SPIEGEL: It took eight years from the time the first bacterial genome was decoded until the human genome was completed. How much time will elapse between the creation of the first synthetic bacteria and the creation of the first synthetic human?The interview's worth a read: the questioners come at him from as many angles as they can. Venter does his usual good job of being an asshole, but is also surprisingly clear about how much he doesn't know about any genome anywhere, which is not the Venter I remember. Mind you I haven't kept up.
Venter: There is currently no reason for us to synthesize human cells. I am, for example, a fan of the work that was done a short time ago that led to the decoding of the Neanderthal genome. But we don't need any more Neanderthals on the planet, right? We already have enough of them.
The bioforgery industry proceeds with or without meddlers in the genome:
Kano — Assessment of the degree of fake seeds distribution and sale in Nigerian markets by the National Agricultural Seeds Council (NASC) has shown that the North-West and North-East regions of the country have the highest proliferation of fake seeds in circulation.
26 comments:
The human genome project was completely different, it was supposed to be the biggest thing in the history of biological sciences. Billions in government funding for a single project -- we had never seen anything like that before in biology. And then a single person comes along and beats scientists who have been working on it for years. It is no wonder they didn't like that.
Okay, let's have a typing race to retype the Bible. Each day we type as much as we can. Then you give me all the pages you typed and I keep mine to myself. We finish at the same time. Yours is more accurate. I WIN!!!!
Not only does he win, but he also says winning is immaterial. He's above that cheap competition, you see, which is why he never talks about being better than anyone.
It is probably best that he keep to himself about that winning and losing thing:
Celera went on to build a successful database business, providing custom search tools and software that enabled dozens of pharmaceutical companies and hundreds of academic, government and biotech clients to use its findings in biological research. While the Celera database business ultimately became profitable, it was clear by 2000 that this was not a sustaining business model, as the public effort caught up and provided free access to genome sequences.
Celera moved on - both scientifically and commercially.
By moved on they mean forced Venter out:
In January 2002, Venter left the company, reportedly forced out by Applera Chief Executive Officer Tony White over differences about Celera's direction.
...
In April, the company appointed Ordonez as Celera's new president. She faced the formidable task of transforming Celera from a genetic data provider into a drug company at a time when many investors had lost confidence in the firm. Its stock that once soared as high as $256 two years earlier had tumbled to little more than $14.
Okay my comment punking Venter keeps getting deleted. I think he is watching me...
Huh, the comment doesn't delete when I post it at my site.
SUBSTANCE IS J CRAIG VENTER!!!!
That's pretty weird. I haven't noticed any comment weirdness recently...
I don't understand how anyone could toss out such a warm and giving individual.
The very fact that scientists are arguing seems to discredit the concept of science. That's why the Bible always wins.
So if religious people were ever to argue, the Bible would be discredited? Nuts, like THAT'S ever gonna happen.
Captcha is cheri. A day or so ago it was seduces. I think blogger is flirting with me.
my comment punking Venter keeps getting deleted
Blogspot was rolling out new spam filters the other day. Time to check the spam folder.
Case in point: I just checked the Riddled spam-folder and found a comment from tigris that had been caught there a few days ago. It was cold and traumatised and could only whisper about "the bad thing".
Gee, now it looks like fish is haranguing us.
Fish was stealing his own comments.
Ok, whatevs. I don't do life sciences, just a billion times less interesting than astrophysics or cosmology, but from what I've read you're selling Venter short - he did develop breakthrough technologies that accelerated the process of sequencing the human genome by adopting some statistical methods that NIH was unwilling to embrace.
Not sure why smart doods need to be huggable, but while you were all screwing around with hurt feelings, Hawking disproved god.
So try to catch up...
I'm not selling him short at all. It's an interesting interview. Some of the other things that are interesting about him are his business operations and his personality.
On Hawking he's been on a "Where is there room for God?" kick since at least that one popular book that I didn't bother finishing.
Oh, no. Very fine line. He originally said that while the universe didn't need god, there was a framework where god could have a role.
NOW he says god is redundant. I see this as the evolution of the secular worldview. We made room for idiots and fairy tales, but ultimately, we have to look at the universe as a system, which makes it inevitable from the physical laws, which makes god redundant. It's just a process of shaking off medieval indoctrination. It takes time and courage. We're almost there..
Apparently he says "given gravity" whereas before he said "given this other stuff." Don't see much difference there.
Clean up on aisle 3.
he did develop breakthrough technologies that accelerated the process of sequencing the human genome by adopting some statistical methods that NIH was unwilling to embrace.
Not so true. He more quickly adopted a "shotgun" approach because he came late to the game and needed a different approach. At the time shotgunning a genome the size of the human genome would not have worked if he wasn't able to cheat by using all the publicly available data to patch up all the holes in his assembly. Even then, the Celera assembly was was not as accurate as the public efforts. The last really great idea he had was for something called Expressed Sequence Tags in the 90's. To be fair, that was something that every one else thought was stupid and they were all completely wrong.
He originally said that while the universe didn't need god, there was a framework where god could have a role.
NOW he says god is redundant.
Hawking is full of crap on this point. I mean, yes, creator-gods are indeed as redundant as leprechauns, but his particular argument is as full of holes as my third-best trousers.
Essentially he claims that the laws of quantum gravity, when they are known (for this is M-theory he is talking about, which is not so much a Theory of Everything, as a promissory note for a prolegomena for a ToE) will be sufficient on their own to cause a universe to bubble up out of nowhere in a quantum fluctuation.
Oddly enough, John A. Wheeler considered this very point in the closing chapters of Gravitation. His exact words escape me (for 3-&-1/2 decades have passed), but they were along these lines: Once we have worked out the laws of physics, and removed all the arbitrary variables so everything is self-contained, you will be able to write them out on a piece of paper, and put it on the floor, and call out 'Fly'. Yet a new universe will not fly. Something else is needed, some context -- "pregeometry" in Wheeler's formulation.
We are a primitive shepherd people here and we revere Wheeler as a near-divine figure.
Has he worked out how many non-necessary gods can dance on the front of an advancing wave of gravitons?
I suppose - I missed the part where he was using M Theory as the vehicle to arrive at this conclusion, but here's the thing.
From the standpoint of a less rigorous but generally-good-for-the-future-of-humanity observation, any internationally respected figure coming out with clear statements of the unnecessary nature of mythology in a modern worldview is an important contribution. Hence my enthusiastic response...
Assessment of the degree of fake seeds distribution and sale in Nigerian markets
Memo to self: Do not buy magic beans in Nigeria. Or for that matter, trust e-mails from Nigeria offering magic beans in exchange for a cow.
How fake are these seeds? Are they carved out of wood?
How fake are these seeds?
I dunno. The only stories about it seem to put it in the same category as "low-yield seeds" although I would imagine that a lot of it is Bt corn and other grains.
They may be fake, but you can't think too badly of a seed that's managed to get a degree.
a lot of it is Bt corn and other grains.
By which I mean pretend GM grains that turn out not to be Round Up ready and so on.
Post a Comment