Birth of the Earth

331
8.60
12345678910
Ratings: 8.60/10 from 10 users.

Storyline

Birth of the EarthOur Earth was spinning very fast when it was spit out of the Sun as a molten glob four and one half billion years ago in the initial explosion.

Venus was spinning in an opposite direction when it was spit out and is still doing the same.

The Earth settled down in a very fortunate orbit for the existence of life. At 93 million miles distance from the Sun it receives just about the right amount of radiant energy.

Its spinning has gradually slowed down over these billion of years and is now settled into a comfortable 24 hour rotation at the present time.

It will be millions of years in the future before it slows to a complete halt as our less massive moon has already.

In the days of the dinosaurs when the Earth was spinning faster, the days/night cycles were shorter.

Going back a couple of billion years further, at one time the Earth was spinning so fast that it may have had a ring around it, similar to Saturn.

The Earth was much more oblate at that time, the oceans were more concentrated around the equatorial zones, with much more shallow ocean depths at the poles.

The oceans are still deeper at the equator then they are at the poles and the Earth is still slightly oblate.

More great documentaries

Comments and User Reviews

  • Ez

    Is anyone else having issues watching this? I can't watch it because it will not buffer correctly. It buffers really slowly and then gets to certain spots were it simply stops. I can move the slider past that point and it will start buffering again very slowly. Could it be that everyone is trying to watch this new doc right now during prime time? Sometimes if I wait until most have watched the new doc I can watch it with no issues, or just wait until the sane people have gone to sleep, ahh elusive sweet sleep! How it eludes me constantly- but thats what the pills are for. Maybe I should just pay for more bandwidth, any contributions?

  • http://princejaka.wordpress.com princeton

    i was a bit disappointed in the part about the comets and water.. i mean they have never even found water on any comets to say its not "the same water." even the temple 1 mission's impact did not look anything like their animation did (made it seem as if there was a water gush). anyone who looked at the impact and read the NASA official results would know that there was only .5% ice on the surface of temple 1 & no ice on any other comets we observed. also the impact was a series of bright flashes (5 times brighter than expected) followed by finely divided dust (impossible to be water which sublimates) and there were "dust" jets on the dark side of the comet.

    i feel they were a tad bit dishonest in that part.. or just didn't do their homework and saw what they wanted to see.

    let down!

  • Ryab

    I was under the impression that the earth and other planets were formed from the left over debris after the sun had formed from the dust and gas in a nebula...

    Have I been completely misled, and the earth was "spat out by the sun"?

  • Achems Razor

    Was a good doc. overall, but like @princeton said, I am also not satisfied with their water from comets scenario, was to obscure.

    Ez, I did not have any trouble watching the doc. buffered okay.

  • zol

    @EZ I use the Download Helper extension for Firefox to download longish videos from the YouTube site itself (doesn't work for other sites) for convenient (and repeatable) viewing later. Slow downloads are less annoying if you aren't staring at them. Also a good plan to load a flash game or plenty of reading material first if you need something else to do while waiting, in case downloading consumes all your bandwidth.

  • Dr. Dunkleosteus

    Pretty good. The clock reference keeps things organized, but they jumped around a lot, skipping whole hours. The last 1/4 was rushed I feel. They went from the moon forming, to a brief mention of dinosaurs, then straight to humans. Uh, Cambrian Explosion anyone? Tectonic movement and continental formation? The little "could a human survive on Earth at [i]this[/i] stage? what about [i]this[/i] stage? Or [i]this[/i] stage?" bit was silly, but was probably thrown in for the kids.

    7.5/10

  • Cool E Beans

    Note that none of the descriptions given are covered in this presentation. I think the copy may be from some other video.

    As to the content, any scientist who says 'now we know exactly how that happend' is a fool and anyone who believes what they have said is a da** fool.

  • Lester W

    Does anyone know why the earth spins toward the sun while venus spins away from the sun?

