Republican Acceptance of Evolution Plummets

The origins of viruses in the evolutionary history of life are unclear: some may have evolved from plasmids—pieces of DNA that can move between cells—while others may have evolved from bacteria. In evolution, viruses are an important means of horizontal gene transfer, which increases genetic diversity.[7] Viruses are considered by some to be a life form, because they carry genetic material, reproduce, and evolve through natural selection. However they lack key characteristics (such as cell structure) that are generally considered necessary to count as life. Because they possess some but not all such qualities, viruses have been described as "organisms at the edge of life".[8]

LINK....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus

AboveAlpha

- - - Updated - - -

Viruses are an important natural means of transferring genes between different species, which increases genetic diversity and drives evolution.[7] It is thought that viruses played a central role in the early evolution, before the diversification of bacteria, archaea and eukaryotes, at the time of the last universal common ancestor of life on Earth.[216] Viruses are still one of the largest reservoirs of unexplored genetic diversity on Earth.

LINK....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus#Role_in_evolution

AboveAlpha

 

This is his gig. He insists superior understanding of a subject he doesn't actually understand. He posts in caps as if he is educating. He then posts high level explanations he does not understand, but believe support his position and nobody will question because they are beyond him, so they are beyond anyone who would engage him. When proven wrong, he will argue interpretation he lacks the fundamental education on, and will double down on arrogance.

Destroying him, utterly smiting him... brings no victory. Only sucking time from the marrow of your bones. He has broad overview "possible" explanation which he faiths as absolute truth, and does not understand the difference.

It is not worth your time is my advice. He is a time vampire, and science zombie. He will just keep rising from the dead.

 

All living organisms consist of elementary units called cells. Cells are membrane-enclosed compartments that contain genomic DNA (chromosomes), molecular machinery for genome replication and expression, a translation system that makes proteins, metabolic and transport systems that supply monomers for these processes, and various regulatory systems. Scientists have performed careful microscopic observations and other experiments to show that all cells reproduce by different forms of division. Cell division is an elaborate process that ensures faithful segregation of copies of the replicated genome into daughter cells. The best-characterized cells are the relatively large cells of animals, plants, fungi, and diverse unicellular organisms known as protists, such as amoebae or paramecia. These cells possess an internal cytoskeleton and a complex system of intracellular membrane partitions, including the nucleus, a compartment that encloses the chromosomes. These organisms are known as eukaryotes because they possess a true nucleus (karyon in Greek). In contrast, the much smaller cells of bacteria have no nucleus and are named prokaryotes.

In the twentieth century, scientists devised new imaging methods like electron microscopy, which can be used to view tiny particles that are much smaller than cells, to detect a second fundamental form of biological organization: the viruses. Viruses are obligate intracellular parasites. These selfish genetic elements typically encode some proteins essential for viral replication, but they never contain the full complement of genes for the proteins and RNAs required for translation, membrane function, or metabolism. Therefore, viruses exploit cells to produce their components.

Classifying organisms (known as systematics or taxonomy) is one of the oldest occupations of biologists. Carolus Linnaeus constructed his now famous taxonomic system — certainly one of the foundations of scientific biology — in the middle of the eighteenth century. How did he classify organisms? Since Linnaeus was not an evolutionist, his classifications strived to reflect only similarities between species that were considered immutable. The goals of systematics changed after Charles Darwin introduced the concept of the Tree of Life (hereafter, TOL). At least in principle, the TOL was perceived as an accurate depiction of the evolutionary relationships between all life-forms. After Darwin, evolutionary biologists attempted to delineate monophyletic taxa, which are groups of organisms that share a common ancestry and thus form a distinct branch in the TOL. Until the last quarter of the twentieth century, however, taxonomists worked with phenotypic similarities between organisms, so monophyly remained a hypothesis based on the hierarchy of similar features. Accordingly, biologists could boast substantial advances in the classification of animals and plants, and to a lesser extent, simpler multicellular life-forms, such as fungi and algae. However, taxonomy was nearly helpless when it came to unicellular organisms, particularly bacteria, which have few easily observed features to compare. As a result, microbiologists were skeptical about whether it was possible to establish the evolutionary relationships between microbes. How could they compare these tiny organisms?

