Mars rover searching for signs of life

Author and theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss, discusses what it would be like if we found life on another planet.

For more CNN videos, check out our YouTube channel at http://www.youtube.com/cnn

Or visit our site at http://www.cnn.com/

• Category

  News & Politics

[LightninLew]

Are you special? DNA, as well as all genetic science backs up evolution. It isn't some alternate theory that debunks it.

[smithyboy00]

Evolve into what? 1st-century biblical ignorance? I'd rather take my chances with reality

[Cristiano Ronaldo]

dear NASA if there is life on Mars please bring their women to earth, thank you.

[Demonic709]

eik tu durneli nesvaiges,pilna tokiu teoremom apsipilusiu puskvaisiu zemeje.... issimiegok ir nevartok tu narkotiku:)

[CheshireAndAliceee]

What pathetic argument spam and waste of comments.

Get off of here american christians. This video wasn't for you.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but evolution is fact.

[WarmWeatherGuy]

"If we find DNA based life on Mars it could just mean that its the only way life can happen..."

We would also need to determine the code that is used (which codon = which amino) and that would tell us if we are linked (i.e., if we're Martians).

You might be interested in The Teaching Company's DVD course "Origins of Life." Go to teach12. com

[purpleprinc3]

As I said previously, humans act altruistically. The concept of love in itself is evidence of this, or that some people risk life & limb in order to same some nearly extinct animal, not because out of some need for preservation, but because of a love of life & science. You keep using examples as have I, what that shows is that there are altruistic and selfish actions and species especially humans cannot be generalised one way or another. And love makes me feel warm! Much love, platonic kind..

[LightninLew]

What contradictory evidence? There is not a single species on the planet that acts altruistically towards another species for no benefit of it's own. It has nothing to do with parents, love or reciprocal altruism, such as that of ants & fungus. That is all for the good of their genes.

The kind of thing that would "annihilate" his theory would be if we found a species of mouse that fed its own food to chicks in a birds nest, or a bear that helps salmon on their way up the river.

[purpleprinc3]

No your are right, a mother and child are the same species, no need to point out the patently obvious and be patronising though. There are selfish examples of species, there are altruistic examples of species, however to categorize it as one way or another would be a disservice and ignoring the contradictory evidence at hand. Species are not wholly altruistic or selfish, however there are those who display only such characteristics, yet some show both. It is not so black and white as I said.

[LightninLew]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure a mother and child are always the same species. There is a clear benefit to behaving altruistically towards your own family, which is explained perfectly by natural selection.

[celtlen]

Is Dr. Krauss doing that interview in a bath robe? That's one relaxed scientist :D

[Ragu de Ferdi]

Genome sequencing has actually proved that Darwin's theory of evolution is in fact correct. The genome mapping shows exactly the same patterns to what paleontologists have mapped years ago. So no, your comment is baseless. Do some research before you make false claims. If evolution was to be proved wrong, it wouldn't be hushed up, it'd be pretty fucking big news. Unlike some people we welcome new ideas, but not the absurd bullshit.