How Did Life Begin?

[@HistoryoftheEarth]

Hello folks. Hope you enjoy it! Hopefully gonna have a video every weekend in July. Next weekend...LUCA.

[@klogjo]

I subscribed last week, really enjoy your work, thank you

[@bidishadey3815]

Great

[@r2out]

Great video! I really loved it. It gave me some powerful emotions of awe delight. I'm subscribing right now, and hoping to relive those same emotions in your next work. The fact that life exist at all, isn't it the most astounding thing ever? The fact that each one of us is alive, that I'm alive, fills me with the most awesome feeling. Thank you for making it possible👍💖

[@JakeBiddlecome]

I'm glad I found this channel. I watched the playlist earlier today then watched it all over again on the bigger screen. Astronomical/planetary education videos are had to get right and this was perfect. Can't wait to see what's next - thanks for the upload!

[@istvansipos9940]

keep 'em coming also, embrace for sh!tstorm under the upcoming LUCA video. may the holy ponytail of Artemis save our sanity in the comments :- )

[@dibsyD]

when i was a kid (maybe 7 or so) i remember my mum trying to explain to me that moths are made out of dust and if a place is dusty enough for long enough then the dust will just become moths. (im deliberately avoiding using words like spontaneous as they werent her words). And i remember sorta laughing a bit and saying "ok, but that cant be real though" and she looked at me with bemusement and i realised quickly that she truly believed this... it was quite a moment for me!... still makes me chuckle :)

[@rustythecrown9317]

So that makes moths creations of our waste.

[@dibsyD]

@@rustythecrown9317 it's pretty metal, that's for sure, lol. that whole emanation thing fascinates me though. that people thought life spontaneously arised from mice appearing next to sacks of wheat, or maggots/flies appearing next to rotting things... it's wild that that seemed like the explanation xD

[@andyturner87]

Sounds like she was taught that to get her to clean up and passed it on to you!

[@danchinoloves7804]

@@dibsyD she was right in a way no dust nothing for them to eat and reproduction. The cleaner the house less dust behind things the less moths have the ability to live

[@oldgreybeard2507]

As a science teacher, apart from the ubiquitous answer from year 7's to the question 'what are the elements?' answered with - Earth Air Fire and Water, the other issue was that kids were told by their grandparents that eating too much sugar gave then worms. Well meaning or illogical I know not but it came up time and time again. That said the ability of first year High School students to come into lessons with the wrong science and leave with the correct science AND the remnants of the wrong science was not uncommon.

[@samarkand1585]

1:25 with the subtitles on, 'life baguettes life' , now that was beautiful

[@wwoods66]

"eels servet newborn from nothing more than a wet *booze* and..."

[@elizabethshaw734]

Yes I noticed that! I don't know why but my closed captions are on and I can't shut them off on this video. BaHahaha! Dr. Elizabeth MD Ph.D Ph.D

[@Salamander1269]

" life begets life " , it has nothing to do with baguettes.🙈

[@samarkand1585]

@@Salamander1269 you're not particularly bright are you?

[@harrietharlow9929]

@@samarkand1585 I don't think he or she understands puns.

[@lise7538]

I study biology in France, it's my first year and we have a course called Apparition of Life. You described the first chapter almost word for word ! I couldn't be more thrilled, it's always a relief to have a bit of visual support when reading pages and pages of informations becomes disheartening. I can't wait to see more, thank you

[@glennsimonsen8421]

Au contraire, cette video est trop con. Je vous suggere de considerer Dr. James Tour.

[@ceaserusa4771]

Hey sorry to burst your bubble - but if you are looking for answers you have looked the wrong way my friend you say that you study biology - if so the very first law in science regarding biology and life - is that life can only come from life. Do not allow a - KZbin video - made by evolutionists lie to you and make believe that - billions of years ago - some lightning struck some pond scum - and suddenly life came about. That's not how things work - and that's not how science works either. You must get out into the real world and look around you ask yourself - did everything come about by accident and by chance? - - Or was there a designer or Creator - that had created everything that you see and know of

[@76rjackson]

Science and Faith? Might as well suggest studying science and Santa Claus. Lol. You are gonna get the kid kicked out of school. French science is very rigorous. Mythology is a completely different subject and they know better not to mix the 2 up over there.

[@melchiorlise2466]

​@@76rjacksonI don't understand how that relates to my comment...

[@76rjackson]

@@melchiorlise2466 reply was to the true believer pushing James Tour.

[@fahad56297]

"Every element is characterised by it's behaviour, it's affinity for others elements, and the energy needed to make or break connections." If that doesn't deserve a like, I don't know what does.

[@bobdobbs943]

life accidentally formed. the eye is a electric video camera. it formed by accident.

[@zaceishen7974]

@bob dobbs no it didn't. It was carefully crafted by God our savior the lord Jesus christ. all things were made by him and without him was not any thing made. Ye must be born again How To Go To Heaven According to the holy Word of God in the King James Bible! It is very simple to be saved and takes only a minute to explain. Please let me show you how to get to Heaven from the Bible, God's Word... Man is a Sinner in the Eyes of a Holy God. Isaiah 53:6, “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.”Romans 3:19, “Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.”John 3:3, “Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”Romans 3:10, “As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one.”Romans 3:23, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” There is a Price For Our Sin―Burning in Hell Forever. Romans 6:23, “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”Romans 5:12, “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”2nd Thessalonians 1:8, “In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.”Revelation 20:15, "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.”Revelation 21:8, “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” Jesus paid that price by dying on the cross and shedding His blood; Christ was buried and bodily rose again the third day! Romans 5:8, “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”1st Timothy 1:15, “This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.”1st Peter 1:18-19, “Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ...”1st Corinthians 15:1-4, “Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures.” This is the Gospel. By faith in Jesus Christ ALONE we are immediately saved.Galatians 3:26, “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.”John 11:25, “Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live.”John 6:28-29, “Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.”Ephesians 2:8-9, “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”John 14:6, “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”John 6:40, “And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.”Mark 1:15, “And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.”Acts 26:18, “To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.”Romans 10:13, “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”1st Corinthians 3:11, "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”Galatians 3:26, “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.” Salvation is NOT found in a religion or good works, but in a Person... The LORD JESUS CHRIST! Simply BELIEVE the Gospel and You Are Saved!

[@zose6289]

@@bobdobbs943 It is not just life that is accidentally formed, recently there was a storm near my place, it went through a pile of electrical waste and rubbish, and to my surprise when the storm stopped I saw that it formed from these materials a new sony tv

[@dynamicworlds1]

@@zaceishen7974 if our eye was designed by a god, that god is either sadistic or stupid.

[@davidthomas9190]

​@zaceishen7974 A million candles burning for the help that never came.

[@SerpentintheSun]

Such beautiful prose and he makes it so much easier to understand complex ideas. I cannot get enough of this channel. I feel like a child exploring the world for the 1st time again.

[@michaelpetersen3843]

This is extremely well produced, researched and narrated. The Channel is a hidden gem of the internet!

