who knows about evolution and biology shit

August 17, 2012 @ 01:18:58
i got some questions about how life began and all that shit, if anyone knows the answers or where to find them...

alright so life apparently started with a protein being zapped or some frankenstein shit and becoming some sort of microscopic life form, but...

what did this life form live on? in order to sustain life we consume life(dead plants/animals/organic matter) what did these first lil organism shits live on?

how did they automatically reproduce?

at what point does the split occur from a single cell organism that reproduces on its own to organisms that rely on other organisms to reproduce/ how is this evolutionarily beneficial?

these are the questions that haunt me so help a nigga out
August 17, 2012 @ 01:20:28
dont worry about it

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

August 17, 2012 @ 01:22:17
hypebeast OT isn't evolutionary bio 101, b. go enroll in it, get educated, and come back here with answers instead of questions.
August 17, 2012 @ 01:22:50
hypebeast OT isn't evolutionary bio 101, b. go enroll in it, get educated, and come back here with answers instead of questions.

sir yes sir
August 17, 2012 @ 01:23:28
dont worry about it

lol i aint worried just curious
August 17, 2012 @ 01:35:59
-Alot of microscopic organisms can feed on things that arent edible to us, and have differnet mechanisms then us. (they can feed on oil, aresnic, atomspheric nitrogen and other elements, and ofcourse there was water) Since the conditions on earth used to be extreme they probably feed something like that.
-I dont think we know "why" they reproduce, basically just because "thats life"
-I would assume the split happened when there were larger organisms that could make good hosts. It's evolutionarily beneficial because then that organism can use the host for food and not worry about it. (if that's what your asking?)
August 17, 2012 @ 02:43:10
Humans and animals and plants are just big groups of cells that rely on each other (symbiotic relationships)

single cell organisms usually don't survive that long, so billions of years of natural selection created bigger animals and plants
August 17, 2012 @ 02:52:49
one day there was a man, he met a very beautiful woman
they fell deeply in love and at a special time in their lives, they decided to do grown up actions.
these actions lead to the greatest creation of all time.... 80hd clothing

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Florida State Seminole

August 17, 2012 @ 06:57:23
Carl sagan is one of the greatest scientific minds to grace the earth. What made him so great is he realized the importance of teaching science in a way that people could understand it simply.

Here is a video that I think will help you, very cool, very easy to understand:

August 17, 2012 @ 07:05:09
There are no definitive answers since it all lies on theory and guesswork, which isnt truly science.
Whatever you choose to believe deals with faith not fact.

Run away from the land of Sodom and Gomorrah, the land of the sinking sand

August 17, 2012 @ 08:33:59
Originally posted by Inactive User
There are no definitive answers since it all lies on theory and guesswork, which isnt truly science.
Whatever you choose to believe deals with faith not fact.


I mean you are right in some sense but just because it's a theory doesn't mean its guesswork. That's like saying gravity, which is also a theory, is guesswork and not truly science. Something takes intense pier review and criticism to become a theory. Evidence upon evidence has been compiled in favor of evolution.

Faith requires no evidence, no fact. I could have faith in a unicorn bringing me candy every night. Doesn't make it real. Doesn't make it a good way to view the history of the cosmos.
August 17, 2012 @ 08:58:34
Originally posted by Inactive User
what did this life form live on? in order to sustain life we consume life(dead plants/animals/organic matter) what did these first lil organism shits live on?

primordial forms of life survived off certain compounds/molecules found in the extreme environment of early earth
Originally posted by Inactive User
how did they automatically reproduce?

it's not defined as life if it doesn't reproduce...life is distinguished by the ability to recreate itself
Originally posted by Inactive User
at what point does the split occur from a single cell organism that reproduces on its own to organisms that rely on other organisms to reproduce/ how is this evolutionarily beneficial?

