Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

16 Pages « < 3 4 5 6 7 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

Biology Human Evolution

views
     
kaika
post Jul 8 2009, 10:56 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
61 posts

Joined: May 2009
Yep. Natural selection.
SUSmaknyuus
post Jul 9 2009, 09:56 AM

New Member
*
Junior Member
38 posts

Joined: Jun 2009
QUOTE(lin00b @ Jul 8 2009, 09:25 PM)
huh? please elaborate
*
show me one cell that is simple.
lin00b
post Jul 9 2009, 12:13 PM

nobody
*******
Senior Member
3,592 posts

Joined: Oct 2005
simple and complex is relative.

compared to multi cellular organism, all single cell organism is simple.

compare to single cell eukaryotic organism, all prokaryotic organism is simple.

compared to that, viruses are simple.

compared to that, free flowing genetic material (those that are theoretically formed at primordial seas) are simple.

compared to that, individual carbon chain molecules are simple.

compared to that, atoms are simple.

ad nauseam....

Nagisa
post Jul 9 2009, 03:20 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
35 posts

Joined: Jul 2009
I am not very well-versed in Theory of Evolution.
Most of my understanding came from my own thinking and some science books.

When we say evolution, we are not saying a monkey which born as monkey, by growing bigger and older, the monkey start to lose its hair, learn to walk fully with 2 legs, drops its tail and become human. As we noticed not a single monkey in the zoo ever grow and evolved become humans.

We are talkin a big population of a species, which give birth to its species but with slight unique differentiation between each individuals. For example people. You look like your brothers and sisters. You also look like your father and mother. You also have similarity with your uncles, aunties and cousing. Not surprisingly you also more or less has same skin and hair colour with your neighbours and friends.

But obviously, you are unique and different from all of them in some way. Maybe you can run faster than you other brother. Maybe you are more dumb in math compare to your other sister. You are taller than your neighbour son. You might even have different type of blood compare to your own parent eg. you are type O , whereas your father is OA and Mother is OB . And this differentiation come from random combination and sometime accidental mutation gene during conception ... not during you are growing up.

The second factors that causes evolution is the external environment.

Presumably, a virus mutated and can kill all the people except people with blood type O ... and by times go by ... we will find a lot or almost all the people who lives on earth have blood type O . Mutation does occur during propagation, maybe once in while during ovulation, some part of the gene or amino acid failed to locked in probably and the baby produced might have blood type A again, or maybe type B ... or new type C !

Since, when the situation where all the type A and type B people has been wiped out, the virus that by itself would have ceased or maybe mutated to the different type, which might start to attack blood type O ?

This level of evolution still happening, like races features, G6PD deficient, Thalasemia, Sickle cell, etc.

Let say the whole earth is flooded, you will either start to grow gill like fish, or wing start to come out from your back .... this is another stupid ignorant statement or understanding by people who is .... you know what !

wub.gif
SUSmaknyuus
post Jul 9 2009, 03:23 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
38 posts

Joined: Jun 2009
QUOTE(lin00b @ Jul 9 2009, 12:13 PM)
simple and complex is relative.

compared to multi cellular organism, all single cell organism is simple.

compare to single cell eukaryotic organism, all prokaryotic organism is simple.

compared to that, viruses are simple.

compared to that, free flowing genetic material (those that are theoretically formed at primordial seas) are simple.

compared to that, individual carbon chain molecules are simple.

compared to that, atoms are simple.

ad nauseam....
*
you are the scientist. you should be able to answer that instead of evading my question.

how did the first cell able to replicated, and on what purpose?

what actually really happened in the "premordial soup" as claimed by darwin?

i am sure theres techonological advancement now since the past century. dont tell me you still dont know.

what kind of scientist are you? if you cant put up a rational argument, then you are no different with the believers who relied on FAITH.
latias93
post Jul 9 2009, 03:37 PM

Peminat Setia Exists
******
Senior Member
1,270 posts

Joined: Nov 2008
From: Soviet State of Sarawak Status: Exiled



Has anyone here seen the 'Missing Link' fossil at the London Museum of Natural History? I went there, can learn a lot about Darwinism and such as well as gawking at the missing link itself.

I suggest anyone that is in London or going to London anytime soon pay a visit to the Museum biggrin.gif
Nagisa
post Jul 9 2009, 04:01 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
35 posts

Joined: Jul 2009
When talking about evolution and the first living organism ... there is a big different.