[@moose6459]

@@bigboreracing356 humans evolved to be cancer

[@epicgamer5054]

Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down

[@donuts3476]

@@epicgamer5054 and desert you~

[@hakonberg8003]

I disagree, the narration is painfully sloooow... I feel like I am wasting my time

[@legendofman12]

@@hakonberg80032x speed

[@kimberlyperrotis8962]

As an older geologist, I’m out of date, my generation of geology students (early 1980s) learned that 92 elements occurred naturally on earth, not 94. Your videos are excellent, thank you!

[@Rubashow]

What are the two elements that aren't counted anymore?

[@vacuumcleaner5208]

@@Rubashow this person said they were out of date on the time they learned that there was less naturally occurring elements not more. So the question I would be asking is what are those two elements that have been added recently?

[@vacuumcleaner5208]

Also this is something we can both search up if we’re curious enough, which I’m not currently.

[@Rubashow]

@@vacuumcleaner5208 yeah I misread her statement. looking it up showed me that 98 elements have been shown to occur naturally l.

[@chriswarburtonbrown1566]

Not sure what you mean, as the last element that exists in natural form on Earth was discovered in 1941, plutonium. All subsequent elements discovered only exist in lab conditions or nuclear explosions.

[@lamegoldfish6736]

It is nice to see Carbon gets along with everyone.

[@jamesmiller7457]

@@lamegoldfish6736 especially plants 🪴 😍 😆

[@meowunicorn7658]

Why did I laugh at this? Way to amused by this comment.

[@alexhatfield2987]

This is extraordinarily well researched, presented, scripted and narrated.

[@silic8873]

oh

[@oznews1]

That’s a flattering opinion.

[@tarstarkusz]

No it's not. It's "well, it could have happened this way and therefore it DID happen this way" It's speculation dressed up in the skinsuit of "science" It is speculation on top of speculation. We have no example of anything but modern cells which have nearly 4 billion years behind them. We don't know what kind of soup was flowing around the earth! It could have been Campbell's cream of mushroom or it could have been Chunky Style. Who knows. So many soups and we don't even have the empty can to test. We don't even have any of the dirty dinner plates (rocks) from the era. We will never know what happened with any certainty. We will and already know some that didn't, but we do not know what did.

[@phillipmiddleton9335]

@@tarstarkusz Wrong! DNA and RNA studies allow scientists to "look" back in time and accurately confirm the beginnings of life on Earth. This is not guesswork or conjecture it is proven scientific fact.

[@tarstarkusz]

@@phillipmiddleton9335 What does a modern cell tell you about the old cell? Nothing. I assume you are not making the very ridiculous argument that modern cells with BILLIONS of years of evolution are just like 2 or 3 plus billion year old cells? We have no Deoxyribonucleic acid or Ribonucleic acid (I cannot post the abbreviation or it autodeletes) from billions of years ago. We most certainly do not even know for certain that life originated on Earth. This series even explicitly says so. So argue with him about it. We have very little rock of this age and what little we have are from a single small area.

[@Musketeer009]

Note that many of the cells shown in this interesting video, are Eukaryotes which developed from Prokaryotes. Prokaryotes (the Archaea and Bacteria) have no internal membranes to seperate cell chemistry (such as a Nucleus, Mitochondria and Chloroplasts etc.) but do have the outer cell membrane made of fatty acids. Two or more Prokaryotes got together (accidentally) and ended up making a viable symbiont called the Eukaryotic Cell, from which we all developed. This all took a long long time.

[@lilianflower3017]

Why? Though... so every life wants to evolve What caused this ambition

[@mstalcup]

@@lilianflower3017 There isn't a desire to evolve involved in the process of evolution at all. More combinations of bionts have failed than have succeeded. In fact, it took so long for incremental changes involving chance encounters of bionts for evolution to progress in complexity that for the first 80% of the history of life on Earth, the only living things were single-celled. Sexual reproduction significantly accelerated the diversification of life because it introduced greater variety in the way genetic material was recombined. This has a lot to do with the diversification events of the late Ediacaran and Cambrian.

[@Brakvash]

@@lilianflower3017 I think you mistake evolution "ambition" for survival instinct.

[@juniorloaf12]

It was this combination that I think is a major hurdle for complex life in the galaxy

[@donaldmacdonald9940]

Susan W Uehara ...Good question. 😊..🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿....see video 1hr 50mins ..not “evolutionist”....kzbin.info/www/bejne/eavcgpWFhpWXrJI

[@octoberrust987]

I watched many videos on this subject and by far this one is the most easily understood, Good job very well done

[@robertsmith3672]

Does this mean god didn't do the bizzo in seven days .

[@danminer5343]

This video was too simplistic. It ignored all details required for the reactions needed to occur which he falsely imagined could occur. When going into detail experiments have proven that never could a building block for life nor a building block required to build those building blocks could be formed by naturalism without a Creator. Neither can any chemist today in a million dollar modern lab be able to create an amino acid, protein, sugar, RNA or DNA required for life by using molecules that did not come from already existing life.

[@eduardogardin879]

@@robertsmith3672 It’s only a theory since it can’t be duplicated in a lab. Besides scripture is a poetic explanation for those who had no concept of billions of years or chemistry

[@junodonatus4906]

​@@eduardogardin879 "Only a theory" Look up scientific theory. 🙄

[@martinchitembo1883]

​@@junodonatus4906it is a theory because it as main unanswerable aspect of this abiogenesis.

[@tj4312]

Thanks

[@nyx626]

I feel like the production on these videos is on par with some BBC/NatGeo/Discovery shows!! Love it!! I'd been looking for a channel that details this stuff and KZbin recommended this video. I can't wait for the rest of the series!!

[@oxcart4172]

I was just about to just that!

[@harrietharlow9929]

@@oxcart4172 The production is wonderful on theses videos. I love this channel and eagerly await each new video.

[@oxcart4172]

@@harrietharlow9929 theyre beautiful! (And I'm about 25 miles from Harlow!)

[@ziomudru]

This is way better than big media productions

[@Supeer76e]

I just found this channel a few days ago but from all that I've seen on KZbin this is the most comprehensive and involving channel about earth's history. Very well done! I wish you many subscribers and a good fortune!

[@jakev8510]

This is by far one of the best shows I have ever seen, even better than a lot of big budget documentaries. Thank you for this.

[@KC-rd3gw]

The writing on this channel is leagues ahead of 99% of big TV documentaries. Awesome content!

[@noscompusarme]

Awesome production! As someone working full-time on emergence of life research it's great to see there's loads of interest on the topic!! Huge thanks

[@debbiehenri7170]

Really nicely-paced narration, wonderfully clear - perfect for those of us with hearing problems :D Lovely graphics too. Thanks for this!

[@Mr.Nichan]

It doesn't have to have happened only once. Perhaps it can still happen, just not often enough for any abiogenesis to ever have been observed by humans, and abiogenic life forms are always outcompeted by prexisting ones.

[@Musabre]

This is a thought that i've had in the past on this myself. The precise combination of events that may have led to the spark of abiogenesis that eventually leads to us, may have happened once or more since, but as you say, been outcompeted by more developed creatures already here. Sobering thought if it's ever proven.

