Evolution

kmguru

Staff member
I saw on the forum, this sig quote:

The biggest problem with evolution:
If everything did come from a single cell, where did that single cell come from???

The answer:
I read somewhere that the single cells came from aminoacids and electricity and mutation for over a few million years.

Is that correct?
 
that used to be my Signature

but i changed it....i was sick of all the remarks I got, but on another note......

to answer your ? with a ?....
where did the amino acids come from?
 
That part is easy. Aminoacids are chains of Carbon, Hydrogen, Nitrogen and Oxygen atoms which was plentyful during the birth of Earth. Throw in the right temperature, pressure, water, light and electricity all moving, swissing around....

Arginine formula: C6H14N4O2
 
KM,

i know i have this before and here i ask again...

where did energy come from,from where the matter takes its derivation in pair production...
???
bye!:confused:
 
As we discussed elsewhere, the universe moves from Simplicity to Complexity. The fundamental simplicity is "nothing". It is simple and obvious, no matter how improbable that may sound.

Based on Sanatana Dharma (aka Hinduism), the universe is created and desoyed ad infinitum. Well, when a super complex system goes through its next instability, it may destroy itself to nothing - just to start all over again.

And what is the properties of nothing or what is "nothing", we do not know. But it is logical. come to think of it. Just after the big bang, we got hydrogen which gradually over time became more complex matter. So, if you go backward, what do you get?

The reason we do not know is because, we are inside a system whose boundary we can not see. If we can get out of this universe and observe it outside, then we can say, aha! so thats what happens. But we are stuck inside....
 
I did start a thread on Evolution as a subject a few weeks back:
http://www.sciforums.com/f19/s/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4784&perpage=20&pagenumber=1

Somehow you seemed to have missed it Kmguru.

I wrote the following to answer your question there, of course it needs a bit of refining since I wrote it many years back.

I'll go from the planets creation:

The Sun in its infancy suffers sunspots that jetison globuals of heated gases in to the cold void of space. The globual begins to float out and manages to just overcome the suns gravity enough not to be pulled back in, but this causes it to have an eliptical trajectory that orbits the sun.

This trajectory causes the globual to cool, and in essence allows it to create a spin, during which time the sun begins slowly to retreat in size as it condenses itself into a more effective fusion/fission centre.

As the spinning globual cools, it begans to have a crust harden for it's surface and as it hardens it has a captured polarisation throughout the landplates. (Magnetic friction can cause the plates to change polarity and cause earthquakes)

This newly formed planetry body is a mass that through it's trajectory, spin and magnetic mass of a disposition begins to attract free floating gas clouds through ionisation.

These eventually form vast pools of liquid upon the newly formed planets surface, that freeze... afterall, the planet lacks and atmosphere... well once that will lead to a greenhouse effect.

Then one day, another once globual appears on a collision course from another eliptical orbit and crashes into the newly formed earth. This causes the earth a trajectory change itself and cracks it's landplates like a spoon cracking the shell of an egg.

These cracks allowed hot molten materials to begin to merge with the frozen liquids on the planets surface, beneath a vapour cloud that had been thrust up to defy gravity and begin to create a atmosphere.

The hot rock caused liquid to cascade into the depths of the molten chasms, and caused great clouds of Acidic gases to extrude out and merge with the newly formed weather system, of lightening through friction.

The planets surface would be covered by hail, suffer cloudy spells (not just a day and night) and the acid rain began to fall.
Under the newly forming seas surface, at the base of a molten sizemic fissure, the acid levels began to have effects with some of the solidified rocks, the effect was Protein.

As this continued the effect metamorphed from protein to single celled creatures, that didn't rely upon sunlight, just warm fertile waters at the base of a sizemic fissure.

The single celled lifeforms began to change slowly, through a mixture of chemical changes in the water from the continued earthly reactions and the waste (excriment and dead organisms) caused the cells to become different. When sunlight began to beat down throughout the planets newly formed ozone, The very frequency and radiation was enough to cause a new step in evoltions path... Mutation, where a single cell splits to two, and they become Siamese twins.

Later, these Siamese twin cells would continue the evolution of difference, although joined and create the first Hermaphrodites and asexual organisms.

Further still these dual-cell creatures would then split again, allowing them to mate with each other, or to become puratins of one sex or another.

(You could look at our DNA for a clue as to how we first transcended, XX female and XY Male, Notice that Male could be percieved as once Hermaphroditic.)

The rest of evolution is Neo-Darwinism.
 
Zion,

I meant via our DNA, Since we have X (Female Ancestory root) and Y (Male Ancestory root). This means we contain genetic traits of both Male and Female (although being Male).

I placed it forwards that at some evolutionary period our specie was probably Hermaphroditic, and that when we moved towards being more Male, certain offspring compensated by swapping a Y Hermaphroditic state for an extra X, making them Female.

The rest is evoluionary history.
 
Stryder:
But other animals have different chromasomic gender determining factors. (damn I wish I had payed more attention in HS Biology) If I remember correctly, grasshoppers have a O chromasome in there for sex determination.

Besides, the genetic trait can't be both XX and YY for female and male, because any combination of traits will give XY or YX, which would leave only middle of the ground hermaphrodites after the first generation.
Oh, and I do know this for a fact: Hermaphrodites are "created" by adding extra X chromsasomes, such that you would have three X traits or two X traits and a Y, etc.

Did that make any sense?
 
Stryder,

X chromosomes are always dominant over Y chromosomes.they are sometimes known as recessive(as far as i know).
as i understand it,
the X chromosome in XY combination if it contains some carrier traits,like for example color blindness,it"ll be expressed in males with makeup as XcY,

whereas in females Since both are X therefore both of them should carry the trait to express it,like the same for color blindness say,XcXc.

bye!
 
The evidence suggests rather that the Y chromosome is a more recent mutation. This would make sense in evolutionary terms if the advantage of genders over hermaphroditism was to separate one set of gametes into a more 'disposable' subspecies which could be subjected to greater competition, thus strengthening the entire species.
 
"...where did that single cell come from??? "

It spontaneouly appeared, just like so many gods, of course!
 
Back
Top