for us, right, so from what i understand energy contained in molecules is pretty much the reason for life on earth. so energy can't be created or destroyed. it can only be transferred. right? so this is really mean that energy that i consists of, we can tracy back to where life started, maybe even further big bang. in principle, i suppose you could, but nobody would have a brain big enough to do that. is really the flow of energy, which is the important thing. so the way is moving from place to place on through us continuously. so we are eating and breathing all the time and where changing our molecules of time. so an easy way to think of it is like a stream slowing down a hill side and the, the, the molecules in the stream and any one moment and not the same molecules, but the stream itself is morris. as we are a person in that sense,

sustained by discontinuous flood. okay. so in that sense what happens to my energy flow and molecules that energy consists of one site, di? what happens with energy? well, you just break down. not transferred anywhere, right? it's not, it's not transferred into another single being linked with you. it's transferred into the whole fabric nature is transferred into the worms in the bacteria that eat, you have to feel buried. if you're converted into most of the c o 2, if you're burned, then then you will be turned into pumps. right? so cinematography speaking, it will be like spreading ashes and the ocean stops, right? yes. okay. you said the live forms can generate energy and do you think that viruses can't do that? but then i look at viruses and they're new viruses everyday and mutates. so i

wonder, i mean, if they're not living, how can they evolve? well, i think of living and it's not that we can generate energy. we can converse, energy that's in the environment into energy that is useful for us. and that helps us to live, to do everything that we're doing relating to move around to think, to build new muscles, whatever it might be. that all costs energy, which we take from the environment by eating food and burning that food in auction . the way that viruses get around, that is they, they are parasitic. they simply sabotaged our own systems of conversing that energy into things made copies of themselves. so in that sense, we are very similar to viruses. we are simply, we'll, we'll parasitic to you, but they're not living organisms. or, if you asked 2 different biologists, that question, you got 2 different dances. we can't define life. there is no definition of life.

and so we can define if a virus is alive or dead. and the reason is because life is really a continuum from non living things to living things. and a virus is in the gray area too. but it, it makes copies of itself. it evolves and changes over time, and in that sense it, it seems alive. we're okay with a fair m that all live organisms generate energy. what would that make sun? i mean a sun life in that sense? no, we're not generating energy. we're feeding off energy. this in the environment is flowing, so the sun is producing a continuous flow of energy already are feeding grady on that on that source of energy. but how come we can't just fade off the sun's energy and harness it like plants to, for instance?

we, we can't do that. in fact, it will be virtually impossible for an animal to do that because the amount of energy that plants gets by converting sunlight directly into the kind of fuel that we need to live would not be enough to really take a step time so stuck to the spot and the good reasons that they have an enormous surface area, leaves him a tree or whatever it may be, which is capturing the sun's light and converting it into organic molecules. but if we were to, there are actually some animals that have eaten the chloroplasts, which do the photos imposition plans. and they, they get the tiny amount of energy from that because they, they don't have enough surface area to capture the sun. and the post has been so slow that he's not capable of allow you to run around and chase of the things and behave like an animal. so charles darwin and the building where having this sharon is named after him. this sess, 11 nurse appeared in the small pon,

created from rainfall you are saying life appeared from the higher thermal event on the bottom of an ocean is wrong. 1 this is a strange thing about darwin dough and was a visionary scientist. and he was right about something very important, which was very natural selection. he was wrong about all kinds of details. he was completely wrong about how genes work, for example, on the origin of life. well he, he wrote a short paragraph in a letter to a friend of his that was never published where he imagined life monica started in a warm count on land. no, i'm said that it's far too soon for science to be thinking about these questions. so it's very easy. i think a lot of our small, really just like to see when is equivalent to being a profit. and therefore,

if we can show that darwin was wronged about one thing, then he must be somehow wrong about everything though it was. this dentist scientists are wrong almost by definition about a great deal. but science as a discipline can become more correct over time. as we realize mistakes as we begin to correct the mistakes we begin to approximate on the true. so no one scientist is ever right about everything. okay, so let's assume that you are right about they had with thermal vents and the beginning of our origins on the bottom of the ocean. there are number of astro biologists and they're saying that similar vents in the frozen seas of the moon of jupiter. and saturn can be found. what does that tell us? do you think life could have emerged there? one day possible? it's possible. i'd like to think it's possible. i certainly think it's worth going to these places to find out. it's also of course worth going to places where i