    I'm sure there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for this but I don't think I've ever heard it.

  • Lester W

    Oh, and by the way, EZ try to look up the name on Google. Certainly when it's first posted.

    I personally use orbit to download the file. I then convert the .flv to an avi file. After that, I use windows media player to open up the file because my settings in WMPlayer are set to "Share" to xbox.
    I then watch them on the big screen. :)

  • Cliff T

    You know, if it's found that the Earth is growing, this will all be blown apart and they will have to rethink how the universe formed to how it is today. I may be one of those that accepts that way of thinking but I'm in a minority which I can accept, but I would encourage people to look into it more rather than just laugh at the very idea of it. To me, Pangaea seems more laughable, but I still acknowledge it as the current accepted theory.

    @ princeton, you are certain that you mean comets or are you getting mixed up with asteroids? (Apparently some scientists have observed asteroids with tails made of ice, when it was previously thought they were too close to the sun to retain water in any form)

  • Lester W

    Earth moves toward the sun, thanx figured it out. I'm dum.

  • Ez

    @ Lester W

    I think you are referring to the fact that if you were to look down at the plane of the solar system from its 'north pole' you would see the planets orbiting the Sun counter clockwise, and rotating on their axis counterclockwise. Except for Venus. Venus would be rotating clockwise as it orbited the Sun counterclockwise. Scientist think this is due to some traumatic event in the far past that affected the planet while it was being formed. Perhaps a collision with another planet, or a huge asteroid impact caused this odd behavior. Hope this answers your question.

  • Cliff

    @Cliff T

    I'd consider Pangaea a little laughable but the continents seem to fit together rather nicely. :)

    But that's why science is so great. We go with the best theory until it's proven wrong, or added to. Everyday something unimaginable could be learned.

  • http://www.intbel.net Intbel

    So ... our planet began as a dust cloud? Okay - where'd that come from, please?

    The dust being tiny chunks o' this an' that - sounds similar to a cloud o' sand ... which was originally a chunk o' rock.

    No answers to origins at all in this movie.

    I also question "Our only safe haven" - that is an assumption based on what? Nothing as far as I can see.

    Sorry, guys, I have learned nothing from this documentary.

  • Benjinator3000

    @Intbel....You should look into the universe with stevan hawkin!

  • tp

    its on Google video in 3 parts, maybe the link could be replaced?
    enjoyed it thoroughly.
    this is my first post so thanks for a great site Vlatko, im on here almost every night.

  • Dean

    hi vlatko this link is not working on 11/11/2010 hope to watch this one soon it sounds interesting

  • David Pirtle

    @Cliff T, I don't think the expanding earth hypothesis is laughable. I think it has absolutely no evidence to support it. Evidence for plate tectonics and Pangaea is extensive, and most would say overwhelming.

    @intbel The hydrogen and helium in our solar system condensed shortly after the 'big bang', as energy began to cool. All the heavier elements were fused in stars which died, and the resulting nebulae from those dead stars is what forms new systems like ours.

    @princeton Its not accurate to say we've never found water while investigating comets. It is fair to say we have found far less direct evidence of water than was first exected. However, what the documentary was referring to was not direct observation of water, but observation of hydrogen isotopes through spectroscopy.

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @tp, thanks for commenting and pointing me to the source.

    The doc is fixed now.

  • Arbutus

    [00:46:50] Sometimes its better to not follow internet links put up here.
    [00:49:14] I have to limit myself to listening only to websites that
    recognise the importance of disseminating info that is based on rigorous usage
    of the scientific method.
    [00:54:51] Everything said (as well as how it is said) has to go
    thru rigorous peer review.

  • slappy

    The Sun did not "spit out" the earth, if it did the planet would be so intensely radioactive that life could never take hold. Venus is spinning backwards because of a massive impact that reversed it spin. If the planets where already formed when the nuclear furnace that we call our Sun went critical, they (the planets) would've been destroyed. I don't know where this doc came from, but it is horribly inaccurate. Just because something sounds right , doesn't make it science. Try doing the research and subjecting the hypothesis to the scientific method, BEFORE making the doc.

