For the alternative theorists:

[Write4U]

so?
science can probably replicate on demand almost any DNA you choose.
the fact still remains that science has not been able to recreate life from the elements.

True, but the universe did.

isn't that what we are talking about? life on earth? nature as on earth?

No, we are talking about the origins of life anywhere in the entire universe.

yes, science can create compounds not found in nature, as in here on earth, our nature.

Why do you want to restrict life to earth only. That is presumptuous, IMO.

the only way i know of to "make gold" is with the use of "atom smashers"

Yes, a little trick of universal potential which occurred billions of years ago inside novae. Gold is not native to the earth.

that may be true, but we are talking about a specific place, er, planet.

Why?

yes i will agree, a reasonable and logical conclusion would be a good starting point.

Yes, and then test from available evidence. It may take awhile. It took the universe 13,800,000,000 years (give or take).

 

[billvon]

okay.
this i gotta see.

Here's a list of organisms that have evolved into new species as we have watched:

Evening Primrose (Oenothera gigas)
Kew Primrose (Primula kewensis)
Raphanobrassica
Hemp Nettle (Galeopsis tetrahit)
Madia citrigracilis
Brassica
Maidenhair Fern (Adiantum pedatum)
Woodsia Fern (Woodsia abbeae)
Stephanomeira malheurensis
Yellow Monkey Flower (Mimulus guttatus)
Fruit fly (Drosophila paulistorum)

 

[origin]

Here's a list of organisms that have evolved into new species as we have watched:

Evening Primrose (Oenothera gigas)
Kew Primrose (Primula kewensis)
Raphanobrassica
Hemp Nettle (Galeopsis tetrahit)
Madia citrigracilis
Brassica
Maidenhair Fern (Adiantum pedatum)
Woodsia Fern (Woodsia abbeae)
Stephanomeira malheurensis
Yellow Monkey Flower (Mimulus guttatus)
Fruit fly (Drosophila paulistorum)

Don't forget the nylon eating bacteria Flavobacterium, Sp. KI72

 

[Gerry Nightingale]

In reply to origin and AIP's re: life.

Okay...I think I'll give this a rest with regard to returning your "serves". I have no wish to argue with someone who adopts the posture of a pedantic school-teacher.

"Muscles?"...Really? This all you can respond with?

You want to parse semantics? And provide "links" that do not answer the question of "how did the Eel form cells that literally are components for a biological battery".

Everything I have wrote on this "thread" are legitimate questions...and I provided what I think may be an answer.

Responding with "Life with Father" type declarations such as "Egad...such nonsense! What is this! This "force" that you speak of!? Never have I heard such drivel! You

must provide proof!!! Proof, I say! Why, never have I read such things! And therefore, they are meaningless! Because I say so!"

You respond to me as if you were addressing a recalcitrant child. A dolt. No, I did not ride the "short bus" to school.

(I was likely studying "evolution" before you were born...to keep harping on this singular aspect reveals how "weak" your own understanding of evolution truly is. You

still don't "get" it)



(Thanks for reading!) p.s., you remind me of pmb.

 

[origin]

In reply to origin and AIP's re: life.

Okay...I think I'll give this a rest with regard to returning your "serves". I have no wish to argue with someone who adopts the posture of a pedantic school-teacher.

OK

"Muscles?"...Really? This all you can respond with?

Yup.

You want to parse semantics? And provide "links" that do not answer the question of "how did the Eel form cells that literally are components for a biological battery".
Everything I have wrote on this "thread" are legitimate questions...and I provided what I think may be an answer.

Your writing style is a bit hard to follow, what was the answer you provided.

Responding with "Life with Father" type declarations such as "Egad...such nonsense! What is this! This "force" that you speak of!? Never have I heard such drivel! You
must provide proof!!! Proof, I say! Why, never have I read such things! And therefore, they are meaningless! Because I say so!"
You respond to me as if you were addressing a recalcitrant child. A dolt. No, I did not ride the "short bus" to school.

OK. How would you suggest I respond to the proposal that "cells learned how to manufacture electricity"?

(I was likely studying "evolution" before you were born...

You studied evolution when you were 2 years old??

to keep harping on this singular aspect reveals how "weak" your own understanding of evolution truly is. You still don't "get" it)

What singular aspect? No, I guess I don't get 'it'.

p.s., you remind me of pmb.

What's pmb?

 

[Write4U]

Extremophiles,

Although we have not discussed all of the possible extreme environments or the creatures that inhabit them, it would only take a little imagination to come up with other types of extreme environments like those with excessive electric currents or inside of rocks.

The goal is to identify extreme environments on Earth, study the nature of life within these environments, and extend that knowledge to our search for life in the Universe.

Recommendations:
Extreme Environments Beyond Earth
Life on Venus
Life on Mars
Life on Gas Giants
The Nature of Life
The Tree of Life
Thermophiles
Psychrophiles
Acidophiles
Alkaliphiles
Xerophiles
Halophiles
Barophiles
Anaerobes
Radiation resistant

http://thelivingcosmos.com/Extremophiles/Extremophiles_12May06.html

And check out this little wonder,

Deinococcus radiodurans is an extremophilic bacterium, one of the most radioresistant organisms known. It can survive cold, dehydration, vacuum, and acid, and is therefore known as a polyextremophile and has been listed as the world's toughest bacterium in The Guinness Book Of World Records.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinococcus_radiodurans

IMO, there is a lot of work to be done still; perhaps we have only just begun.

 

[leopold]

Here's a list of organisms that have evolved into new species as we have watched:

ah yes, ye old semantics game.
uh, yeah.
this is the famous ADAPTATION we have been talking about.
and let's not even start the "small accumulating changes" crap.

