a cybernetic class-based society (surely, most will not be able to afford all the latest greatest nano-bio-tech gadgetry to make one smarter)...but so much in this talk reminds me of a POEM I wrote back in 2003 called 'Genomia'. (which you can find on the chaosmosis(dot)net website under the Writing/Poetry link)...in which a question is repeated at the start and finish: 'What sort of people should there be?'
sonofTelstar 8 months ago
I would opt for shooting electricity from my hands.
dvdragon 9 months ago 17
@dvdragon
fck yes!
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
@dvdragon well that's entirely plausible.
LowleyUK 7 months ago
haven't we been self-directing our evolution since the origin of technology? we're just approaching a higher phase?
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
Comment removed
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
@mahatmabit you don't get out much do you now...
It's a form of expression , as in the odds are in favor for nano .
Once we have this technology money will be meaningless. So stfu u dumb troll.
DurexDurpaneu2 9 months ago
@DurexDurpaneu2 its a form of expression and a way of thinking. so wrapped up that you (we) just can't tell the difference anymore.
what's a "troll"?... i hope it has a 1000 iq, at least
mahatmaBit 9 months ago
the invisible hand of evolution is difficult to understand and works in mysterious ways.
why does mankind (the human race) has so much trouble seeing that we are nature. and nature "messes" with itself: "nature evolves"
even materials ("dead nature") have a life cycle: from light to heavy atoms...
mahatmaBit 9 months ago
@mahatmaBit
we should probably amend that to say: "mankind messes with itself; evolves with nature; WITH LITTLE OR NO REGARD TO NATURE HERSELF"
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
@xjustamem0ryx i agree.
its messy and "messed up" : )
its kind of a disregard or disrespect to ourselves and to (our) nature - i'm not sure if i make sense (in english and otherwise)
mahatmaBit 9 months ago
@mahatmaBit
that's why we are mortal. our relationship with nature is one-way. to draw without return.
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xjustamem0ryx i agree.
its messy and "messed up" : )
its kind of a disregard or disrespect to ourselves and to (our) nature - i'm not sure if i make sense (in english and otherwise)
mahatmaBit 9 months ago
@mahatmaBit
@mahatmaBit
we should probably amend that to say: "mankind messes with itself; evolves with nature; WITH LITTLE OR NO REGARD TO NATURE HERSELF (unlike the rest of nature)"
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
I can just see kids playing in the future...
"F U JONNY, I'M GONNA HAVE MY DAD GET ME THE SUPERMAN GENES FOR XMAS!"
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
Not that im against what hes saying but isnt he just promising a cure all, you know dont like your body well we can splice your genes and make you an adonis.
cirv0 9 months ago
Yipee! We're creating the Supreme Race! Again. : / Well, it went so well the last time...
PoutyLoki1 9 months ago
@PoutyLoki1 This time we're doing it right, and it won't involve genocide!
:3
FutileFreak 7 months ago 8
@FutileFreak ... if it remains restricted to people actively choosing these genetic replacements. However, we are uncertain if you change say, 40 different genes to get all of the great results he mentioned, in combination they might produce horrible diseases.
imasciencegeek 4 weeks ago
It might be a caricature, but I think that it would be a good idea to watch the movie Gattaca after watching and considering this video.
mish1012 9 months ago
@mish1012 Gattaca is about eugenics. What he's talking about is genetic engineering. However they may lead to the same thing.
kokofan50 9 months ago
@kokofan50 actually this would solve the gattaca problem, because we could "cure" people with "bad" genes instead of discriminating against them. And BTW Eugenics is much worse than Gattaca.
ZialusPT 8 months ago
@ZialusPT The question is where do we draw the line for what's a "bad" genes, and yes, Gattaca is about eugenics.
kokofan50 8 months ago
@kokofan50 as far as I remember, eugenics is about eliminating people with "bad" genes and Gattaca was about discriminating against them. As I said, this(neo-evolution) would actually solve the Gattaca problem. But i'm not saying that that would necessarily be a good thing.
ZialusPT 8 months ago
@ZialusPT Eugenics is about removing un wanted genes from the gene pool. Discriminating against the people who have the unwanted genes is one way you do that. I'm not trying to say that the stuff in the video is all bad. I just think he gives good examples of the good things about it, but we just need to think about what could go wrong with it. When we think about that and try to make sure that doesn't happen. This is just so you know I'm not just seeing the bad in it.
kokofan50 8 months ago
@kokofan50 Again "But i'm not saying that that would necessarily be a good thing." I share the same fears as you. I can totally see this being used the wrong way. But anyway; the type of people that would use this wrongly, would most likely destroy the planet before we even get to the time when we can make neo-evolution happen. So we have other things to worry about.
