Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Just a few questions...
TheLiteralist
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 54 (244723)
09-18-2005 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by nwr
09-18-2005 9:13 AM


Re: co-evolution? are you sure?
Hi nwr,
TheLit writes:
Are you saying that there was a time when only wind-pollenated plants existed?
In response, nwr writes:
Hmm, I probably misspoke on that. There are underwater plants, and unless we consider the water currents to be wind, those were not wind pollenated.
I should have said that wind pollenated plants preceded insect pollinated plants.
Heh. I'm not as argumentative as I sounded (I think). I actually meant, "Are you certain that the wind-pollenated plants preceded the insect-pollenated plants?" Well, you not only cleared up the fuzziness of it all, but you also answered the question as well.
Now that we've got that cleared up (), would you mind sharing a few examples of what you consider evidence for your position that wind-pollenated plants preceded insect-pollenated plants?
I'll have to read the co-evolution link to comment on that, which I intend to do.
Regarding my question of which creatures were first to possess lungs, you answer (understandably tentatively) "lungfish."
My next question, then, would be, "Are lung-fish the predecessors to amphibians? If not, then what are the predecessors to amphibians?"
--Jason

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by nwr, posted 09-18-2005 9:13 AM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by nwr, posted 09-18-2005 10:54 PM TheLiteralist has replied

  
Enuf_Alredy
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 54 (244724)
09-18-2005 10:38 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by RAZD
09-18-2005 9:25 AM


Re: reproduction question
Ok,now that you have all that...When, where, why and how did life learn to reproduce itself?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by RAZD, posted 09-18-2005 9:25 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Nuggin, posted 09-18-2005 10:58 PM Enuf_Alredy has replied
 Message 46 by RAZD, posted 09-19-2005 10:48 PM Enuf_Alredy has replied

  
Enuf_Alredy
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 54 (244727)
09-18-2005 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Andya Primanda
09-18-2005 8:38 AM


How did the flagella know to do specifically what it does? Wouldn't evolution require lots of trial and error? How would the species survive long enough to learn how to perform the said work?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Andya Primanda, posted 09-18-2005 8:38 AM Andya Primanda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by jar, posted 09-18-2005 10:58 PM Enuf_Alredy has not replied
 Message 23 by Nuggin, posted 09-18-2005 11:06 PM Enuf_Alredy has not replied
 Message 43 by Andya Primanda, posted 09-19-2005 7:51 AM Enuf_Alredy has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 19 of 54 (244728)
09-18-2005 10:54 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by TheLiteralist
09-18-2005 10:34 PM


Re: co-evolution? are you sure?
Now that we've got that cleared up (), would you mind sharing a few examples of what you consider evidence for your position that wind-pollenated plants preceded insect-pollenated plants?
Again, keep in mind that I'm a computer scientist and mathematician, not a paleontologist.
What I had in mind when I wrote that comment (on wind pollenation), was that the gymnosperms (includes conifers) were earlier than the angiosperms (flowering plants, some of which are insect pollenated). Just about any book on plants, including gardening books, will tell you that the gymnosperms are older.
My next question, then, would be, "Are lung-fish the predecessors to amphibians? If not, then what are the predecessors to amphibians?"
That's my understanding.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by TheLiteralist, posted 09-18-2005 10:34 PM TheLiteralist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Nuggin, posted 09-18-2005 11:09 PM nwr has replied
 Message 36 by TheLiteralist, posted 09-19-2005 1:18 AM nwr has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 20 of 54 (244729)
09-18-2005 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Enuf_Alredy
09-18-2005 10:38 PM


Re: reproduction question
Ok,now that you have all that...When, where, why and how did life learn to reproduce itself?
Seems kinda backwards as a question. I would define life by the ability to reproduce itself, so it's sort of a "right at the start" thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Enuf_Alredy, posted 09-18-2005 10:38 PM Enuf_Alredy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Enuf_Alredy, posted 09-18-2005 11:10 PM Nuggin has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 21 of 54 (244730)
09-18-2005 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Enuf_Alredy
09-18-2005 10:52 PM


Wouldn't evolution require lots of trial and error?
Yup. Sure did. Them that didn't make it through the filter ain't around.
If you look, almost every living thing is a piss poor, just good enough to get by critter.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Enuf_Alredy, posted 09-18-2005 10:52 PM Enuf_Alredy has not replied

  
Enuf_Alredy
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 54 (244731)
09-18-2005 11:05 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by NosyNed
09-18-2005 12:46 AM


Re: Others will, I'm sure enlighten
I understand knowledge is power and through study you gain knowledge. I am just curious about the thoughts from other brainpans... This is a deep subject EvC...there is so much to be learned from books, studying, and other powerful minds...This forum is a wonderful place to gain experience and knowledge in science based discussions.
I love science in all aspects. I also love to learn. If I don't get anything else from this, I am least getting a lesson in the advanced sciences.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by NosyNed, posted 09-18-2005 12:46 AM NosyNed has not replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 23 of 54 (244732)
09-18-2005 11:06 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Enuf_Alredy
09-18-2005 10:52 PM