LINK....http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/the-two-empires-and-three-domains-of-14432998

AboveAlpha

 

WOW!!!

YOU have some serious issues dude.

Try chewing GUM it might help prevent you from making your lip bleed.

AboveAlpha

 

There is NO PROOF that all life "evolved from a single-celled organism".

Only COMPLETE speculation. There can be NO EMPIRICAL TESTS on the PAST, only guesses.

Try to get your mind around that basic SCIENTIFIC FACT.

Science, utilizing Scientific Method, can PROVE many things about the PRESENT; it can PROVE NOTHING about the distant past...just provide GUESSES.

I realize that you will now blow another gasket, and blather on about your "Great Knowledge" , (again), but it really doesn't matter.

The fact that you try to present COMPLETELY UNPROVEN THEORY as "factual", pretty much precludes any real credibility of actual scientific understanding in your case, regardless of your claims otherwise.

Sorry.

(BS in Chemistry, UMR, aka: Missouri School of Mines, when I went there, waaaaaay back when,or just "Rolla"; now called Missouri Insitute of Science and Technology.)

BIG on Scientific Method,and establishing VERIFIABLE, REPEATABLE results= Scientific Proof.

Not a thing you've posted is remotely close to that. Stop trying to cut and paste things, you clearly do not grasp.

 

Still waiting on your answer to my ungooglable question back in the thread you exist only as chunks in my stool. Your first attempt was asking for clarification on the distance/sec then said "I didn't bother looking because it was so poorly drawn". I answered your question you did not even understand due to your faith in a very specific theory, among others, though you claim it is DEFINITIVELY PROVEN... and FACT. The thread stands for itself... but unfortunately became representative of your style... baffle with bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Nobody is reading 30 pages to understand WHY you are wrong on subjects most are not versed in... save the physicist whom I do not get along with who was kind enough to drop in and re-iterate why you were talking out of your ass.

That problem is waiting for your superior understanding.
It is ACTUALLY elementary. You just can't google it because I drew it from a book you can't google.

 

Try reading the PDF file I posted to you as such PROOF cannot be explained or detailed in a couple of sentences using only at maximum 4 letter words.

AboveAlpha

 

"A PDF file" cannot change the simple veracity of what I posted, despite your ongoing delusions otherwise.

SPECULATION is not "fact". Sorry.

 

It is no longer speculation.

Look...the easiest way I can explain it and as I have stated I an not a geneticist....is that we have mapped 10's of Thousands of Genomes of all sorts and types of species including Humans.

Now although there are 1000's upon 1000's of different Viral encoding there is ONLY ONE that all species have within their Genomes that is THE SAME.

THAT is the proof.

AboveAlpha

 

roflmao

 

Beliefs require no facts but do require people to believe in them for the belief to exist, science does not require anyone to believe in it for it to be the truth.

 

No, because the only facts they can present are concerning adaptation, not amoeba fatherhood. So I actually enjoy those channels.

 

God help us all!

 

You obviously don't keep up with current events concerning evidence proving contrary to your claims. There have been discoveries of both a failed adaptation of single cells to organize into fractal shapes which ended quickly and around the same time cells clumping and organizing together to form binary symmetry, which is what humans are. Fossils are being discovered all the time which show, in chronological order, the morphing from single sea cells into various forms of organization (i.e. randomized like sponges, which they have proven can start from single sells, btw), to said two variations of real organization. The question that puzzles biologists is WHY the cells moved towards this organization. What made them work together in the first place?

You might enjoy this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKW5iugJChk

It covers interesting discoveries which I'd think is harder evidence than random contradictory accounts of things in the Bible. As well, one could embrace both accounts of the origin of life without contradictory if the bible were not taken literally. For instance, think about 'dog years' and 'human years'. We speak about 5 minutes to a dog is like 30 minutes for a human, etc in terms of life span, etc. So if god is eternal, how long to you think 7 days is for that guy? And who says he had to create things just by point a mystical finger or whatever? Maybe he DID create life VIA evolution and billions of years = 3 days to god?

You never hear this really discussed. People just jump on one side or the other of this phenomenon of the origins of life when the two could co-exist just fine (despite contradictions of events even in Genesis) and could support each other in terms of religious and science explanations of life.

But whatevs. I'm atheist so I don't care if people want to ignore science and a possible link between holy texts and physical discoveries of Earth's past.