ZialusPT 8 months ago
@kokofan50 We don't draw the line...the drawing of that line is personal and individual. Each person must decide for him or herself what is enough. Some may want to eliminate disease others may want to enhance. Freedom, liberty, and human freewill dictate how much we will or won't enhance our genetics. No one has a right to force anyone to enhance or to not enhance them selves or thier off spring.
DK0526 8 months ago
@DK0526 Your body, your choice!- but as for offspring, I think it will take a little while before that happens.
TehNewV 8 months ago
@TehNewV If your saying that people should think twice about the decisions they make for thier children ...I agree. However, today many people have children with no regard for thier circumstance, they care little about genetic disease, drug abuse, mental illness, and socio-economic circumstance...rather they just have sex and to hell with the consequences. It could hardly go worse then the present experiment. At least genetics can help try and screen out the pain & suffering that is rampant now.
DK0526 8 months ago
>>> and to some degree it is happening right now. Genetic testing helps to screen for downs syndrom, and other abnormalities. Micro-sort technology lets parents decide the sex of thier child with out need for abortion like in china. There will be much better sorting technology that will come close to the scenarios of Gataca. It needs to be managed but not shut down unless you want black market genetics to flourish because the market always wins when there is a supply to demand issue.
DK0526 8 months ago
those who think this man is evil are blinded by ignorance.
downwiththeman420 9 months ago
Coming to a Theater Near You: Dragonball Z, the Documentary.
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
Now I can become the superhero I've always wanted to be. HHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAHHHAHHAHAHAHA Super Saiyan achieved.
HybridD91 9 months ago
Transformers!
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
Is he promoting gm-people? Scary...
wateraarde 9 months ago
@wateraarde What's scary about it? I find it scary people would object to this. This can put an end to many diseases and truly make us 'equal', nature is cruel and unfair.
HybridD91 9 months ago
hell yes then we can finally have some IRL mortal kombat action.
xjustamem0ryx 10 months ago
well why the fuck cant i have all of them... I mean I want the beaty geene and the memory geene and all of them!!
anabolicErik 10 months ago
Next Gen Internet @ /watch?v=mnx-uUeHuqg
xjustamem0ryx 10 months ago
this idiot talks too much, id slap him in the face if i ran into him
zeshfashad 10 months ago
I think we are presently gathering the tools necessary to conquer outer space...even if we don't know it or believe in it yet. Inspiring talk, specially for all scientists out there. I love living in a discovery revolution era. Get inspired to learn more every day !
WorldCollections 10 months ago
THIS IS SO FREAKING AWESOME HARVEY FINEBERG HAS BEEN MY HERO FOR FOREVER AND NOW HE HAS HIS OWN BREAKTHROUGH VIDEOOO!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS IS D000P333!!!!!!!!!!
hardywienberg 10 months ago 2
After all this talk, I can't believe, people still don't believe someone, somewhere is creating "super-soldiers".
Yes, it's all hapening right now. But, a great problem I see, in society, is that this will create is even higher class separation. Those with money will have "best"-children than those wihtout.
Cuz, technology is great, but someone has got to pay for it.
leonidasx666 10 months ago
Found it!!!
DARPA project: “Metabolically Dominant Soldier”.
Google it.
leonidasx666 10 months ago
All very interesting but I smell a consensual eugenics indu$try forming to transform into "supermen" those that can afford it.
windshapedstone 10 months ago
All very interesting but I smell a consensual eugenics indu$try forming to transform into "supermen" those that can afford it.
windshapedstone 10 months ago
this is bullshit. good changes will be for rich elite and their children who will still spend their super health on consuming more drugs... for normal people medications for infertility will be administered
b4blue 10 months ago
you don't have to sell it like it's an evil plot. if the stuff will work, people will come to it naturally
Tolstoievsky 10 months ago
If the tech becomes feasible, then the subject matter of this talk is an inevitability.
To those rallying against it - banning such tech will only deny its access to the poor. If there is a significant benefit in accessing it, the rich will get it no matter what the law says.
SolRosenberg84 10 months ago
The use of the wrong caduceus pretty much represents my view on Neo-Evolution.
The Medical Caduceus, wich is the symbol of Hippocrates, patron of medicine, is a single snake coiling around a stick and secreting venom on a tiny plate on the top.
The caduceus in the video, the one with the two snakes coiling a winged stick, is the symbol of Hermes, god of Commerce.