personally don't think life would have for me quite because well i personally don't think life would form a title, which is another thing moves when you think we should go there. i think we should go there because i might be wrong because if life did start, then it would follow completely different principles to the principles that i talk about. what any scientist should want to know is the truth in the end. so i personally think that the moon and seller, this is the most plausible place to find life in our own solar system. what do you make of the theory that live came on earth from space i think is unlikely. i certainly call rude it out. it's in a strange way irrelevant because we'll never know how life started on. we call it a historical question. we can't know what the answer actually was, because we don't have a time. we can go back in years, even if we didn't have

a time machine that allowed us to go back for billing is we would arrive, where should we go? should we go to the bottom of the ocean? should we go to a warm pond and how long should we wait until we see life clearly out of something so will ever know how life started. what we can know is how, in principle kinda stero, planet, just a wet rocky find it with no life on it. what are the driving forces that turn it into a living planet? full of life? what, what, what are the materials that are needed? what kind of energy flow is needed, we can understand those things and so we can understand why it is that life started on, i think intellectually, we can understand that. and by that same criteria, we should be able to say, well, life wouldn't have started in these places for those reasons. now if, if life was delivered from space to us, we don't know where it came from when it came from what the conditions where it

tells us nothing about the principles that govern the origin of life. it only says, well, historically, it was like that which is an accident. i was thinking recently to these nasa planter research. sure, jim bell, and he was actually proving he's the point that there was life on mars millions of years ago because there was evidence of liquid water and the climate was work. as a biologist do think it's possible, he's absolutely as possible. it would be, i would say, surprising and disappointing if we never found any trace of life on mars. i think it would be quite surprising if we found life still on mas, surprising, surprising. now, it wouldn't, it wouldn't astonish me. plainly, there's nothing on the surface. if we dig down a few meters, it may be that we find things that would almost certainly be virtually don't. we can tell from the atmosphere of mars at the moment that there's almost no, it's called the secret librium. but in the earth's atmosphere we have gases like me

say mixing with oxygen, which if, if it was just left alone, if they weren't being continually produced by, by bacteria, then they would react with oxygen. and you wouldn't see these gases as a reactive co existing together in the atmosphere. we seal on mas, there are occasionally tiny little traces of me thing, probably produced by geological processes. so, if they're still life on mars, it must be virtually dormant. and very little of it, but when they were oceans and they were oceans for me and 3 and a half 1000000000 years ago, the conditions was really just right. it would be disappointing if life hadn't started. do you think if there was life on mars or any other planet for that matter that we would know at this point live forms would resemble anything like us here on

earth. depends on what you mean by resembles. so i would say probably an animal if you think about the history of life on earth than animals appeared quite abruptly about 550000000 years ago. life started 4000 movie years ago. so. so more than 3 quarters of the, of the history of the planet when there was like round. there weren't even any animals. it's very easy to imagine that the planets may just stay bacteria forever is much easier to imagine than it is to imagine. that, that would be a kind of convergent evolution meeting to animals leading to humans on other planets as well. and if you just think about animals, you know, an octave estimate, human, very different kinds of beings. so the idea that we would get humans, some people think we would, i personally don't,

i think we would see cells. i think we would see a life made of topic. so in that sense, i think it will be similar, but in the structure of animals, i don't think it would be very nick, we're going to take a short break right now. when we're back, we'll continue talking to nick lane, evolution or a biochemist and best selling author. we're talking about the origins of life. stay with us. with join me. every person on the alex salmon? sure. i'll be speaking to guess of the world of politics, sport,

business. i'm sure business. i'll see you then. ah, you were told there was bands, your eyes and your posture that it would stop you from having real friends and finding a girlfriend. but what they fail to mention is that you can make thousands of dollars every weekend by simply playing video games with stacy been a couple of them for though we formed the 1st one. so it's up to one of them to proper you facilitate georgia resume the president can multiple reduce operational sooner course to make video games a high paying job. you have to be gifted and quick witted, hang on to open up with bites, surgical installation and fitness to live near bottom. and miss thompson with webpage bentley from youngs. produce park even established. yeah. gala boy, well you most storm you my video it out or you me. i was at kneels florida guy of the order, but i would that be cool?

what was the se odd to do i also use with who's and we're back with mclean evolutionary biochemist. going back to what we're saying right now. story from simple single cell organism bacteria, here are nurse how can you use lin at some point? but tyria started to develop, right. and then it transformed itself into more complicated form and then others just stayed the same bacteria, like you're saying here, and earth are booked here,

developed into animals into humans and probably on other planets. just stated material. i mean, well, bacteria state ition for some material to become us and others to just stay with tyria. most bacteria who stays bacteria and her state bacteria for 4000000000 years. they really haven't changed very much. we can see fossil bacteria in the fossil record from st hospital in years ago. this is a very strange thing about complex life. if we think about plants and animals, but also single cell, things like that, we all have these big complication. cells that have essentially all the same machinery in them. we, if you look at the plant cell or a mushroom cell down to microscope one of our cells, most people couldn't tell the difference. they really different to about tarion.