 

[origin]

ah yes, ye old semantics game.
uh, yeah.
this is the famous ADAPTATION we have been talking about.
and let's not even start the "small accumulating changes" crap.

I see. You have rejected reality and substituded with your own.

Knock yourself out!

 

[billvon]

this is the famous ADAPTATION we have been talking about.

Adaptation is not inherited. You can adapt to too much sun by getting a tan. But you can't pass that on to your kids.

Evolutionary change IS inherited. Your child will not have darker skin just because you like lying in the sun. However, the next generation will have darker skin on average if you (and many other people who have fair skin) die before having kids due to skin cancer.

 

[paddoboy]

(I was likely studying "evolution" before you were born...to keep harping on this singular aspect reveals how "weak" your own understanding of evolution truly is. You
.

Being involved in answering other inane replies I have not gone into depth in what you are trying to say.
No one disputes evolution...in fact this is not about evolution.
It's about how life STARTED in the Universe, and the question of LIFE arising from NON LIFE.

Panspermia may be the answer as to how LIFE started on EARTH, in fact I quite like the idea, although conclusive evidence is yet to be forthcoming.

So Gerry, what do you say to the question of how did life start in the Universe.
I see the only obvious, logical answer as LIFE AROSE FROM NON LIFE.

 

[paddoboy]

So Gerry, what do you say to the question of how did life start in the Universe.
I see the only obvious, logical answer as LIFE AROSE FROM NON LIFE.

Gerry?

 

[leopold]

Adaptation is not inherited.

the sherpas would disagree.

Evolutionary change IS inherited.

well, the sherpas evolved into what? high altitude humans?
that's ADAPTATION billvon.

Your child will not have darker skin just because you like lying in the sun. However, the next generation will have darker skin on average if you (and many other people who have fair skin) die before having kids due to skin cancer.

this has GOT to be the most nonsensical thing i have ever read on this forum.

 

[Gerry Nightingale]

In reply to paddoboy and AIP's re: Life.

I concur with "life from non-life"...of course, there may be some "X" factor involved that is not currently known. (No, no "deity") What really interests me are the

conditions/forces that served as "causation". For instance, I noticed that viruses have been mentioned several times in this "thread".

The part of their existence that interests me is "by what mechanisms did they come to be?" Are they part "failure" or a supreme accomplishment? They are perfect

in their singular identity...they "need" nothing. (although this might be subject to change, as new information is found)


(Thanks for reading!)

 

[paddoboy]

In reply to paddoboy and AIP's re: Life.

I concur with "life from non-life"...of course, there may be some "X" factor involved that is not currently known. (No, no "deity")

Great...You did have me worried for a while.

The other aspects including viruses, I'm not that knowledgable to comment on.
Just the logical common sense factor, that accepting the BB/Inflationary model, there is no question that the conclusion that Universal life arose from non life, is obvious.
That's all my argument has ever been.

Your "X" factor though intrigues me...what did you have in mind?

 

[leopold]

the concept of "things becoming alive" is ludicrous.

 

[paddoboy]

the concept of "things becoming alive" is ludicrous.

Not really...your here, I'm here.....Just chemistry.

 

[leopold]

Not really...your here, I'm here.....Just chemistry.

yes, and we are both samples of life coming from life.

 

[Motor Daddy]

the concept of "things becoming alive" is ludicrous.

Picture this, a thing called a bird deposits a thing called an egg. The bird sits on the thingy called the egg. Time elapses. The thing called the egg becomes a thing called a bird, and a broken empty shell of an egg thingy.

 

[dumbest man on earth]

Picture this, a thing called a bird deposits a thing called an egg. The bird sits on the thingy called the egg. Time elapses. The thing called the egg becomes a thing called a bird, and a broken empty shell of an egg thingy.

Okay...Motor Daddy, let me get this straight...

A living male "thing called a bird" utilizes it's living sperm...
...to fertilize the living ova of a living female "thing called a bird"...
...to produce a living egg that is incubated outside of the living "thing called a bird"...

..."time elapses"...while the living embryo develops inside the living "egg thingy"...

...the living, growing and maturing young "thing called a bird" outgrows the confines of its hard-shelled incubation chamber...
...the living, growing and maturing young "thing called a bird" escapes/hatches from its hard-shelled incubation chamber...

Did I get any of that correct, Motor Daddy?

If I did, could you please explain where, at any point during that reproduction cycle, did NON-LIVING material "become" alive???!!!

And also...Motor Daddy...how is your example of any use in support of the idea that "LIFE AROSE FROM NON LIFE"???!!!

 

[Motor Daddy]

Okay...Motor Daddy, let me get this straight...

A living male "thing called a bird" utilizes it's living sperm...
...to fertilize the living ova of a living female "thing called a bird"...
...to produce a living egg that is incubated outside of the living "thing called a bird"...

..."time elapses"...while the living embryo develops inside the living "egg thingy"...

...the living, growing and maturing young "thing called a bird" outgrows the confines of its hard-shelled incubation chamber...
...the living, growing and maturing young "thing called a bird" escapes/hatches from its hard-shelled incubation chamber...

Did I get any of that correct, Motor Daddy?

If I did, could you please explain where, at any point during that reproduction cycle, did NON-LIVING material "become" alive???!!!

And also...Motor Daddy...how is your example of any use in support of the idea that "LIFE AROSE FROM NON LIFE"???!!!

(confused)

Motor Daddy, since it seems that you only want to "play your childish, puerile and asinine games", then I humbly request that, from here on out, on SciForums, you "play" them with some other Poster, please???!!!

Goodbye, Motor Daddy.

Have fun!