Ancestors of Rocks and Elements

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

EmptyForceOfChi

Banned
Banned
If we follow the trail of evolution back far enough to the pre biological state, are we not according to the theory of evolution the direct ancestors of your common Stone or rock?.


Peace.
 
I actually like the idea of rocks and inert chemicals as the ancient ancestors of man.

And, in a certain way, they are.
 
May I remind people that the topic of this thread is the pre-biological evolution of humans and the trail of evolution before biological life and leading up to it.

Over-Stand
 
Nothing —> fluctuation —> opposite pair production —> elemental particles —> stars —> light atomic elements + heavier atomic elements —> molecules —> cells and rocks —> life —> brains —> consciousness —> posting about rocks.
 
EmptyForceOfChi said:
If we follow the trail of evolution back far enough to the pre biological state, are we not according to the theory of evolution the direct ancestors of your common Stone or rock?.


Peace.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are quite correct! Rocks can come to life, given the right conditions and enough time.
 
EmptyForceOfChi said:
I was told to stop talking about religion so much, so here is a nice scientific thread for you all. Lets talk about science, real science like this, im interested in your opinion about this Gustav I should Imagine this subject is childs play to you as it is to me.
Click to expand...
You must think we're stupid. Your question is patently ridiculous and everyone here knows it, including you. To pretend that it is not a joke is intellectual dishonesty, which is the most egregious form of trolling on a website that strives to be dedicated to science and scholarship.

You've already been banned once for preaching, so you come back trolling. If you do not halt this ridiculous "discussion" you'll be banned again, for longer.

It's your choice, dude.
 
GeoffP said:
Actually, abiogenesis is a common enough term that people will follow it.

Did you have questions about it?
Click to expand...


No I just realised how many ordinary people I meet are not able to follow evolution back past Biological states. I thought maybe many people who post on here have never studied it back to this point or maybe do not understand pre biological evolutions in the universe.


I was going to put a poll with it to see the awareness levels but I already added a few polls in other threads and didn;t want to flood alot of them.


I don't have any questions no I understand it fully.


Peace
 
oh, crap, I studied what the current thinking is when I took Biology 1, but that was the Semester of Sinusitis fever...

Amino acids in solution start forming coherent patterns, the patterns start increasing in complexity....

Ooh! Google is my friend... http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/originoflife.html#RNAworld

....The study by the group of John Sutherland (Powner et al. 2009) shows how nature could have spontaneously assembled pyrimidine ribonucleotide monomers from prebiotically plausible molecules through intermediates that contribute atoms to both the sugar and base portions of the ribonucleotides, thus avoiding a condensation step of sugar and base altogether
Click to expand...

Yes (and gawd that was a miserable semester!) since RNA can function both as a catalyst and a template it is thought RNA molecules formed the first primitive organisms.

Which explains why our cellular "printers" ribosomes-use RNA templates to "print" up cells/cell structures out of components...but not DNA. DNA is used as a template for the RNA. Since the RNA actually came first. Having a "library" of DNA, that then got stowed in a nucleus to protect the integrity of more complex organisms, is a later innovation.
 
Last edited:
Oh, I scrolled down on the same site to find this bit:

In a different putative scenario, minerals also play an interesting role... it has been hypothesized that life may have begun in the depths of the ocean, in the unique environment of deep-sea hydrothermal vents. It was shown that relevant organic molecules can be synthesized in reactions involving gases and minerals present at those sites, with CO and other small carbon-containing molecules as the carbon source.
Click to expand...

(look under topic# 5)

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/originoflife.html#Orgel2004

Hmm, so that IS one of the considered-possible avenues of life's origin-deep-sea rocks. Go figure.
(Learn something new around here every day....)
 
EmptyForceOfChi said:
No I just realised how many ordinary people I meet are not able to follow evolution back past Biological states.
Click to expand...

Mod note:

That’s because most ordinary people probably have a better understand of the Theory of Evolution that you do.

Most here think you are trolling. I tend to agree, but I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt this once, and this once only.

The Theory of Evolution deals with changes in populations of organisms once they have formed. It does not deal with the mechanisms that changed inanimate matter into animate matter*. That is a process known as abiogenesis. If you want to discuss abiogenesis, then fine – do so. But call it that. Trying to involve the ToE is not valid as it has nothing to say on the matter.

Thus, seeing as this thread proceeds on an invalid postulation, there’s no point keeping it open.

So thread closed.
----------------

(*) There are some aspects of natural selection that would have played a part in the propagation of self-replicating RNA molecules in the pre-biotic Earth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top