First organism is came about from chances.
It is a very simple organism, with just a few combination of shell of amino acids, some short strain of RNA and simple carbon material which come together by chances. The probability is very rare but make happen because of simplistic nature and vast number random chances that are involved. There is Billions of amino acid, carbon, maybe water, energy on One planet multiply by billions of planets in one galaxy, multiply by billions of galaxies out there making a so-call rare probability become not so rare anymore when compare to this Mega billions chances that is make available.

Variation of species came from evolution.
Evolution is not talking about chance anymore.
We are not talking about a probability of a very complex protein, happen to be together with a very complex carbohydrate, happen together with some complex collagen, DNA, RNA, and with everything else and suddenly pop-up a complex species like tiger, giraffe or even humans.

Evolution best seen thru bacteria as mention before because of its small size so we can have a big population of bacteria in a single cm square, short life span, and we can manipulate their environment.

In real life, we can see fossil and actually even life animals. Tiger, lion, leopard, cheetah are obviously came from same ancestor. Do you know that white tiger came from orange tiger ? Not that the orange tiger getting old and its orange fur start to gray like human hair and become white tiger. By some chances, the combination of 2 cells of Orange tigers give rise to a white tiger !

Have you see a sea-snail that have tentacles like squid ? I almost got a seizure when I saw it first time ! Its has shelf but it has a very small tentancle waving about ( for what I am not sure) and I can see a spurt of water pump up from it proppeled it forward at 1 feet per hour. Now I know why snail and clam are of the same families with squid and octopus ~ the Molusc.

wub.gif
transhumanist92
post Jul 9 2009, 08:39 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
255 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
From: Prison Planet


QUOTE(hazairi @ Jul 4 2009, 10:00 PM)
I believe in theory of evolution but not 100% of it.
I don't believe humans evolved from apes..
As far as i know, scientists still haven't found the missing link between ape and human, i mean the fossils..
*
I guess the fossils were put there by God to test your faith.
lin00b
post Jul 10 2009, 12:51 AM

nobody
*******
Senior Member
3,592 posts

Joined: Oct 2005
QUOTE(maknyuus @ Jul 9 2009, 03:23 PM)
you are the scientist. you should be able to answer that instead of evading my question.

how did the first cell able to replicated, and on what purpose?

what actually really happened in the "premordial soup" as claimed by darwin?

i am sure theres techonological advancement now since the past century. dont tell me you still dont know.

what kind of scientist are you? if you cant put up a rational argument, then you are no different with the believers who relied on FAITH.
*
you re not looking at it deep enough. please read more on evolution.

how do i know you have not read? you say primordial soup as claimed by darwin. darwin said no such thing.

and scientists has successfully created primitive RNA-like substance in lab from nothing.
Read All About It

uh huh. be offensive, that will help you learn. doh.gif stop trolling
befitozi
post Jul 10 2009, 05:09 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,468 posts

Joined: Nov 2004
From: Earth


QUOTE(transhumanist92 @ Jul 9 2009, 08:39 PM)
I guess the fossils were put there by God to test your faith.
*
Why can't these religious rhetoric just stay out of this thread doh.gif
SUSmaknyuus
post Jul 10 2009, 06:35 AM

New Member
*
Junior Member
38 posts

Joined: Jun 2009
QUOTE(lin00b @ Jul 10 2009, 12:51 AM)
you re not looking at it deep enough. please read more on evolution.

how do i know you have not read? you say primordial soup as claimed by darwin. darwin said no such thing.

and scientists has successfully created primitive RNA-like substance in lab from nothing.
Read All About It

uh huh. be offensive, that will help you learn. doh.gif stop trolling
*
what kind of darwinist are you? didnt you read origin of species? darwin did talk about this hot pond even though he didnt dare to explain it further.

creating RNA didnt prove anything. on what purpose it replicate? and how and on what purpose did it survived? this experiment already been done since the 50s when they blast the soup repeatedly with some sort of thunder. dont tell me the scientists are stupid.

as i expected, most atheist and darwinists cant answer this question. they relied their faith only on their scientists. in a way, they are no different with believers. always evading the question to a melodramatic extent.
lin00b
post Jul 10 2009, 07:30 AM

nobody
*******
Senior Member
3,592 posts

Joined: Oct 2005
you speak of purpose, as if life has some grand plan to achieve?
rainpocky
post Jul 10 2009, 07:49 AM

Casual
***
Junior Member
387 posts

Joined: May 2008


man if there was some grand plan of achievement I gotta wonder what the hell is it... ascension to something greater than we are already... lol who knows...
SAM90Gil
post Jul 10 2009, 09:23 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
60 posts

