Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9045 total)
94 online now:
jar, PaulK (2 members, 92 visitors)
Newest Member: Dade
Post Volume: Total: 887,398 Year: 5,044/14,102 Month: 642/707 Week: 40/157 Day: 6/16 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Cell Division
RAZD
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 7 of 32 (605447)
02-19-2011 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Drevmar
02-18-2011 10:25 PM


Hi Drevmar. and welcome to the fray.

Very astute and much to think about, thank you very much!

This is a great site for learning things, and finding out where your preconceptions may be in error when discussing things with people educated in the various fields that visit and share. I know I've learned a lot here/

Enjoy.

... as you are new here, some posting tips:

type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:

quotes are easy

or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:

quote:
quotes are easy

also check out (help) links on any formatting questions when in the reply window.

For other formatting tips see Posting Tips

If you use the message reply buttons (there's one at the bottom right of each message):

... your message is linked to the one you are replying to (adds clarity). You can also look at the way a post is formatted with the "peek" button next to it.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Drevmar, posted 02-18-2011 10:25 PM Drevmar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Drevmar, posted 02-19-2011 9:22 PM RAZD has responded

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 9 of 32 (605457)
02-19-2011 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Drevmar
02-19-2011 9:22 PM


Re: To RAZD
Drevmar, your welcome.

Thanks for your question. btw - you may want to read Self-Replicating Molecules - Life's Building Blocks, Part II and watch the video on the possible protocells that have been discussed here.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : ...


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Drevmar, posted 02-19-2011 9:22 PM Drevmar has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by shadow71, posted 02-20-2011 7:21 PM RAZD has responded

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 11 of 32 (605550)
02-20-2011 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by shadow71
02-20-2011 7:21 PM


Re: To RAZD
Hi shadow71,

Hi Razd, I watched the video. The music was great. But if this is science's answer to the orgin of life, you guys are in big trouble.

Amusingly the application of the video to this thread was about the formation of proto-cells and how cells divide, as discussed in the other posts and which this video showed in detail, based on actual experiments conducted in actual labs. Perhaps you should read Message 1 and the replies first.

I acutally laughed through most of the "important parts" of the video.

Cognitive dissonance is like that.

On this board I have been critized for speculating, dreaming, not showing the evidence etc. and then you have the nerve to show this video?

Did you read the rest of the article? You will see that each element is referenced. If you want to discuss the actual science with Dr Szostak, he has a website where you can contact him: http://genetics.mgh.harvard.edu/szostakweb/ - see people and I believe that it is referenced in the video.

Yes maybe life began that way, ...

Which, curiously, is all we can say at this time. Nobody is claiming that this is what happened, only that it is one possibility, one that works with known science and natural processes.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : clrty


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by shadow71, posted 02-20-2011 7:21 PM shadow71 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by shadow71, posted 02-21-2011 7:18 PM RAZD has responded

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 16 of 32 (605635)
02-21-2011 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Drevmar
02-21-2011 1:21 AM


To Drevmar
Hi Drevmar,

Okay, I went to the link you provided and I have to admit, I had to look up "self-polymerize" - this stuff is really slow reading for me. I'll have to look at it a few times before I am gonna get it. But I think the main gist is that we are talking about chemicals getting together, forming into a very basic cell-like structure, ... The attached reading material is somewhat difficult as well and has a lot of "out of my league" stuff.

No problem, take your time and check all you want to, that is how the open-minded skeptic operates.

Yes, this is one possibility for the way cells formed, and it can be observed in the lab as well, so it is not just a hypothetical development.

... and then picking and choosing this and that until they achieve life-form? ...

Or just lots of trial and error "tests" with various chemical combinations until one occurs that takes off, that is the hypothesis.

I feel the need to ask if a life-form has been developed in a lab? or, is the current state of development still chemical compounds? No insult intended I just want to know!

No life form has been developed in the lab yet, and the current state is still chemical evolution - where we have replicating molecules that show some mutation and selection.

Of course this gets into the question of "what is life" -- and that is a whole nother ball or worms.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Drevmar, posted 02-21-2011 1:21 AM Drevmar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Drevmar, posted 02-21-2011 11:45 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 20 of 32 (605733)
02-21-2011 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by shadow71
02-21-2011 7:18 PM


Re: To RAZD
Hi shadow71

Do you consider the video and the article by Szostak & Ricardo "Life on Earth" in Scientific America Sept. 2009:

A theory?
A hypothesis?
Speculation?
Wishful thinking?

I would say that it is a scientific hypothesis for one way life may have begun on earth. There are others.

We don't have any direct evidence for how life began 3.5 billion years ago on earth, so we may never know: the oldest fossil bearing rocks already show simple life forms existing, so we don't know when it really began or what came before, except that it occurred some time after the formation of the earth (unless it came from space), some 4.55 billion years ago. That doesn't give us much to work with.

http://www.fossilmuseum.net/Tree_of_Life/Stromatolites.htm

quote:
Stromatolites are not only Earth's oldest of fossils, but are intriguing in that they are our singular visual portal (except for phylogenetic determination of conserved nucleic acid sequences and some subtle molecular fossils) into deep time on earth, the emergence of life, and the evolving of the beautiful forms of life of modern time. A small piece of stromatolites encodes biological activity perhaps spanning thousands of years.

I would say that it is a scientific theory for how life can begin from chemicals and natural reactions.

The difference is that theory is supported by experimentation and the evaluation of the evidence from this and similar studies: it has been tested, while the actual origin of life is not.

The development of the theory for how life can begin is an integral part to the formation of the hypothesis for how life did begin, as it provides the evidentiary basis to make the hypothesis.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by shadow71, posted 02-21-2011 7:18 PM shadow71 has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021