how can it?

[EmptyForceOfChi]

how does a species just come about into bieng, i hear alot about animals evolving from this that and the other,

but ok for example say humans come from apes, the apes came from what? and that what came from what?, and when did the species originaly form?


also i have a few other questions on this subject, wich i will post further intot he thread when i get a basic grasp of shit,

when a certain species of animal first comes into creation, this must be in a certain location on earth right? so wouldent everything in a sense be inbred?,

and a creature cant just boom into existence right, every animal on this earth today came from anouther species right?, so if you trail everything back far enough, it must be single cell organisms correct? like bacteria or fungi?


is it possible that we all come from plantlife? or fungi? that evolved slowly into animal life?, because we must come from something along those lines because an animal cant just come into existence already looking like an animal,


is there any scientific way to make non life matter turn into life matter?

like not growing bacteria or farming fungi or anything like that, or cloning anything or taking this component from that and mixinfg it with this already existing live matter,


i mean turning total non life matter into a living thing? if this could be presented then it solves all of the mysterys of life on earth and how it came about,

planet in space, water comes down into orbit, sparks of non life matter, the now alive single cell life matter evolves slowly, into fungi/bacteria, then into plant life (maybe in the sea) then those plants slowly turn into animals and start moving, like maybe ie a venus flytrap 1 million years later might be able to walk and uproot itself etc or some funky shit,


so can it be done yes or no?, get straight up regular matter like rock or dust, and make it into a lifeform oof somesort like fungi?


or can we not do that? does life have to be there already to manipulate we cant create it from scratch with just raw earthly elements,



peace.

 

[cato]

well, for a general answer:
animals didn't come from plants, they are separate branches.
there are scientists working on trying to create life from scratch, but it has not been done yet. they can make DNA though. you can custom order any DNA sequence you want, monkey, fish, bird, or your own custom DNA.

the early earth had all of the elements to make life. you are just not sure how they came together.

you might find this interesting.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3214/01.html

 

[cato]

you should check out all of the science now videos while you are there. they are awesome.

 

[spidergoat]

Anmals and plants did have a common ancestor at some point. Emptyforce, I recommend the book The Ancestors Tale, by Richard Dawkins. He traces the ancestors of humans backwards to every branching point, although the farther back you go, the less certain we can be about that ancestor. A species can emerge gradually, so that the population maintains genetic diversity. He describes a group of species of salamander in California who's relatives all live in a generally ring-shaped area around a large desert. The adjoining species can all mate with each other, but not with species from a separate area across from them.

Single celled animals are actually quite complex, and get their nucleus from a species of bacteria that merged with them billions of years ago. Before that, cells had no nucleus.

 

[Buckaroo Banzai]

how does a species just come about into bieng, i hear alot about animals evolving from this that and the other,

but ok for example say humans come from apes, the apes came from what? and that what came from what?, and when did the species originaly form?

First of all, rarely one can state that one species came directly from another, but rather what can be said is which species is more closely related to the other. Eventually, as the picure got bigger, is possible to infer that some species are more basal, more ancestral in relation to others, anyway, but that doesn´t implies direct ancestry.

And you can see the hypothesised relationships between organisms in sites such as the tree of life web project.

when a certain species of animal first comes into creation, this must be in a certain location on earth right? so wouldent everything in a sense be inbred?,

I´m not quite sure of what you mean, but if it is that every organism on Earth are biologically related to some degree, that´s true.

and a creature cant just boom into existence right, every animal on this earth today came from anouther species right?, so if you trail everything back far enough, it must be single cell organisms correct? like bacteria or fungi?

Yeah, at some point all that existed were single-celled organisms (not exactly bacteria, neither fungi, but the ancestor of both and everything else), then multicellular ones probably evolved from something like some colonies of unicelular organisms that exist today, in which they assemble themselves in a single "compound body". In some cases, the individual unicellular organisms have specializations, much like the celular specializations of the cells and tissues of multicelular organisms. Examples of this sort of organisms are Volvox and the Portuguese Manowar.