[@Mr.Nichan]

@@bigboreracing356 Is this a response to my comment? If you read it carefully, you'll see I basically already said this.

[@Mr.Nichan]

@@bigboreracing356 The thing is, it doesn't prove very much that we've never observed abiogenesis, because the amount of observation we've done covers a much tinier range of space and time than there would be on Early Earth, or has been since on Earth, for it to happen in. Concluding it probably couldn't have happened because we've never observed it would be like looking around your room, not seeing any kangaroo rats, and then concluding that kangaroo rats therefore probably don't exist. There's such a larger space on Earth for them to exist in. There are both very common and extremely rare organisms that exist on Earth, but would not be seen by you looking around your room. This certainly isn't evidence FOR abiogenesis, but my point is that you're first reply was almost completely irrelevent. Your second reply was slightly more relevant because it labelled most of my original comment as "BS", which is at least new information (in the form of giving your opinion and highlighting that my comment just talks about what's possible and not anything there's any evidence for).

[@Mr.Nichan]

@@bigboreracing356 Why? I can see directions you might be getting this from, but I don't know which you are getting it from.

[@Mr.Nichan]

@@bigboreracing356 I wouldn't say that, no, but the answer to such a question really depends on how you define a living organism, and I think a lot of the common definitions of "life" have problems. Earth is complicated and energy goes in and out (like with most objects) and you could say it responds to it's environment (again like most objects), though it doesn't reproduce, unless creating totally different life forms counts or if human's etc. going out and terraforming other planets in the future counts. It doesn't pass the parts of definitions based explicitly on Earthly biology, like having cells, unless this "Earth" organism you're proposing is actually the Earth's biosphere treated as a single organism and the rest of the Earth is the "dead" parts, like hair, skin, bone minerals, and extracellular matrix and fluid for humans.

[@paulmoffat9306]

I have watched quite a few presentations delving into how life got started, and one thing that I have noticed, is that (so far) nobody has remarked on the primordial Earth's abundance of radioactive elements. Almost all of the radioactive 'light' elements have decayed, but some like Uranium, have half-lives long enough to persist until today. Billions of years ago, U235 could have been as abundant as 8% or higher. Perhaps this source of energy that was ever present on the planet, provided the initial 'spark' to start things going.

[@jerrypolverino6025]

I always thought the same thing. Hey, we are not alone. lol

[@tamircohen1512]

Can you elaborate on how energy from radioactive decay would be any more likely to create life than thermal or kinetic energy?

[@musicobsessive123]

​@@simonebest6013 or the first life form could have been mutagenic, like cancer? not a scientist so i dont know, its like thinking about silicon-based alien life forms- interesting to think about but no one has a way to know yet

[@omniXenderman]

​@@tamircohen1512there are fungi that can extract energy from alpha particles, I could see radiation being a viable source of energy

[@mariusmelerski5136]

@@simonebest6013 while tardigrades can endure many specific situations like radiation dehydration and so on they're far from indestructable. They have a large variety of predators like snails, nematodes, insects or spiders

[@it5942]

Your videos prove that good intention and passion will drive progress, rather than money and profit.

[@A-FELIX]

I have to admit, I fell asleep watching your first video, but i think that was most likely due to the calming voice of the narrator and the late hour. Luckily, i gave it another shot and now I'm hooked.

[@vals4207]

That sounds like an insult.

[@valoriel4464]

It feels like ASMR to me too. Drink coffee for daytime viewing. So interesting and relaxing at the same time. Thanks, love your channel

[@iz6566]

You should try Journey to the Microcosmos for falling asleep! It’s mesmerizing and at the same time, just like a lullaby 👍🏼

[@PresidentFlip]

I was trying to sleep with back muscle spasms and this guy’s videos helped me ease up

[@PeliSotilas]

Yeah, no offense, but his voice is so soothing that it makes me quite sleepy. Kind of like Bob Ross.

[@jonnylumberjack6223]

Bloody hell though peeps! This was GREAT. You made it understandable, RNA and fatty acids, got it! This is fast becoming my favourite channel. So looking forward to the rest of the series. Well done.

[@danminer5343]

The story of evolutionism is a most silly and ridiculous story. It is really amazing and is the opposite of science.

[@yumyum723]

@@danminer5343 and creationism isn't? At least scientific research has provided a good amount of evidence to support evolution while after generation after generation there is still ZERO evidence for god. Call it silly when you can disprove existing scientific discoveries or refuse and prove your an idiot not to ve listened to, I mean if your so sure then why are you even watching this?

[@danminer5343]

@@yumyum723 = You are amusing. It is amazing that people such as you will believe anything without using your mind. Pagans have been searching for a reason to believe in the fairy tale of Evolution since Axiamander wrote about it in 460 b.c. but NEVER has anybody yet found any science to support it. However there will always be fools to try to beieve that everything and everybody created themself t\o avoid the reality of our God creating us. Since I have researched this for decades and read hundreds of scientific journals, books, etc. on this subject I am able to show the fraud and/or deception in every statement ever made that fools have used to promote their foolish story. I accept science and reality which is why I cannot believe that crazy story.

[@danminer5343]

@@yumyum723 -You search for evidence for God like a criminal would search for a policeman. The evidence for God is extremely overwhelming.l Every plant, tree, sea creature, bird and animal designed and built in perfection. God gave us a perfect historical record of our ancient history that has been prove true with hundreds of prophecies with no failure which you completely ignore. Evolutionism, however has made hundreds of predictions with 100% failure. Scientists can show the fraud and/or deception in every statement ever used to promote the story of evolutionism. No book in the world contains an explanation chemically as to how evolution could be possible. The word "Evolution" is used only as an idol of a false 'god' for pagans worship. This is why scientists today are rejection the unscientific nonsense of evolutionism as it is nothing except quackery for pagans who want to sin and to be greedy. You have shown what kind of a person that you truly are and should be ashamed.

[@mickeyb492]

This channel is incredible. It covers Biology, Geology, Cosmology and many others! You guys are amazing!!

[@francus7227]

But it doesn't touch the title. Life's origin. At 20:30 .... "Life from nothing." So we're still where Aristotle was. We know a LOT more about life. But, NOT it's origin.

[@MrBucidart]

Leila, Outstanding work as always .... Thank you and the crew for the most informable series on the tube.

[@TheGreenStone1988]

This channel is criminally under viewed and subscribed.. Excellent video!

[@logik100.0]

Seriously, this is one of the most interesting series I have seen. Thanks to everyone who worked on it.

[@TheElwapo666]

By the way, this beautiful content has saved my life. To know life and the universe are linked has given me peace. Thank you so much !

[@mdivmapperandgamer1138]

What cosmic coincidence it is that I chose to rewatch the previous videos on this channel today, only to then see another video come out mere hours later

[@quintonreismann8278]

A nice introduction. I would have liked to see a bit more work on crystals- how crystallisation spontaneously creates order from disorder, leading to Erwin Schroedinger's idea of the "asymmetric crystal", and finally the self reproducing asymmetric crystal. Life in essence is a peculiar thermodynamic process, that is closely related to crystallisation- molecules that move about randomly, but with a high probability of locking in to particular positions.