Joined: Jul 2008
wat happened to all salimbest's post? got deleted? this is getting more interesting..
kaika
post Jul 10 2009, 11:18 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
61 posts

Joined: May 2009
talking biologically, the purpose of life (apply to all organism) is to survive and reproduce.
lin00b
post Jul 10 2009, 11:49 AM

nobody
*******
Senior Member
3,592 posts

Joined: Oct 2005
at what point do they changed from chemicals automatically replicating to living beings actively seeking to replicate?
SUSmaknyuus
post Jul 10 2009, 02:06 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
38 posts

Joined: Jun 2009
QUOTE(lin00b @ Jul 10 2009, 07:30 AM)
you speak of purpose, as if life has some grand plan to achieve?
*
why life is only available on earth? life is our reality, not THE reality. who defines life? what is life? why life as we know is only in carbon-based form? DNA replication itself show this "life" comes with a purpose.
lin00b
post Jul 10 2009, 02:13 PM

nobody
*******
Senior Member
3,592 posts

Joined: Oct 2005
QUOTE(maknyuus @ Jul 10 2009, 02:06 PM)
why life is only available on earth? life is our reality, not THE reality. who defines life? what is life? why life as we know is only in carbon-based form? DNA replication itself show this "life" comes with a purpose.
*
how sure are you life is only available on earth? when the furthest we have ever got away is just a mere 15 light hours away. the universe is vast. to think that we are special is nothing but arrogance.

DNA replication = life has a purpose; i suppose crystal formation shows ions has a purpose?

as for meaning of life, such philosophical questions are better served at bvnb than here.
SUSmaknyuus
post Jul 10 2009, 03:00 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
38 posts

Joined: Jun 2009
QUOTE(lin00b @ Jul 10 2009, 02:13 PM)
how sure are you life is only available on earth? when the furthest we have ever got away is just a mere 15 light hours away. the universe is vast. to think that we are special is nothing but arrogance.

DNA replication = life has a purpose; i suppose crystal formation shows ions has a purpose?

as for meaning of life, such philosophical questions are better served at bvnb than here.
*
even if there is "life" in other galaxy, we would not recognize it as life. why? because they are probably NON-carbon based. how would you recognize them as "life" ? scientists have been looking for water on Mars, why water? because they are expecting carbon-based life form there. which is probably not going to happen. what if those living things are silicone-based? for gods sake, an ion must be living things too. thats why i ask, how do you define "living things"?

This post has been edited by maknyuus: Jul 10 2009, 03:04 PM
transhumanist92
post Jul 10 2009, 09:21 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
255 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
From: Prison Planet


QUOTE(kaika @ Jul 10 2009, 11:18 AM)
talking biologically, the purpose of life (apply to all organism) is to survive and reproduce.
*
Survival isn't the goal of evolution not merely because evolution is a blind process but because evolution isn't necessary for survival. Indeed, since evolution depends upon genetic mutation, one might say that evolution is the antithesis of survival from the point of view of the gene which has changed in order to give rise to evolution on a phenotypic level.

Survival may (in most cases) be the goal of individuals, but it is not the goal of evolution. If everything survived, there'd be no natural selection - no evolution

QUOTE(lin00b @ Jul 10 2009, 07:30 AM)
you speak of purpose, as if life has some grand plan to achieve?
*
Human observes universe
Human projects it's own ideas and motivations onto universe.
Human concludes that universe was made for it's benefit.

The only step we're missing this time is the maker part. Why do we have to repeatedly follow this nonsensical and arrogant line of thought? We expect purpose because there is purpose in our own actions. I think Dawkins used this analogy: During the questioning section at a lecture at Eden Court Theater, when asked what the purpose of life was he responded by asking "what is the purpose of a mountain", to illustrate that despite being grammatically correct, it's still a question that simply doesn't make sense and doesn't deserve a serious answer.

I like the quote they use at the beginning "A little philosophy inclines a man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy brings men's minds to religion. --Francis Bacon, On Atheism" - An illustration of why using our simian brains to think too long and hard about questions that make no sense in the first place, can lead to some really silly conclusions.

as for meaning of life, such philosophical questions are better served at bvnb than here.


This post has been edited by transhumanist92: Jul 10 2009, 09:23 PM

16 Pages « < 3 4 5 6 7 > » Top
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0226sec    0.31    5 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 5th December 2025 - 12:43 PM