The Complicated Legacy of Lynn Margulis 

Darwin's, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection does not address the origins of life. It is basically a compilation of examples that, taken together, form a compelling picture of how species evolve. Without knowing anything about DNA, Darwin postulated there must be a mechanism of inheritance with randomised variation that would favor some individuals over others, and how, in the struggle to survive in environments with limited resources, those gifted with more beneficial traits would be the ones to survive and pass on their favorable genes. Today, we know that as species adapt to changing conditions, they form different groups, perhaps living side by side, they can continue to reproduce, but only to a certain point. Once the differences become too great between two groups, such that they can no longer produce viable (able to reproduce) offspring, we have a new species.

Lol I've heard that before, too.

The dangers of cherry-picking.

It must have been from something a long time ago. Their website has two references to her and neither of them are what you say.

alucientes I never fully noticed, but it's true. Darwin didn't even attempt to address the origin of living organisms, only how species came about.

"Lame claim to fame" i love english orthography

Dr. Fownes?

@@aureavita8653 thank Weird Al

Enjoying the thumbs up baiting?

The muscle hank of MiCo returns!

Chill, it's fun.

I always look for Rotifer's comment(s) 😊❤

Only Eukaryotic life undergoes mitosis, most microbes are bacteria, they undergo another similar process called binary fission.

gifted people are incredibly complex you are so right.

Second fun fact: she is related to Meryl Streep

what the heck

Eat the cats rats an bats....bon voyage

Also fun fact, she is a 9-11 truther and their son Jeremy Sagan too. as Carl said: extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence

Oh wow, that's kinda cool

They aren't easy to find. I'm a microscopist myself and have spent a fair amount of time exploring this world of wild protists. I have only found one in twelve years. But a blood red amoeba that bores into algae to eat them in their homes? Yep, pretty cool.

We actually showed some of the amazing behaviors of Vampyrella before, check this, please. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-io731XY8fH8.html -James

@@johnnyswatts Hey John, I recommend you to collect the green scum from ponds, like Spirogyra and prepare a slide, leave it in a humidity chamber a day or two then observe it under the microscope. Vampyrella actually pretty common however they remain inactive after being disturbed. That's how we find our Vampryrella. Also we recorded them eating alga before and here is the link. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-io731XY8fH8.html -James

Imagine growing up with Lynn Margulis and Carl Sagan as parents. Early divorce + massive inferiority complex I guess, but on the plus side, your dad's legacy is leaving the solar system and you end up writing awesome books with your badass scientist mum.

Tough life for Margulis

I mean, she's a rotifer, she's probably got bigger problems than her name if all the footage of rotifers being eaten on this channel is anything to go by.

This boggles my mind because I can't imagine any other reason why our mitochondria have unique DNA. Did they give an opposing hypothesis, or was it just a "we're not 100%" thing?

text books are so behind the curve.

@@Brahmdagh Yet They update them yearly to make you keep buying more of the stupid boring stuff.

@@DouglasEKnappMSAOM "update" in quotes.

It might upset teleologists more than evolution. Hard to do.

She’s outstanding in her field ;)

Breeding no. Horizontal transfer mediated by shared retrovirus?.... probably still no, but possible and testable. Dont forget your neurons are using retroviral DNA that is of nonmammal origin right now.

This sounds like a pre-Hox gene era hypothesis-before it was understood that all bilaterians are also segmented and that appendages are co-opted versions of other appendages, as well as the observed continuum of insect metamorphosis. Ed Lewis is another interesting biology biography. He was aware of the relationship between genomic and partial genomic duplications and segment appendage diversity. I think his only flub might have been correlating duplications (which later turned out to encompass Hox genes) with the addition of segments. The reality is a bit more complicated and nuanced than a 1:1 scenario. howver he still received a Nobel prize.

Scientists are also just human and all kinds of people do become scientists. Not all scientists are reasonable people. Some scientists believe in the crazierst things. People become scientists for various reasons. Many Chemists for instance study chemistry because they are interested in drugs. Many biologsts study it because they like animals or have someone in the family who has a deadly disease. Not all scientists have a "scientific" mindset. People who study science with a scientific mindset usually had that mindset before they started studying. Sadly Universities often do not teach people how to think, what actual critical thinking is, no logic or reasoining skills, they don't even teach propertly what the scientific method is. Someone who comes to Uni with an esotheric, spiritual, religious mindset is very likely to keep that throughout their whole career. Someone could be a genius mathematician who can solve the most complex equations with ease, but believe in all kinds of nonsensical things. Being intelligent alone isn't enough. And of course you could be a great scientist with the right mindset, plan everything properly, conduct everything to the best of your knowledge and still end up with bogus results and thus come come up with a bogus explanation. There is so much that can go wrong by accident. There is no guarantee that you'll get it right. On the other hand, another scientist who believes in nonsensical stuff could just get lucky and discover something new and becomes famous.