The no knows of evolution...
How did the flagella know to do specifically what it does?
I don't think the flagella "knows" anything. How did the flagella start doing what it does? Might be a better question. I think the answer is in the next part of your post.
Wouldn't evolution require lots of trial and error? How would the species survive long enough to learn how to perform the said work?
The flagella's predacessor, one which did not consume that particular kind of wood or whatever, didn't suddenly evolve into the version in the termite. Small changes over time. The earlier version probably ate something that was on or in the wood. The flagella which first developed a taste for wood, suddenly had a whole lot more food than anyone else.
Unfortunately, we're talking about microscopic little buggers that, even if they were to fossilize, how would you find them?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Enuf_Alredy, posted 09-18-2005 10:52 PM Enuf_Alredy has not replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 24 of 54 (244733)
09-18-2005 11:09 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by nwr
09-18-2005 10:54 PM


Re: co-evolution? are you sure?
"Are lung-fish the predecessors to amphibians?
I doubt that this is completely true. Just like chimps aren't the predecessors to humans, the current, modern lung-fish is the end of another branch on the tree.
The predecessor to amphibians was likely related to the predessor to lungfish.
Not trying to nitpick, but we all know what happens on these boards when someone "overstates" something

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by nwr, posted 09-18-2005 10:54 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by nwr, posted 09-19-2005 12:19 AM Nuggin has not replied

  
Enuf_Alredy
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 54 (244734)
09-18-2005 11:10 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Nuggin
09-18-2005 10:58 PM


Re: reproduction question
But when was the "right at the start thing?" How did life learn to be life?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Nuggin, posted 09-18-2005 10:58 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Nuggin, posted 09-18-2005 11:17 PM Enuf_Alredy has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 26 of 54 (244735)
09-18-2005 11:17 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Enuf_Alredy
09-18-2005 11:10 PM


Re: reproduction question
"How did life learn to be life?"
This is a question which predates what Theory of Evolution describes.
In other words, there are lots of possibilities for how life got started on Earth, and Theory of Evolution couldn't care less which one is right.
First thing to do with this question is define "life" and "learn".
By "life" I take it you mean a self replicating form which is born, ages and dies. This would cover a wide range of things from raccoons to bacteria. (perhaps even volcanos, I may have cast my net too wide.)
As for "learn", I'm going to assume you mean "get started" as learning implies a higher brain function.
If abiogenesis is correct, a mixture of chemicals perhaps sparked by lightning, produced basic amino acids and started it all.
If Theistic Genesis is right, God came down and got it all started.
Either way, once that ball got rolling, Theory of Evolution took over and got us to where we are today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Enuf_Alredy, posted 09-18-2005 11:10 PM Enuf_Alredy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Enuf_Alredy, posted 09-18-2005 11:49 PM Nuggin has not replied

  
Enuf_Alredy
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 54 (244745)
09-18-2005 11:49 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Nuggin
09-18-2005 11:17 PM


Mutations
The ToE implies that new creatures come from the start of one creature. How can mutations (recombining of the gentetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce a Chinese book)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Nuggin, posted 09-18-2005 11:17 PM Nuggin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by NosyNed, posted 09-18-2005 11:55 PM Enuf_Alredy has replied
 Message 30 by coffee_addict, posted 09-19-2005 12:40 AM Enuf_Alredy has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 28 of 54 (244748)
09-18-2005 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Enuf_Alredy
09-18-2005 11:49 PM


New books
The ToE implies that new creatures come from the start of one creature. How can mutations (recombining of the gentetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce a Chinese book)
No, and lo life is written with the same letters following the same grammer**. Just as a few English letters can create a seemingly infinite variety of books so the recombinations of the letters of the genetic code can and do create the variety of life we see. They are all a one.
** just a reminder about how analogies are of limited value and may be dangerous to the mind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Enuf_Alredy, posted 09-18-2005 11:49 PM Enuf_Alredy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Enuf_Alredy, posted 09-19-2005 12:47 AM NosyNed has replied
 Message 50 by Dr Jack, posted 09-20-2005 10:29 AM NosyNed has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 29 of 54 (244760)
09-19-2005 12:19 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Nuggin
09-18-2005 11:09 PM


Re: co-evolution? are you sure?
The predecessor to amphibians was likely related to the predessor to lungfish.
Thanks for the comment. I hadn't meant to suggest that modern lungfish were amphibian predecessors. I agree with your point.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Nuggin, posted 09-18-2005 11:09 PM Nuggin has not replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 476 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 30 of 54 (244763)
09-19-2005 12:40 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Enuf_Alredy
09-18-2005 11:49 PM


Re: Mutations
You can't use that analogy. The language of genetics only uses 4 letters. Try to guess what they are.
It may shock you to learn that DNA strands are only made of 4 bases, but to those of us who have a at least a little bit of background in genetics and biology, it's common knowledge.
Now, if you want to completely discredit the theory of evolution, go ahead and find a creature whose DNA does not include one one or more of the 4 bases.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Enuf_Alredy, posted 09-18-2005 11:49 PM Enuf_Alredy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by TheLiteralist, posted 09-19-2005 12:52 AM coffee_addict has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024