It´s interesting to note that even some multicelular organisms, such as cnidarians (I guess, not much sure, some medusa-like aquatic organism) have some very simple specializations, like the reproductor organ not being something sophisticated, but rather a part of the body whose cells are likely to tear apart.

is it possible that we all come from plantlife? or fungi? that evolved slowly into animal life?, because we must come from something along those lines because an animal cant just come into existence already looking like an animal,

not plants nor fungi, but something unicelular, that would not be an animal, anyway. First animals really evolved from more "stationary" organisms. In fact, some aquatic animals can be mistaken as plants at sight, unless you know exactly what it is and that is in fact an animal (sea urchin, for instance).

is there any scientific way to make non life matter turn into life matter?

like not growing bacteria or farming fungi or anything like that, or cloning anything or taking this component from that and mixinfg it with this already existing live matter,


i mean turning total non life matter into a living thing? if this could be presented then it solves all of the mysterys of life on earth and how it came about,

planet in space, water comes down into orbit, sparks of non life matter, the now alive single cell life matter evolves slowly, into fungi/bacteria, then into plant life (maybe in the sea) then those plants slowly turn into animals and start moving, like maybe ie a venus flytrap 1 million years later might be able to walk and uproot itself etc or some funky shit,


so can it be done yes or no?, get straight up regular matter like rock or dust, and make it into a lifeform oof somesort like fungi?


or can we not do that? does life have to be there already to manipulate we cant create it from scratch with just raw earthly elements,



peace.

We still not know all the stages that originated life. There are two basic approaches on the research, that may eventually "met". One is "top-down", it means, trying to evolve living simple unicelular organisms into organisms even simpler, and the "bottom up" approach, which attempts to create proto-life organizations from simpler chemicals. Thereare many interesting discoveries, such as spontaneously forming vesicles that could be the precursor of cellular walls; the random creation of a RNA virus "from scratch" (pieces of RNA that were not capable of self replication were put in a solution containing chemicals that helped RNA pieces to assemble themselves randomly in larger strains, and at least one of them was able to replicate itself... yet that virus are not yet living organisms, they´re "free living genes", and this reasonably easy achievement of the genetic self reproduction is impressive), and things like that.
Much can be read at wikipedia, in the article about origin of life.

edit: not quite sure of this thing about RNA virus from scratch; I can´t found a reference, but surely occurred two experiments: one in which a RNA virus evolved into a very tiny RNA virus, losing 90% of its genome (or maybe RNA sequences, I´m not sure), was yet capable of self-replication and better at it than the bigger ancestors; and an experiment that randomly assembled RNA in something that was nearly half size of this tiny virus, but that was not capable of self replication yet.

But I "almost remember" of reading something in that sense... if someone knows someting about and could refresh my memory I would appreciate... I already know that one of the things I said refers to Spiegelman´s monster, and the other by experiments conducted by Eigen...

 

[EmptyForceOfChi]

you should check out all of the science now videos while you are there. they are awesome.

thanks,

peace.

 

[c7ityi_]

how does a species just come about into bieng, i hear alot about animals evolving from this that and the other,

if it was so, there would have been found many transition forms.

but ok for example say humans come from apes, the apes came from what? and that what came from what?, and when did the species originaly form?

we don't come from apes, apes comes from us.

and a creature cant just boom into existence right, every animal on this earth today came from anouther species right?, so if you trail everything back far enough, it must be single cell organisms correct? like bacteria or fungi?

if the first lifeform can just "boom into existence", all life can just boom into existence, but to understand that this you have to accept energy states above our senses, ethereal worlds, the blueprints of this world. evolution is not merely physical but it goes from spiritual to material, then into spiritual again. you can also say that it goes from within outwards.

Darwinism is rooted in the materialistic assumption that the universe consists essentially of physical matter and energy, and that mind and consciousness are merely byproducts of the brain. According to the theosophic tradition, on the other hand, the physical world is the outer shell of inner worlds – astral, mental, and spiritual.

i mean turning total non life matter into a living thing? if this could be presented then it solves all of the mysterys of life on earth and how it came about,

there is nothing dead in nature, only things that are more living and less living. or more correctly, life can express itself in different levels. life itself is not an organism, life is the source of all power. lifeforce.

 

[Buckaroo Banzai]

I think I saw that. On which Star Wars episode was that?