[@alexanderplatypus3664]

Yeah. This is a rather weak video to be honest, it kinda just says "DNA is complex, how did it start? Now look over here at RNA and fatty acids, we're done". Not an an amazingly step by step explanation... and I agree with your point of view the *chemistry* is the key to it.

[@LordFirthunands]

Y siguiendo esto (lo siento, sé leer inglés pero todavía no soy bueno escribiéndolo), hay que decir que hay una hipótesis que dice que la formación de diferentes cristales con diferentes formas pudieron catalizar de manera diferente los diversos procesos químicos que llevaron a la complejización de las moléculas orgánicas. Siendo así una manera más en que la química inorgánica tuvo un papel crucial en el surgimiento de la vida y su posterior evolución.

[@allanwrobel6607]

But Crystals hold very little information, the spontaneous local reversion of Entropy has to create enough information to create a structure that holds information, a structure that reads that information and structure that acts on that information to reproduce, plus some form of sack to hold the various structures together to stop the disparate components dissipating in the holding medium. I think that's orders of magnitude more information than is needed to create crystals.

[@VeganLinked]

Wow this so eloquently pulls everything I've been learning and wondering about together. I love the writing and the narrator's voice is perfect. Great work and thank you for doing this! ❤

[@petloh1882]

I remember when this channel had just 13.1k subs - I came here from the main channel a year ago. What a beautiful channel.

[@francissantos7448]

Thanks for the info. Excellent intro into abiogenesis. Lots of brainstorming and experimentation left yet.

[@NintendoTransformer]

My ass would've stayed in the primordial soup if I knew there was gonna be days like this.

[@RealmsSMPStudios]

Technically you wouldn’t have the sentience or self awareness to have stayed in the chemical soup our family was born in, but I understand you man, TODAY ITS NO LONGER WORTH IT…

[@jacobburr3570]

This was so beautiful. Really makes me grateful just to be alive, I love you all ❤️

[@jodiegreen7980]

Beautiful science writing, thank you Leila Battison, David and Peter Kelly, and Khail Kupsky.

[@harperwelch5147]

This series is the best one to emerge in our time. It is very well written and visualized. The narration is exceptionally well done. Flawless editing to keep it brief and understandable. As a former teacher this is excellent learning material to be sharing with students. I recommend it highly. Oh, and it’s also great entertainment. Compelling storytelling

[@jimmccallum2308]

Hi Harper Welch. Actually, "This series is just BS." No one - not even those who claim to be a genius - has ever been able to prove this BS to be true. This is just Atheist propaganda. Jim. :-)

[@harperwelch5147]

@@jimmccallum2308 Wow. Glad I don't know you or other people who think science is a bad word.

[@jimmccallum2308]

@@harperwelch5147 Hiya Harper Welch. You have picked me up wrong. I'm a scientist by nature and by education, and the most fundamental law of science states the following: "Matter and energy CANNOT be created or destroyed but only changed from one form to another." Not one single experiment of the many thousands conducted over centuries of time has ever contradicted this fundamental law of science. The problem for those Atheists masquerading as 'scientists' is that their whole belief system is based on the claim that the universe created itself from a nothing. However, that most fundamental law of science I've quoted proves they are 100% wrong. In other words, the doctrine they are preaching is total BS (if you believe in science, that is). Nothing comes from nothing. If you start with a nothing, then a nothing is what you will end up with. This is simple science. Any belief system that does not believe this scientific law is BS. Do you personally dispute the most fundamental law of science? Do you actually believe the universe created itself from a nothing, and for no reason or purpose? Do you actually believe all life is descended from rocks dissolved in water with a few gases thrown into the mix, and with a few lightning bolts and some UV rays added to provide the energy for inanimate material to suddenly become alive? If you do believe these things, then you are a true Atheist/Scientist. But I would say you must have a phenomenal amount of faith to believe such BS. That fundamental law of science I have quoted proves that the materials, the energy, the space, and the time, that make up our universe must have always existed in some form or other. Any other suggestion inevitably contradicts the fundamental law that matter and energy CANNOT be created or destroyed but only changed from one form to another. 'Atheism' is just another form of 'Creationism', because both of these belief systems are unscientific. Atheists and Creationists are just two faces of the same BS that the universe was created from a nothing. For any belief system to have credibility it must acknowledge the fundamental laws of science that are proven to be true beyond all doubt. In other words: "In the beginning there was a 'something', and that same 'something' has now become the universe we see around ourselves today." Any other belief system has to be BS. I hope you have a better understanding of the position I'm coming from. Jim. :-)

[@sevenlineitapinfo2944]

@@jimmccallum2308 "Atheists and Creationists are just two faces of the same" Question, in your saying 'Atheists and Creationists' should I conclude that you are referring to life coming about only by an Intelligent mind (person) or unintelligent random force (evolution)? if not, then what is that third option that you think cause life to come about as we know it?

[@jimmccallum2308]

@@sevenlineitapinfo2944 Hiya SevenLine iTapinfo. Do you have an understanding of 'The Big Bang Theory?' If so, do you believe 'The Big Bang' came from a 'Nothing?' Or do you believe it must have come from a "Something' that already existed? Jim. :-)

[@BytebroUK]

Nicely done, and an interesting vid. Look forward to the proposed follow-ups :)

[@AddictsoftheImmediate]

What a wonderful, well informative video! Easy to understand and full of info in just 20 short minutes. Thank you so much!

[@victorcontreras9138]

I just had to watch this presentation again. It's so interesting and I needed to remember more facts. I'll probably watch it again soon!

[@brookegalyon5022]

love love love this channel! super well researched and narrated. one of my favorites!

[@goldenrepublic6848]

This channel deserves more subs

[@theobserver9131]

Already one thumbs down? Some people can't be pleased. I like this!

[@klogjo]

must be a liberal democrat, they hate everything.

[@comrade_commissar3794]

Gary O Lmao

[@tammcd]

Those who base their entire lives on belief in a non-existent control-freak are easily frightened by reality.

[@deborahromilly6238]

They are trolls.

[@klogjo]

@@tammcd and then there are those who reality smacks in the face

[@nop_nop_nop_nop_nop]

oh man, I just learned you have a channel other than History of the Universe!!!! I'm so stoked to have more of your content now that I've caught up on all of the History of the Universe episodes!

[@wolfpackastrobiology3690]

A few things: 1. The more we study pre-biotic chemistry the more the importance of wet-dry, hot-cold & acidic alkaline cycles as driving forces is elucidated which makes a terrestrial serpentinizing hydrothermal pool (versus a hydrothermal vent) a far more likely candidate for the origin of life. 2. RNA world implies that the metabolism of the first life was catalyzed by ribozymes and while the first life likely had some catalytic RNA sequences, quite a few metabolic reactions were probably catalysed by inorganic minerals.

[@harrietharlow9929]

I love your videos. Early Earth and the beginning of life are two of my interests. You've made some very-high quality videos, and the narration is wonderful. Keep up the good work!