very similar to each other. so plant cells have a lower plan as well. it does focus into this, but apart from that, almost everything else is the same. and so it becomes a very interesting question. why is it the plan switch route to the spot? photo synthesize to make their own organic matter an anomaly which runs around and each plan. so other animals on a fungus which dissolves things and absorbs the nutrients. they all have exactly the same structure of cell. now, this is strange because you might think that if these are adaptation to a way of life, then they will look different to each other, but they will look the same as each other. and so there's a, there's a kind of an interesting problem at the heart of biology, which is why is that the case given that we all playing the related, we all share the same structure, then the only arose once. and so you could say, well, maybe it arose on millions of occasions and we just don't see any evidence for that

. but we've looked hard and we can't find any evidence for multiple origins of complex life. so if you take it at face value, you may say, well, it's really rare, it's very unusual for complex life to evolve. and when he does, you got all of these curious properties. now, i think and not everybody agrees with me, but i think the reason is what's called the symbiosis, but really, why i want to get inside another one. and, and that leads to all kinds of conflicts and resolutions of those conflicts and getting along together. and that's changed really the whole playing field and it changed how selection worked. basically symbiosis, a one fell getting into another simplified and breaking down. might be possible reason why things are different, but made of the same. so right. why for instance,

i don't know. some bacteria resistance to things and others aren't like, for instance, their impact period that can survive. and i know acidic pulls of yellowstone but will know what happens to humans. got forbids falls inside, you know, what i mean? is it the same reason the cells and b know, in part it is, i mean, effectively because of this cell, symbiosis cells can become enormously larger. and effectively more fragile to, i mean, the bigger and more complicated you, are there easiest to damage ego. and so if you, so a lot of cell into it as a rule. yes. so bacteria, tiny valley robust but simple system is protected by a wall with a wall around them. and they, if, you know, if you take bacterium from the floor of the lab and so it into yellowstone palms as well, it would also die. the ones that are living that have adapted to live that over millions of years. but the type of cell being small and robust is much more able to

live in that environment than the one of the complicated cells that can give rise to dinosaurs are also far more likely to pull the pieces and go wrong them. so you throw them into a spring and fall to pieces. another thing, i mean i don't understand how, you know, the 4 basic elements that are mixed under certain conditions and they produce still living so that i get them. i don't really understand how that living cells become self governing and conscious. this is a big question. possible question to answer. and i was one of the most interesting questions probably and all the biology. what is conscious and i don't think we have an answer yet. there's $2.00 to $2.00 or 3 possibilities. one of them is that it's really an emergent property from a really complex nervous system. and then if you could make a robots or

a sufficiently complex, then it would become conscious as well, simply because, so all of this processing going on at the same time, leads to a kind of an awareness that is unstoppable, that maybe the case. a lot of people would think perhaps it's not. i don't think at the moment we have any way of knowing. another possibility is that it's a property of matter that all matter us study on is the some alive. i think the answer is no. but if, if consciousness is somehow linked to too light an undiscovered form of principle, a matter of physics is that it would be the case that even the rock would be conscious away in an incredibly minister way. the question for me is, i think consciousness is linked with life. i would say lots of lower animals are

consciously aware in one way or another. so i don't think it with this complex central nervous system. so much is living cells. i think it's again the process of how energy works that leads to electromagnetic fields and so on. and that's why we should be looking for the answer. ok. and then there's cells that the light, i mean, you know, it's such a natural thing for us to seek his old late to reproduce. right? so it really the idea of continuation and survival is really inherent to, to anything living. where did that come from 1st? what 1st, like this primitive pronoun cell to sing? well, i want to multiply i think the very 1st cells almost 2 weeks inevitably. so if you're in an environment where there's a continuous flow of energy flowing through it. and, and that is turning gases or rocks in the environment into organic

molecules. and those organic molecules, things like that for example, conform spontaneously under those completely quit paths that kinda kind of facts that we find in our cell membrane. the building blocks of proteins, the amino acids they can be formed under these conditions. and if you have a continuous flow of energy and a small proportion of that is reacting, informing these things, then effectively what you're seeing is growth. and fats will organize themselves spontaneously, into satellite structures, and those will keep going. and as they grow, they become less stable and they divide into it's almost the physical property of any system which is growing like that. so to understand why things would divide into, it's quite easy, it's just make to grow. and then if there is linked with that