 

You happened to bring up a favorite subject of mine that being how different Animals perceive TIME differently from other Animals.

As example a Hummingbirds perception of time is much different that a Human as a conscious Human Being could NEVER make the mental decisions to move to a flower, adjust flight characteristics and body position then to sip the flowers sap and then move on to the next flower anywhere NEAR the rate the conscious mind of a Hummingbird.

It is not just because the Hummingbird's reflexes and body movements are far faster than a Human but it is also because to the Hummingbird it is moving and making conscious choices at a natural rate and very much as if TIME for the Hummingbird is moving SLOWER....thus to the Hummingbird it is the same as a Human cooking breakfast and flipping eggs before they over cook and getting the toast buttered and toasted before the eggs are done.

As well for a Tortoise TIME is moving FASTER as the Tortoise it's moving a few feet to reach a desired form of vegetation and then eating it would seem very much like for a Human to walk over to the fridge and grab an apple and take a bite.

As well CONSCIOUS thought is MUCH SLOWER that DREAM STATE THOUGHT....as in Humans when we are dreaming we can in just a matter of seconds experience in a dream what seems like several HOURS of time passage as this is known as UNCONSCIOUS TIME COMPRESSION.

A good example and explanation can be seen in the movie INCEPTION....which I personally think is BRILLIANT.

AboveAlpha

 

Christians don't discard science, they just focus on things actually proven, none of which cause issues for Christians. Believing there is nothing out there that cannot be explained by science is a silly stance IMHO.

 

Duck, duck and no goose. I said you cannot link humans with arachnids. You are doing nothing but throwing up irrelevant crap. SHOW THE LINK OR SHUT UP.

 

Yes because one link is going to convince you. Possibly, especially from the position you're taking, you should read up yourself and try to convince yourself. Cause me, alpha and no one is going to get you to understand it or believe it.

See, I'm at the post-religious state in terms of my beliefs and how they've changed. I wasn't LOOKING to be convinced, I simply asked questions that could not be answered and science, even if it didn't answer, provided suggestions that were displayable physically here, in this reality. There's plenty of early evidence that can link the evolution of all animal life today. Again, it's early evidence, meaning nothing has been proven conclusively and science is so awesome in the way that it works in that it doesn't start from the result and work backward. It doesn't start AT evolution then work back to find evidence. It looks at findings with an idea, but if the evidence doesn't support it, it looks at the conclusion that the evidence suggests.

So FOR NOW, there's strong evidence that all life began in the water. In the future, if we find new evidence that it hasn't, then science will change what it's propagating throughout the world. It's not rigid, it's fluid.

 

Following one excuse with another doesn't cut it. Show a link between Human DNA and Arachnid DNA or shut up.
Here's a hint. Arachnids have a copper based blood system called hemocyanin, while Humans have Hemoglobin which is Iron based. Find the link.

 

You're an idiot. We're not direct descendents of spiders. Again, you fail to understand how evolution works. The mutations between when spiders appeared and humans appeared are so numerous now and happened over millions of years. If you keep moving the goal posts, of course you're going to be satisfied by not understanding the fundamentals of how evolution works. When evolution occurred leading to spiders and humans, you're talking about a tree with thousands of branches in terms of how it worked out in history.

 

The issue with evolution fundamentally is that there are no new creatures appearing in the world. (Cite Extinction Calender).

 

What are talking about? New creatures don't just suddenly appear out of thin air one day. That's not how evolution works. They slowly evolve over tens of thousands of years. All creatures are evolving right now. Its a continuous, gradual process.

 

It would be funny if those 40% who dont believe in evolution have an infection by penincilin resistent bacteria.

 

First, from your tone, I can tell that you totally didn't read the link. Secondly, what we observe is creatures dying out en masse rapidly. Rapid de-evlolution is much closer to what we are observing today. Whether you are Republican or not, this introduces some scientific issues. Science is supposed to be based off of our observations, not our theories which is why evolution is still a theory. If I had to create a theory TODAY based on what was observed, it would surely much closer model oblivion and the end of life on the planet, rather than fairy tale evolving unicorns.

 

Well, you have to admit, that when they look at some of their leaders and "heroes," they can't see much "evolution" happening!