[@psrivastav]

Incredible quality documentry om such a complex subject . Explained in a a simple manner

[@ExodusM30]

This series is absolutely incredible thank u for making these

[@RyantheComm]

There's new research that posits life starting out in wet and dry cycles. --Instead of the ocean. While water is certainly necessary for today's life, it's also hard to make new life with water diluting the inner machinery. These wet and dry cycles would allow lipids (fatty acids) to wash over organic compounds and capture them when it gets wet, and break apart when it's dry. --Only for them to wash over again when the time comes. This cycle would've probably encouraged some of the first prelude machinery to develop: Molecules that spontaneously replicate after breaking apart (like prions), then developing the coding to split while still inside lipids, intake organic compounds, etc. This would mean that pre life "cells" probably worked together and shared their inner mechanisms, because they had no choice. The best and strongest pre life machinery in the puddle would take over. It was only after the first cells were able to replicate and keep their cell walls intact that I think they started flourishing in the ocean, where there would be lots of room to grow and diversify from itself better. It's a process that probably took billions of years to develop. The key is consistency, and I think having wet and dry cycles is the answer to how pre life got its sea legs.

[@Gelatinocyte2]

Prions are not self-replicating molecules, they're a class of proteins that refold other proteins of similar class/sequence into its likeness. They're named after the Prion protein, which are found normally in mammalian nerve cell membranes.

[@theflyingfool]

I'm loving this series! I want to be able to show it to my young grandchildren when they are a bit older :D

[@jimmccallum2308]

Hi Steve Roberts. Did you know that the most recent design of Robots are the ones designing the next, and the next, Robots? Welcome to the future. Jim. :-).

[@theflyingfool]

@@jimmccallum2308 but not as "we" know it! I didn't know that , thanks Jim :)

[@jimmccallum2308]

@@theflyingfool Hi Steve Roberts. You should let your grandchildren decide for themselves what they choose to research and believe. This particular propaganda might appeal to you personally, but you shouldn't plan to impose it on your grandchildren. I say it is verbal garbage; as untrue as you can get. Do you want your grandchildren to be aware of my opinion? Or the opinions of others? Or only of your opinions? Jim. :-)

[@theflyingfool]

@@jimmccallum2308 not sure why you class this as propaganda. I see no reason to move away from a reasonable science based point of view. The truth is we'll never know for sure exactly how life began on this planet, so this is based on our best scientific assessments of what might have happened, mixed with some guesswork. Do you have a better idea?

[@jimmccallum2308]

@@theflyingfool Hi Steve Roberts. This BS is the propaganda of Atheists-claiming-to-be Scientists because they have a BSc in a science subject. The most fundamental law of science says the following: "Matter and energy CANNOT be created or destroyed but only changed from one form to another." Countless thousands of experiments conducted over centuries of time have never once proved this fundamental law to be false. In other words, if you begin with a nothing then science says you will end up with a nothing. Science and common sense say this fundamental law is True. Therefore, it is a certainty that the raw material or raw phenomena of which the universe is made must have always existed. Not always in it's present form, but it must have always existed. Otherwise, that most fundamental of all scientific laws must be wrong. And yet, not one single experiment out of the many thousands that have been conducted has so far suggested this fundamental law is wrong. The odds against the universe creating itself from a nothing are so astronomical as to be incomprehensible. And the odds against life creating itself from non-life are even more astronomical. So astronomical, in fact, as to be absolutely impossible. We are in the age dominated by Atheists. And these Atheists would have us believe that the universe created itself from a nothing; and that all life forms are descended from rocks dissolved in water with a few gasses thrown into the mix, and some lightning bolts and UV rays from the sun to provide some energy, and that this set of circumstances turned non-life into life. This is their claim, but presented as scientific fact. I say it is BS. Atheist propaganda with absolutely no basis in science. The people promoting this BS are flashing their diplomas and their other qualifications in an attempt to persuade us all to believe in their religion. It requires an awesome amount of faith to believe this pseudo-science. It requires a conviction that is the equivalent of religion. In fact, it requires an amount of faith that is beyond normal belief; it requires brainwashing. Those that are brainwashed are normally complicit in the procedure. Jim. :-)

[@kimpraschma8371]

Absolutely beautiful, informative and with a wonderful narrator.

[@cabbagehead8]

As usual great narration and artwork!

[@sosmooth13]

It’s crazy that people for damn near 2,000 years just thought life materialized from nothing. I’m so happy to be watching these science videos lately. As someone that grew up with a super religious family, these videos give me an existential crisis at times, but it helps me cope with the understanding that maybe not everything I was taught isn’t so and that’s okay.

[@ESL-O.G.]

It's even crazier that millions of people right now believe that everything is here because God put it there and there ain't no evolution, yeehaw

[@AG-vb6vv]

If anything, these videos should increased your faith. Shows how we basically know nothing about how life was created, let alone evolved. Lends credence to the idea that there is a creator, a guiding force in the universe.

[@DarthVaderfr]

​@@AG-vb6vv except although... It doesn't This shouldn't give you clue about neither of both, at very maximum gives you clues of how life can evolve without a creator, and we kinda know a lot about evolution, not everything obviously, but hte fact of been clueless for thousands of years is also been slowed down by religious dogma, so how do you come up with the conclusion that there must be a creator given that we are actually learning and finding clues of how life can emerge spontaneously which the entire point of this video This is utterly made up by you

[@pedrovargas2181]

From their conditions and perspective, it was the logical thing to think. There was no microscopes nor lore about microbes back then, and most still have a hard time taking the concept seriously without proof.

[@pedrovargas2181]

@@DarthVaderfr Science: our study on how God made the material world we live in. There, "science vs religion debate" solved. Welcome.

[@thelaughinghyenas8465]

Great stuff! I really look forward to this!

[@serenity8910]

I'm so glad I discovered this channel. I'm currently watching all of them back to back. Thank you for making incredible science content. The cell is truly the most fascinating thing to ever exist. When I learned about it at school, biology quickly became my favorite subject and eventually followed that path for my career too.

[@YourAverageHikikomori]

Oh shit, never knew you have a second channel. Great stuff. Love your voice dude.

[@HistoryoftheEarth]

Welcome!

[@howtodoit4204]

Your profile is one hella of a motivation 🥺

[@salwaabusaad9819]

@@howtodoit4204 عربي?

[@luvr381]

I never cared for the idea of panspermia. That just pushes the origin of life back a step without answering the origin question.

[@PeloquinDavid]

The possibility (not the relative likelihood) of panspermia is what must make us acknowledge that we may never be able to demonstrate that the earth does (or ever did) have the conditions that gave rise to the existing form of life that permeates the planet. That said, my own hunch (it can be no more than that, though others may be more knowledgeable and have greater justification for their beliefs than I do) is that our form of life did indeed originate on this particular damp rock. Even if this hypothesis were demonstrably true (i.e. it could be elevated to the status of a "fact") that would give us relatively little information about the likelihood of some form of life arising in identical or similar or very different conditions elsewhere. We simply need a larger sample size. That is why we humans are so interested in speculating about and looking for evidence of the existence (and possibly independent emergence) of some form of life elsewhere. It's only by getting a better sense of this likelihood that we can arrive at any sort of informed view of how isolated we may actually be in the cosmos.