Yet the video prefers to utilize Hermes' caduceus to promote Neo-Evolution.
Draw your own conclusions from these two facts.
JesusDeSaad 10 months ago
@JesusDeSaad
there are no more physicians, just businessmen with lab coats.
xjustamem0ryx 10 months ago
So... The super human is within reach...
BattlestarRhea 10 months ago
suddenly "sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their frickin' heads" doesn't seem so farfetched xD
xjustamem0ryx 10 months ago 2
So he wants to eliminate genetic diversity? Great idea!
charmander4533 10 months ago
@charmander4533 Genetic diversity will always exist, even if you are changing a few genes to emphasize certain characteristics because of processes like meiosis, chromosome cross over and the like. This is more of what could come of human evolution or what we are doing or will be doing to augment evolution on a human time scale.
iFlasH 10 months ago
What will become of the Democratic party??? They will be decimated by this!
DK0526 10 months ago
@DK0526 WTF? All politics will be obsolete by then. If we can survive that long.
ZialusPT 8 months ago
@ZialusPT learn to laugh a little.
DK0526 8 months ago
This guy's designer is amazing. What a stunningly eloquent speaker. Awesome talk as usual.
ADSwank 10 months ago
we are not from apes!
fyruz4 10 months ago
@fyruz4 facepalm
DarkWARior768 10 months ago
flood was here
MrCrackWeasel 10 months ago
The idea that we are going to have the technology to select this stuff is naive. Artificial selection of humans will create bad humans. Select for longevity and you get idiots who could live a long time, only they will cause their own unnatural death. Selecting for traits we want will always bring on traits we don't want. Need I point out the Russian foxes?
christo930 10 months ago
@christo930 - Very true, you do have a point, but we won't know till we try. Many people die from various diseases. Wouldn't you want there to be a cure cancer without shooting concentrated radiation on people? I'd take that risk. So what if we end up with 3 heads and no arms? It's a risk we must take, it's the risk that the first vaccine took, and now, we're protected against disease that wiped out populations in the past. (except for those who refuse to get them and caused their kids to die)
Altearithe 10 months ago
@Altearithe We could easily wipe out cancer and get a worse disease. In other words, we may pick genetics that are less susceptible to cancer and end up susceptible to some other disease. I suppose it's worth trying, but I don't think it will work the way we want it to. We could also end up with very poor genetic variability and have the entire population susceptible to the same virus, for example.
christo930 10 months ago
The first AWESOME TED talk in a while. This is what TED talks should be.
blurglide 10 months ago 3
Excellent ;)
But my money is on nano technology.
Genetics r too slow and still leave us very fragile against nature. let's go inorganic!
Borgs all the way ;) no more need for food or water, no more need for an organic body!
DurexDurpaneu2 10 months ago 9
@DurexDurpaneu2 why not have both? we could redefine the world organic, not in a borg way.
Ultra4 10 months ago
@DurexDurpaneu2 What if you used nanotechnology to restructure DNA in a way that you wanted? Hopefully without it hurting a whole lot.
Newenlightenmentnow 9 months ago
@DurexDurpaneu2 "your money is on nano tech."
patents, money, bla bla...
so much for real science and real development of technology. what matters is selling, right?
mahatmaBit 9 months ago
@DurexDurpaneu2 and no need of sex!!!
bestplugins 8 months ago
@DurexDurpaneu2 Either way will yield the same results! we will eventually be immortal, have awesome regeritive powers, be smart and have great memory, have Huge metal bricks/flame/bulletproof skin, Wings, Telepathy, Solar-Skin to make food if we so choose, carbon bones and shapeshifting to non-traditional forms within nanoseconds! Although I think computers are sweet, they will only lead the charge towards more secure and quicker bodies.
Oh, that also means furries IRL. Deal. with. it.
TehNewV 8 months ago
I feel this talk, while nice, didn't add anything to the average TED viewer. It'd be a good talk for those unaware of these subjects, the average person.
wecaan 10 months ago
WE"RE ALL FUCKING DOOMED. not because of anything in this video, but because this video only has 9,000 views in 3 days while ray william johnson's video's get like 5 million views a day, and they consist of cats flushing toilets and people falling into pools. No, it's not "are you ready for neo-evolution" it's "are you ready for Brawndo?, it's got what plants crave"
Raxarax 10 months ago 124
@Raxarax It's got electrolights.