 

[Poincare's Stepchild]

how does a species just come about into bieng, i hear alot about animals evolving from this that and the other,

First of all, defining the term "species" is rather tricky. Even as a term in science, which is usually very precise in its definitions, it is not all that clear. See...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species#Definitions_of_species...to understand some of the problems.

Secondly, moving from one generation to the next, it is really impossible to say that generation A is one species and generation B is another. However, over a number of generations, the accumulated changes can be great enough to say the earliest and latest generations are different species.

 

[Poincare's Stepchild]

Oops...

On the url above, delete the "...to" at the end.

 

[Dinosaur]

It might make evolution more understandable if you think of the other primates as our distant cousins rather than our direct ancestors. Similarly, we are more distant cousins of the modern ungulates, felines, canines, et cetera, while the ungulates (and others) are closer cousins to each other.

 

[valich]

RNA > DNA > DNA World

The origin of RNA-DNA bacteria is about 3.9 billion years ago.

We do not know if plants (the originators) evolved into animals or if animals were a seperate lineage.

By definition, a unique species is called a species when it evolves from a previous form of life to a life form that can no longer interbreed with any other life form. When it can only breed with its own type, then it is called a species: evolution in action.

 

[valich]

Let me elaborate on the above, but as I hurriedly write, I am subject to mistakes.

First, the most widely held theory of the origin of life is that of endosymbiosis. This is where one organism, or membrane structure, engulfs another cell or life form. This is thought to be the origin of animal life (a "eukaryote" single-celled membrane with a distinct nucleus that engulfs, or absorbs, or draws in, another single-celled structure, such as a photosynthetic organelle from a plant or bacteria, or a protein prion, or a transposon). This engulfing endosymbiosis process is thought to be the origin of life.

Second, some RNA-viruses can be neither classified as animals or plants and could have evolved into both or either one (criticism here is gladly welcome).

Third, DNA bacteria could have arrived from meteorites that then evolved into all known species. Evidence for this is very compelling because the earth is now known to have been bombarded by extensive meteor impacts 3.9 bya at the same time that bacteria first appeared on earth. This bombardment is visually and chemically evident by looking at the craters on the moon and the analysis of the resulting remaining rock fragments. Evidence for cyanobacteria has been extensively found in Western Australian fossils dating back to 3.85 bya. Cyanobacteria genes make up a large fraction of the plant genome and encode proteins that service the plastid and make up the proteins for all other cellular functions. The importance of this suggests that endosymbiosis of cyanobacteria into non-plant cell membrane structures then shaped the cell biology of eukaryotic animal cells.

Accordingly, I would combine the first and the last hypothesis to arrive at the most logical theory about the origin of animal life on earth.

 

[Dinosaur]

It is possible that life formed in some extraterrestial environment, but I hope nobody considers or is proposing that as an explanation for the origin of life. If it can be shown that it developed somewhere else, the question of how it arose from non living chemicals is still unanswered.

BTW: The ultimate origin of life is a bit off the topic of this thread which relates to how new species come into existence. Evoluiton (which I endorse) or various mystical explanations have been presented many times. All such explanations seem easy to understand. Take your pick.

 

[Buckaroo Banzai]

First, the most widely held theory of the origin of life is that of endosymbiosis. This is where one organism, or membrane structure, engulfs another cell or life form. This is thought to be the origin of animal life (a "eukaryote" single-celled membrane with a distinct nucleus that engulfs, or absorbs, or draws in, another single-celled structure, such as a photosynthetic organelle from a plant or bacteria, or a protein prion, or a transposon). This engulfing endosymbiosis process is thought to be the origin of life.

That does not make any sense. The origin of life, by definition, must start with something that is not life yet. The "bio" on endosyBIOsis means "life". The "engulfing another life form" already implies two extant lifeforms, so cannot explain any origin of life. It is just the origin of a instance of endosymbiosis and nothing more.

The nearest thing would be ideas such as rough "metabolisms" arising abiotically, and eventually engulfing RNA or whatever chemicals worked first as genes, then starting to work synergistically in a "life-like" way. As many instances would occur, eventually a few would be able to last longer (due to random variation) and eventually achieving rough forms of reproduction, and increasing levels of "autonomy" of the primordial substrates.