[@gillianlovell9578]

@Tim Webb You yourself arose from "some random mechanism". If your mother hadn't slept with your father within the space of a few days, you would not exist. None of us, or indeed any living organism, is predestined by "God" to be here. What IS sad is you posting in the comments section of this excellent channel telling us that we are "lost" if we don't share your opinion - and that's all it is: an opinion. Never presume that we are all atheists either.

[@Jebe_Noyon]

@@gillianlovell9578 why do you care what he says? unless it bothers you that he might just be right.

[@masonmunkey6136]

@@Jebe_Noyon You could apply the same stupid logic to your own comment. Why do you care what @Gillian Lovell says

[@WildsDreams45]

BAAAM! AND IN AN INSTANT LIFE WAS CREATED! by a meteor sperm.

[@HairBallaz]

This is beautifully narrated. Leila Battison, you have done such an amazing job

[@jeanniecatton9168]

I love this channel! Vet tech student here. After studying biology, I knew about fatty acids creating cell walls, but did not understand WHY that would happen eons ago. Thank you, thank you, for teaching this subject in such a clear and elegant way. All your videos are just excellent!

[@justanumber427]

Excellent vid! Love your delivery and visuals. Great job!

[@robthatsme9831]

Beautifully directed. You belong in Hollywood. Top score 5/5 👍👍👍👍👍

[@codeblue4]

This was really, really well done!

[@markwitt7983]

One of my favorite videos of all time! Thank you for that.

[@l1ghtd3m0n3]

You know a channel is gold when most of the comments aren’t on the content itself but how it’s presented.

[@glennsimonsen8421]

Ironic! There's nothing new in the content whatsoever. This is all rehashed "info" from decades past. But sure, the presentation is smooth. In short, no one has the slightest clue how life began.

[@l1ghtd3m0n3]

@@glennsimonsen8421 Isn't that...the point of a science documentary? To make scientific information more palatable to a general audience?

[@harishvyas107]

Great video again love watching. Looking forward to next one Keep up the good work . Love it Bye

[@harishvyas107]

Thank You 🙏🙏

[@estonianpresident6618]

0:10 Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more

[@mathiastwp]

Baby hurt me, please hurt me, some more

[@chrisisfubar]

😂

[@JavierBonillaC]

What an extraordinary documentary. Truly astounding. I love the narrator, the images, and CGI's, but the quality of the content is just amazing.

[@kadnan6111]

channel needs more subs and views amazing content

[@A-FELIX]

I just watched all your videos. You guys rock!

[@yankeetimeline]

Excellent program! Can't wait to see the next episode.

[@harryhill5999]

This is a great presentation, Thank you very much. It is concise, clear, and follows a logical progression. Which brings me to the one issue I have with it. At Minute 20.30 and thereabouts, "Just this one time, Life arose spontaneously." It was not spontaneous. You have just spent the whole video explaining a logical sequence of events that lead up to the molecules that satisfy the two criteria for the definition of life. It was not a spontaneous event, it was just one more step in a progressive sequence dictated by the nature of the bonding of atoms into molecules , and molecules into more complex conglomerations. I believe it is inevitable that an RNA molecule will eventually produce copies of itself and for the process to become sustainable. The molecules that make up the RNA molecule can ONLY bond with certain other atoms that match their bond. At first this might be different types of atoms, that can loosely or temporarily bond with the RNA molecules and fail, break away and do not progress further. But gradually , over time this process would become more and more focused on the atoms that are collected from the environment that best match the requirements for the survival and perpetuation of the RNA molecule. This, as you intimate, is perhaps the earliest demonstration and application of the "survival of the fittest". If this is correct, then it also makes it unlikely that it happened only once. It would have been happening an infinite number of times over millennia. Don't forget we are talking about atoms here that would have been everywhere on earth, all potentially interacting with each other. All these interactions would be "experiments". Most of these experiments would not result in anything significant, but many of them would be significant bondings and would lead to further steps until eventually the process inevitable became honed down to the successful self replicating molecule creating a self maintaining environment for the continuation or experiments that eventually , several billion years later , result in the Life the planet has today. Once the forging of the elements of hydrogen, carbon and oxygen occurred in the furnaces of evolving suns, the eventual progression to life was just as inevitable as the initial bonding between hydrogen and oxygen to form water.. Life is an inevitability that has to happen, providing other physical conditions are in place to perpetuate the process of progressive "experiments".

[@engineeredarmy1152]

I'm curious about how can a RNA molecule self replicate itself?

[@alexanderplatypus3664]

Agree. The key to understanding life is to demystify it, and rob it of the whole "this one time... something truly special happened". As you get into the physical reasons for atoms and molecules bonding together etc it just makes sense that it occurs in certain conditions, and it isn't "magical" anymore.

[@harryhill5999]

@@engineeredarmy1152 It is not RNA "replicating itself". There is no self to replicate. It is simply a conglomeration of atoms that can only form bonds or break bonds according to the restraining laws of physics. The bonds that work can become stable and progress from there. I believe it is similar to the evolution of species, but at an atomic level. Some pairings will work, some pairings will form but break, some pairings can never happen due to mismatch of charge, some pairings will form stable bonds, and eventually some stable bonds/unstable bond combinations will "evolve" to form a replicating molecule. Just like the driver of species evolution is the environment that favours individuals in an evolving species, so the driver for chemical combination at the atomic level will depend on the surrounding environment of available atoms. Of course it is all just theory, but there is no reason to think that a "self" replicating molecule could not evolve. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090109173205.htm

[@MAMW93]

Bruh I ate some Mexican food tonight that was grade A but I just shit myself when I trusted a fart. Damn

[@flowercity546]

As someone actively participating in origin of life studies, I'd like to add to the conversation here. For one, the RNA World is relatively unpopular at this point (at least within my circle of researchers). The production of nucleosides consisting of modern RNA nucleobases, ribose, and phosphate was highly unlikely in Hadean conditions. So instead, there was likely chemical evolution consisting of RNA precursors that were much easier to form and more stable at that time. Also, amino acids (and consequently polypeptides) are much more abundant and easier to be produced abiotically, so it was likely that proteins and genetic material co-evolved. I personally have beef with the RNA World and the damage it's done to the progression of origin of life research as a whole, but that's a whole other tangent. My second interjection is the setting that was chosen for this video. It seemed as though the ocean's surface was the choice, which is not a leading choice for a location. Right now, at least two locations are at the lead, hot springs and alkaline hydrothermal vents (there are more than those, these are just the places I personally know the most about atm so don't come at me). Gradients of conditions would be something likely necessary to drive the increase of chemical complexity that eventually progressed to life. I'm personally on team hot springs coupled with wet-dry cycling (aids in polymerization since water saturated environments result in constant hydrolysis unless there's a kinetic trap preventing it), but it is a touchy subject in the scientific community. I appreciate the overall approach of the video and how it could definitely get people more interested in the subject and provide a guideline on how to view how the origin of life could have progressed. However, I personally feel as though the major points made don't really line up with how the research on the matter has progressed in more recent years. I apologize for the lengthy comment, but you accidentally touched a sore spot of mine. Besides my personal gripes, good video, keep up the good work 👍🏻