genetic information, that's a separate question, whether the genes come from that's difficult to. but if it's linked, this cell gets a slightly better set of information james, than, than this one does, this one might be more likely to survive and, and divide again in this one more likely to die. and then we're into standard biology into natural selection. what darwin was talking about under 50 years ago, i've heard you say that at some point oxygen was a pollutant. and then you know, which is sort of adapted. and then i see people choking literally dying and getting really sick in big cities because with the carbon dioxide emissions. do you think at some point the carbon dioxide emission could be like, were breathing fresh air right now where we would actually adapt to it

being some mass extinction in the history of the where the things that got preferentially wiped out the most likely to die. we're the ones that suffered the most for carbon dioxide from being poisoned by carbon dioxide. so the one i'm thinking already is that permian extinction. this was 250000000 years ago. and funnily enough, the animals that could draw around, dig in the mud and stagnant mud, and deal with sofa. so the things that hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide in large amounts because they were able to ventilate that spiritual system. they could kinda breathed and get rid of the calvin outside. they were more likely to survive. then the more simple things that are stuck to the bottom, and they had to take whatever was coming out them. and so they get floods of carbon dioxide and they just the $68.00 of them died. so we are doing this to ourselves.

now, with global warming, we're gradually fixating the oceans. the oxygen is being driven out of the oceans as they get warmer. the c o 2 is increasing and city buying the ocean slowly. the conditions are a little bit similar to what was happening 250000000 years ago. and a lot of scientists are seriously worried that we will recapitulate that by which time the oceans addendum, those gases like hydrogen sulfide bubbling out to them, killing the life on the chose as well. now some life will survive, maybe not as maybe not much, but fast forward 5 or 10000000 is on the pallet will be the same as it is now. we absolutely fine. we just won't be on it. we'll kill ourselves. that's all you know, i've also heard this idea that if you don't use certain parts of your body of organs, like for instance, astronaut, your costs mounts in space because they're in weightlessness,

the bones get fragile. so it made me think lucian is not necessarily an improvement. is it? it could be delegation. absolutely. yes. a loss of parasites were often seen as being a kind of degraded form of life. actually they, they tend to become simple because they have to minimize anything that would recognize them as a parasite and curious or immune systems for example. so the simpler they can make themselves, the more likely they are to survive. and so this, this kind of direction towards losing complexity is quite common with, with people in space losing bone mass that's not necessarily evolution in the single lifetime. but if, if we were to have generation after generation living in space, then it would be selected in the genes, bones would become useless and so they would be absorbed. now we're just love to

think that we are the pinnacle of evolution. are we know there is no, there is no problem. no pinnacle of evolution. everything's flat. a bacterium is the product to 4000000000 years of evolution. it in a specific environment, so away. so in that sense where we are, the lucky survivors are the end of a long, long process you. so as in to the springs yellowstone, and we will not do very well. bacteria will do much better in that sense. in his own environment is much closer to a pinnacle of evolution. he loses going nowhere. it's not interested in us. and we are interested in us and we have a lot to be interested in. but we shouldn't be big headed about it. i think that there's, you know, for more than 100 years we've known that evolution has no direction. thank you very

much for this wonderful insight is still really a pleasure to talking. thank you very much. with everything with again, there are rumors of war. there are rumors of invasion and again the country is ukraine. their allegations of a russian military build up within the countries borders. though it is a fact, ukraine is receiving legal aid from nato countries who benefits from this strategy . the postal service delivers

a $155000000000.00 pieces of mail every year, randomly 40 percent of the world's name right now. the us postal service is an a flight of its life to see everybody that is reaction, bad financial shade now, facing people. the pulse of service is a cash cow. and there was a way to pull money out of the postal service to put into a federal budget. there was a mandate that you're bringing a $100000.00, new revenue every month. the nature of privatization in the us postal service is very much hidden from public view. it's privatization from the inside out, a big business in money. it's not about the public and given them a service that they deserve. it's not about quality train workers. it's about with

parties top stories, asylum seekers may have to wait months at the ag, belarus, florida to get processed. if a new plan from brussels gets the go ahead, white group say the move throws away, the rulebook cia is embroiled in a child sex abuse scandal. that involves children as young as 2 years old, with over one alleged offender going unpunished. according to the declassified documents and nursing unions around the globe call for cobit vaccine, peyton's to be lifted, blaming production restrictions for deaths in the developing world. yes, the army comes trained will be followed by others if we did not act and it all countries in here to think of vaccinations strategy ah, how much could.