  • slappy

    Post Script - Thank you Vlatko for putting all this information at our fingertips, you're making the world a smarter place, and I think that makes it a better place to live. keep up the good works.

  • Wyatt

    the swimming baby?!?!?!?!

  • NIko

    Ryab

    I think they just never said the word "nebula", because they had pictures of them during the scenes explaining how the sun formed.

  • http://www.intbel.co.uk Intbel

    @ dude7474 ...

    Don't be silly, whatever God might be it's of Love and ain't gonna strike anyone down.

  • http://www.intbel.net Intbel

    @ David Pirtle ...

    How do you know The hydrogen and helium in our solar system condensed shortly after the ‘big bang’, as energy began to cool. All the heavier elements were fused in stars which died, and the resulting nebulae from those dead stars is what forms new systems like ours?

    I'm not saying that's not what happened, I'm just asking how it is you or anyone else could possibly know?

    Either way, the little evidence we have does not constitute proof so saying that you "know" is not entirely accurate, is it?

  • http://www.intbel.net Intbel

    @ Epicurus ...

    Yes, there is something more I want to know. I wanna know what is the origins of life, the universe and everything.

  • mojo

    Good comments from everyone. Another good doc is "The Privileged Planet"

  • capriciouz

    The reasons scientists are supremely confident hydrogen was the first element is three fold:

    1. Because it only has one electron, and we can directly observe that the number of electrons are what determine what the element is.
    2. We can observe the sun converting hydrogen into helium.
    3. It is the most abundant chemical in the universe.

    All of this considered, logically, the only possible explanation for the elements is that hydrogen must be the "building blocks" of ALL elements, if you will.

    In order to fuse atoms, it requires great heat and pressure, which we assume must have existed in the big bang process at some point otherwise the universe should only be hydrogen. The reason we are convinced all other elements came from stars is for this reason. Stars are the only source of this immense heat and pressure required that we know of.

    If you'd like to go deeper down that rabbit hole and understand how hydrogen itself was formed or why an electron could make such a big difference, you then open up the door to particle physics and quantum mechanics.

    Hope that helps.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=48913976 Magnum P Eisenhower

    Not to discredit entirely what you have said. However, hydrogen *was* the only element after the big bang. What's interesting is that there were minute flaws in the uniformity of the spread of hydrogen, which allowed gravity to pull in hydrogen atoms. Eventually when the hydrogen was dense and hot enough at those various points nuclear fusion occurred and formed stars.

    It was from the death of these supper massive stars, that went nova, and expelled all the heavier elements into this universe.

  • volcanogirl

    I find it disturbing that no mention of Bill Hartmann was made for the theory of the origin of the Moon. It was in 1975 thatHartmann first proposed that the moon may have formed by an impact of the "Mars-sized" planet. His theory was then tested later on and confirmed by computer models!

  • http://twitter.com/NathanVez « - - -

    we just have to keep the balance and take care of the earth

  • mudshark23

    You're referring to the Electric Universe concept?

  • Sam Haslam

    Like being recited your favourite story for the umpteenth time as a child, watching this documentary had the same reassuring effect.

    You've heard it all before, but not in a bad way. It's interesting, yet simply explained. If this sort of thing already interests you, then you probably know much of what's said. Despite that, it's still fascinating to hear it all again.

  • D. Douglas

    Unfortunately science doesn't do that - it resists change as much or more than any other sector of societal infrastructure. This has increased in later years because there is LESS PROFIT to be made from re-writing science literature, and re-generating it - as opposed to simply spitting out the same editions year after year. So no matter how WRONG previous theories may turn out to be, they have a decided advantage over anything new, always.

  • Common_Tator

    Don't ask for much, eh?