[@ToroidalX]

Now this is constructive criticism! Amazing info. The channel should pin this comment so people can then go and search more about this topic. I can only imagine the complexity of chemicals needed, and in those times scales! I truly admire the work people like you do every day to uncover the mysteries in the origin of life

[@mirzamay]

I feel like we are missing something big. Trying to figure out origen of life is like a blind person trying to figure out the color purple. We weren't there, we can't see it, and we can't reproduce it even though people swear by things they can't know. All our theories sound like fanciful childhood imagination to me. I'm not sure we'll understand it until we get more evidence of some other part of physics. Like how quantum interacts out something I can't possibly know. So I think in time we'll figure it out, but we'll likely be infinitely further along in understanding than we are right now. All this will push us forward if we don't get stuck on ineffectual theories. I think you are absolutely right. A lot of us are not thinking big enough, we just keep circling around inside our box and the answer isn't in that box. I appreciate your research and passing it along so we can all get a bit more understanding.

[@tbone3291]

Origin of life studies isn't a science at this point. It's just a wild hodgepodge of crackpot whims. The fact is the more the concept is considered, the more confounding obstacles arise. Those obstacles aren't being solved. It's an exercise in hubris.

[@chinyoka2387]

"No mice sprouted spontaneously into being in the late Hadean Earth" Well obviously, there were no dirty shirts around

[@shahdashraf8495]

The story-telling efforts in this channel and “the entire history of the universe” is highly appreciated ❤

[@cherylmccord8230]

Your Video's are visually engaging, which allows learning to happen on many levels. This seems like right brain - left brain learning to me. I think teachers will love using these videos to present complex theories in engaging ways. Thank You all for the ART, TIME and RESEARCH you have put in these Videos. You should all be very proud of what you have created. Keep it up our young people need it in there understanding of Earth and LIFE. As do we all!!!

[@christosvoskresye]

It seems likely that life must have arisen several times, since the harsh conditions of early earth would be prone to kill off new life that had not yet firmly established itself.

[@HistoryoftheEarth]

We have some possible answers for that question next weekend

[@christosvoskresye]

@@HistoryoftheEarth Actually, you have just one answer, which is that life probably only originated once, period. Well, maybe. Or maybe some very, very, VERY primitive forms of life originated separately, and symbiotically merged. For example, some scientists have speculated that RNA came first, and others that cell membranes came first; maybe BOTH came "first", and the first cells were a fortunate merger of the two forms of proto-life. I don't suspect there's any way we could ever know unless we discover a "shadow biosphere". www.astrobio.net/retrospections/a-shadow-biosphere/

[@frankthelion]

@@christosvoskresye Given how microscopic we are talking, even a lake the size of a small village could in theory have both happen at the same time in separate areas and through currents just bang into each other. Even if it took 30 million years of just 1 of each of these to bang into each other. I would consider it to be inevitable over mere chance.

[@jimmyshrimbe9361]

Awesome stuff! Wonderful channel!

[@stringbean02]

Something many people miss about the origin of life is that the eventual outcome is thermodynamically favorable. The initial reactions were favorable which pushed towards the simple building block molecules. Further reactions and folding driven by the hydrophobic effect and the natural drive to increase entropy pushed for more complex molecules to form. Eventually you form life in it's absolute simplest form. And while it may not seem like it, life inherently increases entropy, this is what drives the universe. So by the very nature of life, thermodynamics pushed for more complex life that further increased entropy. This is what has driven life from it's very origin.

[@houstandy1009]

To be blunt, this is a load of rubbish

[@ZaheedaNaheedya]

Such a great video, very informative! Could easily watch this one again. Thank you.

[@cernunnos_lives]

Earth life needs to colonize beyond it's own home, in order to survive. If Earth ends, all of this becomes nothing. At the very least, we have to spread throughout the rest of the Solar system.

[@phaedrussmith1949]

Conflating that "earth" is the humans on earth is nonsense. The humans will end as just another species that came and went. Earth, on the other hand, will continue on with it's journey.

[@RNAxRibose]

@@phaedrussmith1949 multicellular life will die off in 800 million years. In order to survuve, we should exapand and achieve immortality by technological or biological means

[@deepdrag8131]

20:22 “Just this one time, life arose spontaneously” Why once and only once? If it happened once, why not more than once?

[@glenliesegang8935]

Most enzymes have at least 100 to 200 amino acids in correct sequence. 20+ a.a for each position. Odds for a 50 a.a chain in correct sequence is 1 in 20^50. A 50 amino acid protein requires 150 triple codons to specify it. Each codon has 64 possible combinations. Even if 2 codons specify the same amino acid, the odds of making that 50 a.a. protein by random coding is 1 in 2^(32×50). Try google scientific calculator. Is it possible? And, 1 in 2^(32x100), or 2^(32x200)? What are the odds for just 1 protein encoded for properly. Now help me understand how natural processes create 20 unique aminoacyl t-rna synthetases, create ribosomes, ATP synthetase, and exclude all but the left handed amino acids, exclude Zn,Hg,As,Mn,Cu, found at hydrothermal vents, all which denatured proteins and poison life.

[@bobmiedema2726]

@@glenliesegang8935 Well said. It makes happening spontaneously outrageously improbable, even in an ocean full of the right raw materials. I think the "how" in the subject line of the video was answered with a lot of wishful, hopeful thinking on a scale that science should blush at the suggestion.

[@williamchamberlain2263]

@@bobmiedema2726 not into maths are you? Hundreds of millions of years is a lot of chance reactions.

[@scrung]

@@williamchamberlain2263 i’m interested in seeing the time scale vs the probability of this event happening relative to each other. maybe given billions of years, the probability of life arising might be so low that twice might still be a reach. but that’s if and only if the odds imply that this is the truth. since you chose to respond with that kind of snarky attitude i figure you must obviously know the answer. can you please tell me

[@williamchamberlain2263]

@@scrung I can tell that the probability of you understanding Darwin's "stump and wedges" analogy is 0.

[@RickReyes]

We are not able to travel through time but watching your videos makes me feel like I am!!! Thank you!!!

[@mitseraffej5812]

I now know where I might have come from but still have no idea where my life is going. All I know is that it is going.

[@ezr168]

A strange and interesting cycle that is all too real, enjoy

[@Totallyrealhooman]

There's another, more scientifically rigorous view and it's worth considering. kzbin.info/www/bejne/g3fXn6qonraFn5o

[@mitseraffej5812]

@Janette Diaz Human inability to understand and or reproduce how life began is not proof of intelligent design, neither are examples of human technology. Human intelligence is after all the result of nature, and although we may think human intelligence is superior to that of other animals, it is not a solely human trait. In many ways human intelligence is not as developed as other species. As an example my beloved dog is highly attuned to every nuance of my emotional and physical health, in many ways more so than my beloved wife.