As a science teacher I cringe when people talk about science like it's "above" such things, but as long as humans are involved, there will always be the fallable human element.

wouldn't cal it a bicrobe tbh... zooplankton or just plankton would be more correct

Tell here to listen to the first Hearts Of Space. More months I thought they were the same person!

insofar as it is the best explanation for the observations of the similarities btwn plastid organelles and bacteria and the dissimilarities btwn those organelles and the other aspects eukaryotic cells/inheritance, it is "true"

a lot like my crush, Ayn. interesting.

CerberaOdollam Ayn Rand? Was she actually right on anything though? (I’m very much not a fan of hers I’m afraid, I have been unable to find redeeming qualities in Rand’s work that can make up for her absolutely vile ideology)

@@cerberaodollam Just as contrarian and unpleasant, but without the added baggage of being right about anything!

@@the57bears yes men were to blame for her beliefs

what does it mean to get palatalized? How do you say structures?

@@ViskayaNuebler79 I'm not really sure what your background knowledge is in language and linguistics. But in linguistics we usually describe a sound by (among other things) where in the vocal tract is the greatest constriction. In other words, we describe a sound by where in the mouth it is made. So the sounds (I'm putting them in / / just to separate them) /r/ and /sh/ are both made primarily at the hard palate, for the sake of simplicity the hard palate is the roof of the mouth. But the sounds /s/ /t/ /k/ (a hard 'c' in structures) are made in places other than the hard palate. So I would say 'structures' something like (I'm separating sounds by hypens (-) just to make the individual sounds more clear) /s-t-r-u-k-sh-u-r-s/ ([stɹʌkʃɚz] for those who can read IPA). Hank tends to move many of the sounds to the palate (or palatalizes them). This makes his 'structures' sound like /sh-ch-r-u-k-sh-u-r-sh/ ([ ʃt͡ʃɹʌkʃɚʃ ]). TL;DR: He tends to produce most of the sounds at the hard palate (i.e. palatalized) whereas I tend to produce most of them other places in the mouth (alveolar ridge for most). Sorry if that was more than you were looking for. I'm more than happy to answer more questions; I am a language nerd :)

These are the kinds of comments I come to youtube to read, thank you :)

That's fascinating! Apparently, it was German scientists who most supported Carl Woese's work on the archaea as a separate domain of life (ref. Quammen, "The Tangled Tree"). Incidentally, my US high school biology of the 90s had nothing to say about this whatsoever.

Same my dude, good night

bad investment

Did they also teach you the difference between a theory and a hypothesis? And that proving is not really possible as much as disproving.

@@DouglasEKnappMSAOM 🙄 Seriously? What about my comment compelled you to throw this Scientific Method 101 BS at me?

The woman who discovered the psychic symbiosis possible between the Tenno and the Warframes.

YEAHHHHHH im a massive warframe fan and i already knew about the naming inspiration, but hearing the narrator of this video talk about Lynn’s theories and “stubborn attitude towards her work” i couldn’t help but notice the sheer amount of similarities between the two... knowing that honestly makes the warframe Margulis so much cooler to me now

sending you good vibes for your art! have had art block this past week and I feel like my brain was replaced by a rock jttm always inspires me though, so perhaps I'll try and join you:)

Cool, I do that as well!

I couldn't just listen to these videos, the filmed part is just as important to enjoy the content 😍😍😍

That is humanity in general. We are the most territorial beings on this world.

The dirac sea describes the behavior of a field theory with fermions. It is very much mainstream physics.

... you know that tropic's kind of "how long is a piece of string" scale of broad?

Oh, because she was also a 9/11 truther and an AIDS denialist and generally just seemed to go out of her way to try and piss people off because she was forever bitter about endosymbiogenesis being laughed at. Got it.

I feel like she was a complete scientist.. scientists come with all kinds of opinions and morals.. she was human after all.

So what you clarify here - in other words - is that she was a better human being than those who sully her name for no reason whatsoever.

Hey there! We might make a video about staning in the future but so far we never showed a stain organism here, the stains usually kill the organisms and we don’t want to be harming any of our pond buddies. :D -James

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-gf-ZUYIkPl0.html Around 1:30 should be the answer

Hank knows this, famously

Okay, apparently you _are_ talking about the organelles. That does indeed sound a bit insane.