NsaneNtheNbrane 10 months ago
@Raxarax Fucking love this. Very true. Most people don't give a shit about what's truly important. The majority of people are just lemmings who wander from distraction to distraction without taking a single moment to contemplate anything deeper than a fart joke.
shade1978x 10 months ago
@Raxarax
True. But come on, that guy is funny. :D
leonidasx666 10 months ago
@leonidasx666 RWJ isn't funny, anybody who think he's funny is probably a fan of dane cook.
AgrivatedKillah 10 months ago
@AgrivatedKillah I had to 'google' Dane Cook, cuz I didn't know who he was.
But after I found out who he was, I admit that I did saw one stand-up show of him on tv... and yes, I did found him very funny - Guilty!
leonidasx666 10 months ago
@Raxarax
dude.......whatever it is you're smoking, can i have some of it?
hardywienberg 10 months ago
@Raxarax TED needs to pay more money to get to the top.
studiousx3 10 months ago
@Raxarax I really do fear that movie is on point and the current path of our evolution, a world of jersey shore.
downwiththeman420 9 months ago
@Raxarax no....they the ordinairy people that are needed for diveristy are doomed..we the humans are doomed by birth..doomed to to die..nothing to do about it...but the human ras will became something els..but is it the human evolution or is it what we create....the human ras already has the power to create...
it wil create evolution in a rate faster then any of us can imagine today...but is this evolution or ceatism?
we create bots cyborgs that wil evolve...is this evolution or creatism?
opiated666 9 months ago
@opiated666
neither. it's engineering.
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
@xjustamem0ryx damn i forgot that one... tnx... but when people are starting to engineer life... is this evolution ?
opiated666 9 months ago
@opiated666
good question xD
if evolution is supposed to be the 'natural' progression/emergence of traits over time, then I suppose engineering life wouldn't quite make the cut--since it is artificial (the traits gained wouldn't necessarily otherwise emerge; though they might).
but if evolution is any kind of emergence of traits over time, then perhaps?
but which definition should it have!? xD
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
@xjustamem0ryx
but my guess is the traits wouldn't mostly emerge otherwise since what makes them coveted by humans is the fact of their rarity not already present in us xD
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
@opiated666
perhaps it depends on how one feels about: a giraffe vs. a lion with stilts.
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xjustamem0ryx
"a giraffe vs. a lion with stilts."
even though technology aids it in its pursuit to become a, or more like, a giraffe; it is still not a giraffe.
in which case, no matter how close it comes, is it ever possible to consider it finally having evolved to be a giraffe?
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
@xjustamem0ryx
though stilts are a rather brutish implementation of the idea, is genetics to be exempted from the example?
do genetic, invisible stilts count?
though, it's possible the limit of a function (in this case: how close our genetically modified traits approach some kind of evolution) is NOT the function evaluated at that point (actually evolved)...
is genetically modified traits continuous or discontinuous!?
xjustamem0ryx 9 months ago
@opiated666
Well it's still evolution, just not evolution by natural selection. It would be self-directed evolution.
sdrawkcabgnipytmi 9 months ago
@Raxarax Idiocracy has an accurate depiction of the future.
AmericanCritiquer 9 months ago
@Raxarax Why are you suprised? people in general are stupid, they want to be entertained not taught. Just look at the news, world events, leaders, and poloticians are more of an after thought (if not becoming an after thought) compared to celebrities.
cirv0 9 months ago
@Raxarax those 9k views (now 20k) may have more power to change the world than the millions combined who don't get interested into this short of things. So I worry not. Also, I do enjoy seeing cats flushing toilets from time to time.
MrTonyCL 9 months ago
@Raxarax
brawndo has electrolites!
5up3rm4nMy3r5 9 months ago
@Raxarax so true!
ZialusPT 8 months ago
He just repeated exactly what David Pearce has been saying for many years, albeit in less thought-provoking terms, and added nothing. Why doesn't TED just invite David Pearce? This guy Fineberg is eloquent and all but Peace is waaaaaayyyy more interesting.
teleomorph 10 months ago
31 creationists have switched off their hearing aids or plugged their ears aimed for the thumbs down and closed their eyes before scurrying back into the dark ages.
Sadochrist 10 months ago
gattaca!
dreaminginnoother 10 months ago
@dreaminginnoother
Good film, interesting food for thought, but it is NOT an obligatory path.
d3st88 10 months ago
this guy kicks ass
keggerous 10 months ago
Scenario: one group has their intelligence augmented for their kids. These kids have 1 or 2 kids. Another group doesn't spend that money of genetic wazzoos and gets lotto scratch offs instead. They bang out 4 kids and these non-augmented kids have 4 more kids. Result: Enjoy your idiocracy, bitches! Biology FTW! Hubris FAIL!