[@harrietharlow9929]

Watching this, I remember my father, a general practitioner, explaining mitosis and meiosis. It was from him that I learned about humans evolving from a common ancestor with other apes. He would love this.

[@stacyshoemaker9177]

And apes come from…

[@sirsanti8408]

@@stacyshoemaker9177 probably more primitive monkeys

[@jasonwiley798]

@@stacyshoemaker9177 a common ancestor to man

[@stacyshoemaker9177]

@@jasonwiley798 or not

[@pezvonpez]

@@stacyshoemaker9177 or yes?

[@Starkada]

Fantastic content, thank you!

[@tracycartwright978]

This really fascinates me, I love knowing how life started, I don't take our existence for granted, it's a miracle we are here on our beautiful Earth.

[@vaiuuii]

Fantastic high quality content

[@captainzappbrannagan]

Great video! This is the amazing story of our history. What's amazing is that almost right away after the heavy bombardment this chemical process formed life. The galaxy and universe must be teeming with life. All the ingredients are found even on asteroids after billions of years colliding, and being bombarded by radiation.

[@mihajlo6489]

I wonder if one day we'll create a completely new lifeform, unrelated to anything alived today, on a completely new evolutionary tree

[@chirilas5217]

What a great documentary. Congratulations.👏👏👏👍👍

[@monad5140]

It would be interesting if we eventually were able to synthesize autogenesis in a controlled environment. It would then allow us to create lifeforms from the ground up. Maybe even ones fit to travel the stars.

[@richardwebb9532]

Life cannot emerge from non-biological elements. You can add whatever chemicals you like, no life will appear....

[@monad5140]

@@richardwebb9532 Not yet anyway. The most exciting development would be synthesized life. Or some approximation. The true goal is continued spread of genetic material. On a cosmic scale this could be useful as standard reproduction is insufficient for interstellar species. A modified version of life may be necessary.

[@monad5140]

@cat magic I mean the neanderthals probably thought we were monsters (they were correct in their case as we interbred and then killed them all), but the next chapter was quite exciting for life. This new life form will almost certainly kill us, but in the big picture that's almost irrelevant.

[@sevenlineitapinfo2944]

@@bigboreracing356 Good point

[@richardwebb9532]

@@whatabouttheearth ....funny how you didn't explain how inorganic hydrogen becomes organic and "alive"... Nice strawman tho', was it on special?

[@deanbuss1678]

This series is moving just as it should. IMO VERY interesting. At least one good thing about the pandemic. It's allowing time for you guys to produce this series.👌👍 Keep it up!

[@HistoryoftheEarth]

Thanks very much!

[@danminer5343]

Never has anybody ever found a scientific reason to believe in the fiction story of evolution. it is based upon believing the impossible and has zero scientific basis.

[@deanbuss1678]

@@danminer5343 indeed ! Where are the transitionary creatures?

[@danminer5343]

@@deanbuss1678 - Correct, as no transitional could live because a transitional of the interaction of its proteins and microsystem would have to have a different interactome owhich would prevent life.

[@philwomack6841]

Fabulous explanation :)

[@latheofheaven1017]

Enjoying this series very much so far. Great job everyone. Can I make a production criticism though? The script, visuals and music is great, but the recording quality of the narration lets it all down. Echoey, and very sibilant. A better microphone, better microphone placement along with an isolation shield, and a de-esser would bring everything up to par.

[@HistoryoftheEarth]

Thanks - great suggestions and very helpful.

[@loki6626]

Sounded ok to me. Watched it on my tv with a soundbar.

[@Bloodknok]

This is a super series!

[@stefanhensel8611]

A wonderful, very informative and beautiful video, like always! However, I doubt that life emerged only once on earth. It may well be that it took thousands or even millions of attempts. Half a billion years is a very long time. It may even be that lifeforms of different origins, slightly different in chemistry, coexisted in different environments (shallow sea, deep sea, black smokers etc) during millions of years. Until each of them was destroyed by floods waves, volcanic eruptions, lightnings, asteroids or simply eaten up. Each one except one - our great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-mother.

[@cortneyrens]

Well said! I will sometimes think about how every living thing has ONE common ancestor, it took so long for the elements to come together to form this, almost miraculously, it shows how all life (plants, fish, etc) is all related and is very eye opening, that we are “all one” with a common great great great great grandmother like you say. We’re all connected and should be nicer to all living creatures

[@Kerplakistandan]

What an amazing video! I feel very lucky to be able to watch a video of this quality for free. I liked and have been a subscriber for awhile now. Keep up the great work and thank you.

[@JR-hc6ur]

I understand that KZbin only gives you ad revenue for fully watched ads, but nine minutes into a twenty minute video, I'm not going to watch a thirty minute Prager "U" ad... I know you have no say in it, and I very much appreciate the content on all of your affiliated channels, I just wanted you to know that this is happening.

[@HistoryoftheEarth]

You have our blessing to skip that!

[@JR-hc6ur]

Yeah, of course, it just seems like a kind of "soft demonitization" strategy that I've seen lately on education channels that I watch. It probably just has to do with my location, but that doesn't make it right.

[@laurentdrozin812]

I got so frustrated with the ads that I purchased a Premium prenumeration, so I and all my family skip the ads entirely.

[@greenflagracing7067]

@@laurentdrozin812 I use adblock for youtube -- which is free -- and haven't seen an ad in years

[@laurentdrozin812]

@@greenflagracing7067 thanks!

[@isaacchavez6465]

For those interested the book "The Vital Question by Nick Lane" is a great introduction to abiogenisis. He also puts forth a compelling theory about life's origins in the book.

[@thedarknessthatcomesbefore4279]

Thanks, I will look that book up.

[@paubakero]

@Tim Webb It's very different to say that something has no purpose than saying it can't exist. Evolution can explain the complexity, once you have a simple self-replicating unit with a somewhat stable metabolism. Evolution is already well-known, and science is marching on the path to discover what this first self-replicating unit could have been.

[@paubakero]

@ReligionlessFAITH Evolution is a general framework for explaining complexity in life, and does it amazingly well. About awareness and other phenomena related to minds, we are making slow progress but the way ahead still looks quite long. Life can definitely arise from non-life, it necessarily has been done at least once or else we wouldn't be here. By the way, you should learn more about the axiomatic method, math has actually a solid foundation and mathematical proofs are a thing.

[@stevencooper4422]

@ I mean he does have a point, one cannot assume the biosphere suddenly has a purpose when physics dictates it does not!

[@DarthVaderfr]

​@ReligionlessFAITH definitely not, evolution is quite a great theory and actually given his principles it can predict the existence of chemical stable compound that evolve and become more complex, while the less stable compound simply fade away, which is the entire point of an entire field of study, which is chemical evolution, while awereness, even if we don't know what i consciousness, it still works in the frame of evolution because obviously a conscious creature is far more able to survive than one more clueless about his environment so it does make sense The second part of your point went very meta very quickly, mathematical truth are different than scientific truth, cause you define what is a thing, like 3 and that's the axiom, it's not something that you have to prove that all 3 are 3, that will be nonsense