Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

LIFE; What is it?

Page 12 of 19 [ 292 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 19  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

28 May 2015, 5:29 am

DentArthurDent wrote:
I do however have an interest in the thread title, one that goes beyond your simplistic agenda. And I am grappling with what does actually constitute life. One Author I have read suggests we all over simplify it, as in, "its something that replicates", "or something that metabolises", or "has a cell" etc. He sees it as a long, gradual, transition from organic chemistry to biology and there might not be an actual defining point.


Yes. The cellular definition of life has worked so well for so long that it's hard to conceptualize anything other than it. Viruses put a real challenge to that. If you declare them to be alive, there are counterarguments to why they aren't -no metabolism whatsoever. If you declare them not alive, there are again counter arguments. They have genetic material and they attach to cells and inject that genetic material. That this injection happens mechanically rather than through any actual action on their part just adds to the confusion.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

28 May 2015, 7:29 am

Oldavid wrote:
Mere chemical reactions, perhaps?



Life is what you live.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

28 May 2015, 8:58 am

Life can be a b***h, a beach, a botch, and a batch (of experiences).



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,924

28 May 2015, 11:44 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
Life can be a b***h, a beach, a botch, and a batch (of experiences).


I like batch the most; as a b***h or a botch, can make the beach so pleasing after experiencing THAT..:)

Truly that's the meaning of life; appreciating the whole dam batch; light, dark, and all the hues and shades and colors of 50 trillion or more; shades of grey...:)

Life is '50 shades of Grey'.

And yes, there is more

to that movie,

than 'grey'; as well..:)

There's 'Christian Grey'..;)

and much, much more..:)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

28 May 2015, 7:55 pm

Janissy wrote:
They have genetic material and they attach to cells and inject that genetic material. That this injection happens mechanically rather than through any actual action on their part just adds to the confusion.
If that were so then it automatically demands that viruses are preceded by other irreducibly complex organisms that they can parasitise.



Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

28 May 2015, 8:03 pm

DentArthurDent wrote:
For once David I tend to agree with you as do many origin of life scientists. There are many, many issues with the primordial soup hypothesis that tend to suggest it is not how life started. What is looking far more likely are deep thermal vents, and even life forming inside minerals. Deep thermal vents have much going for them as they remove many of the obstacles thrown up by the conditions on the surface of the earth at the time. But no doubt, in your grand wisdom you are going to say this is all nonsense nonscience, thought up by the religion of materialism yada yada yada.

Thing is David your intransigence regarding life only originating via a supernatural creator, teaches us nothing about what the reality might actually be. Sure you could be right, but so far creationists (although they deludedly refuse to admit it) have been proven wrong time and time again.

I do however have an interest in the thread title, one that goes beyond your simplistic agenda. And I am grappling with what does actually constitute life. One Author I have read suggests we all over simplify it, as in, "its something that replicates", "or something that metabolises", or "has a cell" etc. He sees it as a long, gradual, transition from organic chemistry to biology and there might not be an actual defining point.
Thermal vents, eh? Try something a bit more exotic like life originated in another universe where natural laws do not apply and was transported here through a "worm hole".

Do try to keep up with cutting edge nonsense. Your ideas are quite Neanderthal.



DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

28 May 2015, 8:14 pm

Of course it is David. If only the worlds research institutes would pass their theories by you, then your extraordinarily erudite methods of logic and philosophy could dismiss all the nonsense before it polluted the innocent minds of the masses.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

28 May 2015, 11:49 pm

DentArthurDent wrote:
Of course it is David. If only the worlds research institutes would pass their theories by you, then your extraordinarily erudite methods of logic and philosophy could dismiss all the nonsense before it polluted the innocent minds of the masses.
If only the worlds research institutes devoted themselves to science instead of ideological magic I would be completely redundant.



DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

29 May 2015, 12:35 am

Hmmm how is you describe the vast majprity of contemporary scientists and people like myself who learn from them? Something lile "egotistical fantascists"

Not sure how to respond to your above post, maybe I should take my lead from you.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

29 May 2015, 5:49 am

DentArthurDent wrote:
Hmmm how is you describe the vast majprity of contemporary scientists and people like myself who learn from them? Something lile "egotistical fantascists"

Not sure how to respond to your above post, maybe I should take my lead from you.
No. Just do what you always do. Ignore anything inconvenient and re-assert your prejudices as if they had never been (or could never be) challenged.



The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,864
Location: London

29 May 2015, 9:22 am

Oldavid wrote:
Janissy wrote:
They have genetic material and they attach to cells and inject that genetic material. That this injection happens mechanically rather than through any actual action on their part just adds to the confusion.
If that were so then it automatically demands that viruses are preceded by other irreducibly complex organisms that they can parasitise.

Not irreducibly complex (nothing in Biology is irreducibly complex), but yes, it seems likely that cell-like protobionts formed before the precursors to viruses.



Fugu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Dec 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,074
Location: Dallas

29 May 2015, 1:31 pm

Oldavid wrote:
No. Just do what you always do. Ignore anything inconvenient and re-assert your prejudices as if they had never been (or could never be) challenged.
it's ironic that you're telling other people this is what they're doing while doing it yourself. :lol:



Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

29 May 2015, 7:17 pm

Fugu wrote:
Oldavid wrote:
No. Just do what you always do. Ignore anything inconvenient and re-assert your prejudices as if they had never been (or could never be) challenged.
it's ironic that you're telling other people this is what they're doing while doing it yourself. :lol:
I have never failed to address any of the mere assertions of the Materialist gang with good practical observations of the real world that soundly refute their impossible claims.

Their usual tactic is to simply ignore such refutations and "counter" with other vague, irrelevant accusations or assertions. It is a rhetorical tactic that is intended to just annoy or heckle your opponents into complete exasperation; nothing whatsoever to do with any genuine inquiry. It's something I encountered quite often at university if one ever tried to dispute any of the claims of the Maoist, Alinskyite "social reformers" of the day, although it took me a fair while to identify it as a purposeful tactic.

That said, you might accept that I don't re-refute every silly assertion every time it is re-presented.



DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

29 May 2015, 8:29 pm

Oldavid wrote:
Fugu wrote:
Oldavid wrote:
No. Just do what you always do. Ignore anything inconvenient and re-assert your prejudices as if they had never been (or could never be) challenged.
it's ironic that you're telling other people this is what they're doing while doing it yourself. :lol:
I have never failed to address any of the mere assertions of the Materialist gang with good practical observations of the real world that soundly refute their impossible claims.

Their usual tactic is to simply ignore such refutations and "counter" with other vague, irrelevant accusations or assertions. It is a rhetorical tactic that is intended to just annoy or heckle your opponents into complete exasperation; nothing whatsoever to do with any genuine inquiry. It's something I encountered quite often at university if one ever tried to dispute any of the claims of the Maoist, Alinskyite "social reformers" of the day, although it took me a fair while to identify it as a purposeful tactic.

That said, you might accept that I don't re-refute every silly assertion every time it is re-presented.


Hilariously, you don't even realise that you have just proved Fugu's point.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

29 May 2015, 10:59 pm

DentArthurDent wrote:
Hilariously, you don't even realise that you have just proved Fugu's point.
I need to be more careful not to be goaded into a blind alley full of psycho-thugs. Eh?

Anyhow, there is still no evidence that life is, or could be, the spontaneous action of some random chemicals.



Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

29 May 2015, 11:10 pm

The_Walrus wrote:
Oldavid wrote:
Janissy wrote:
They have genetic material and they attach to cells and inject that genetic material. That this injection happens mechanically rather than through any actual action on their part just adds to the confusion.
If that were so then it automatically demands that viruses are preceded by other irreducibly complex organisms that they can parasitise.

Not irreducibly complex (nothing in Biology is irreducibly complex), but yes, it seems likely that cell-like protobionts formed before the precursors to viruses.
If you think about it carefully, all biology is irreducibly complex to a degree. Remove just one of life's necessities and your life is dead.