OgreMECH 10 months ago
Classic subject for people reading sci-fi etc..but still exciting to listen to..
TimmacTR 10 months ago
this reminds me of Gattaca, great movie btw
rice123rice123 10 months ago
I doubt we're ready as a whole, but the science definitely is.
I don't suppose there's anything bigger than neo-evolution to pose a challenge to the ol' "Can means should" ordeal?
xjustamem0ryx 10 months ago
@ConsumerOfNothing
who'd be the engineer?
xjustamem0ryx 10 months ago
Very nice talk, but I would have preferred that he spend time discussing the title of the video: Are we ready for neo-evolution!!??
StuartIsCheese 10 months ago
We should just get Einstein's DNA and make a clone so he can finish his life's work that he wasn't able to finish.
BeAsTm0aD 10 months ago
@BeAsTm0aD
Genes alone won't make an Einstein, you dummy. A person's mind is the product of nature and nurture - genes, environment, upbringing, infinite little things you wouldn't even dream of.
d3st88 10 months ago 3
Isn't "designer babies" an old ethics debate?
theseanze 10 months ago 2
This reminds me of Brave New World.
AAndrewTW 10 months ago
I believe this *is* a part of our evolution, whether it works or not, it's something that we as a species will explore, and who knows - it may lead to us being a stronger more successful as a species - but there will always be haters... until we breed them out, that is. ;)
kngus 10 months ago 3
i think manipulating genes to produce disease-resistant individuals is ethical but manipulating genes to create hyper-functional characteristics is unethical
johndoe77774444 10 months ago
@johndoe77774444 I think you should shut up! Who or what gives you the right to impose your views and restrict behavior. Do you believe man to be superior to nature?! WE ARE NATURE!
lordjavathe3rd 10 months ago
@johndoe77774444 Why? I would argue that the distinction you draw between disease resistance and hyper-functionality is arbitrary. You know what makes people way more functional? Being still alive.
What's unethical about taking an injection and gaining some extra IQ points, say? How is that any more unethical than giving a child a good environment and a good school with supportive parents and teachers? It's a hell of a lot cheaper, that's for sure.
Jotto999 10 months ago
@Jotto999 I guess what I really object to would be parents thumbing through a catalog and thinking "lets have one athletic kid and name him andrew and one musical kid and name her michelle" which would totally mess with expectations and limit individuals. As far as an injection that boosts IQ, i think it may suppress other functions that may be beneficial. Intelligence isnt so much of a linear concept as the IQ test would suggest, however I'm not completely against the idea.
johndoe77774444 10 months ago
@johndoe77774444 Well, you don't know how it works. Suppose it doesn't suppress anything else.
How about consenting adults doing this to themselves? Do you find that unethical?
I think not developing it would be unethical.
Jotto999 10 months ago
@johndoe77774444
Why is that?
How is disease resistance is not a "hyper-functional characteristic"?
Are you fine with dumb fucks flying planes into buildings? Smarter people = less religious fucktards, less Afghan "kill teams", LESS AFGHAN WARS, less Sarah Palins, etc.
This needs to be seriously thought over, not just discarded for no good reason.
d3st88 10 months ago
"I'm here for soupor sex."
Funny thing, I always thought waitresses said "Super Salad" when I was younger.
slaughtz 10 months ago
The problem is that the children wouldn't be the ones making the choice, but parents and societal fads.
celticphrog 10 months ago
@celticphrog Children don't make the choice now either. You think children are happy to be born with genetic diseases from their parents? I'm sure little Tommy is glad that he will have diabetes when he is older and would have chosen to have it if he was given the choice beforehand.
sexyloser 10 months ago 11
@sexyloser
There is little evil done, that is not done "for someone's greater good". I can't see this remaining solely the decision of the parents. Soon society will have its say. Diabetes will disappear along with other perhaps genetic disorders, then it will be genes that make people less "fit" for society, such as the ones that give certain people a predisposition for addictions, or taking risks, or rebelling against the norm. Then it will be people who aren't smart enough and so on.
celticphrog 10 months ago
@celticphrog
Then why don't we kill handicapped people now? you think that if people get smarter they will be more evil?
lubermanl 10 months ago
@lubermanl
It isn't about being smarter, but about taking the next step in ethical development to thinking about the community first instead of the individual or corporation. Right now the profit motive is enshrined in law in most of the world. That means that companies are required to seek profit regardless of the consequences. Think BP Oil. Can you imagine putting the kind of decisions we are talking about in those hands?
celticphrog 10 months ago