if you mean asexual vs sexual reproduction, put simply, variation. sexual reproduction permits crosses between individuals' genes to create genetically-distinct offspring, and also allows mutation to occur (probably the most process to ever exist). in the end you have evolution and a species that won't be utterly exterminated by a single disease they would all be susceptible to due to their identical DNA (which is one problem with asexual reproduction)


also,
Humans and animals and plants are just big groups of cells that rely on each other (symbiotic relationships)

this is incorrect
August 17, 2012 @ 17:14:58
Originally posted by Inactive User
There are no definitive answers since it all lies on theory and guesswork, which isnt truly science.
Whatever you choose to believe deals with faith not fact.

lol
In science, the word "theory" does not mean unproven. Evolution is not at all guesswork. It is an observed and proven biological process.
August 17, 2012 @ 17:49:56
Originally posted by Inactive User
There are no definitive answers since it all lies on theory and guesswork, which isnt truly science.
Whatever you choose to believe deals with faith not fact.


I mean you are right in some sense but just because it's a theory doesn't mean its guesswork. That's like saying gravity, which is also a theory, is guesswork and not truly science. Something takes intense pier review and criticism to become a theory. Evidence upon evidence has been compiled in favor of evolution.

Faith requires no evidence, no fact. I could have faith in a unicorn bringing me candy every night. Doesn't make it real. Doesn't make it a good way to view the history of the cosmos.


When I used "theory" it was in the traditional sense of the word not the one used in the scientific community, why?
Well simply because there are no proper or uniformly accepted "scientific theories" on how life miraculously sprang into existence.
The origin of life is one of biology's biggest unanswered problems.
Scientists are good at understanding processes that they can study, abiogenesis however cannot be properly analyzed or studied so the scientific method cannot even be properly applied; it is ultimately founded on pure speculation, not proof.
Faith is a belief that does not require proof which is why I noted that anything you believe is pure faith. Not to mention, to believe life sprang from inorganic matter conflicts with the Law of Biogenesis, which states that life can only arise from other life. If a law is broken once then it isnt really a law anymore is it?

Run away from the land of Sodom and Gomorrah, the land of the sinking sand

August 17, 2012 @ 17:52:41
i got some questions about how life began and all that shit, if anyone knows the answers or where to find them...

alright so life apparently started with a protein being zapped or some frankenstein shit and becoming some sort of microscopic life form, but...

what did this life form live on? in order to sustain life we consume life(dead plants/animals/organic matter) what did these first lil organism shits live on?

how did they automatically reproduce?

at what point does the split occur from a single cell organism that reproduces on its own to organisms that rely on other organisms to reproduce/ how is this evolutionarily beneficial?

these are the questions that haunt me so help a nigga out


dat discovery channel education

Instagram: @esoJlaziR

August 17, 2012 @ 19:09:09
Originally posted by Inactive User
When I used "theory" it was in the traditional sense of the word not the one used in the scientific community, why?
Well simply because there are no proper or uniformly accepted "scientific theories" on how life miraculously sprang into existence.
The origin of life is one of biology's biggest unanswered problems.
Scientists are good at understanding processes that they can study, abiogenesis however cannot be properly analyzed or studied so the scientific method cannot even be properly applied; it is ultimately founded on pure speculation, not proof.
Faith is a belief that does not require proof which is why I noted that anything you believe is pure faith. Not to mention, to believe life sprang from inorganic matter conflicts with the Law of Biogenesis, which states that life can only arise from other life. If a law is broken once then it isnt really a law anymore is it?


But it is not pure speculation, and it is generally expcepted among the scientific community that the early conditions of earth favored reactions that formed organic compounds from inorganic precursors. (primordial soup thoery) Scientists have even replicated the conditions of early earth in the lab and were able to form amino acids.
The whole law biogenesis argument is old, and is from an experiment of Pastuer in which he did an experiement in a present day enivornment which is completely different then early earth. there other theories but this has the most evidence.
August 18, 2012 @ 00:02:10
God.
Please login first to reply.
x