55 replies to this topic

[BFB]

Quote

For most everyone alive today, it's almost a fundamental fact. Life began in the ocean and evolved into all of the different organisms that exist today.

The idea that this could be wrong causes great discomfort, like discovering as an adult that you were adopted as a child. Nonetheless, a team of diverse scientists led by Armen Mulkidjanian is suggesting that very thing; instead of life beginning in deep thermal vents in the ocean, the prevailing view, they say it perhaps instead started in landlocked freshwater pools created by thermal vapor.

Their theory is based, as they explain in their paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, mostly on the idea that the sea is just too salty to provide the ideal conditions necessary to spur life into existence.

Scientist suggests life began in freshwater pond, not the ocean

[aquatus1]

I'm still quietly rooting for the abiotic origin theory.

[angi chiesa]

Well I like the idea that one of my ancestors was a one cell slime creature,so I am quite content to think that my my lot came down from the trees.Now I am homo sapiensie intelligent life. Why is there so much stress in my life.I want to go back to climb some trees and ponder the meaning of life

[Archangel Oger]

angi chiesa, on 15 February 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

Well I like the idea that one of my ancestors was a one cell slime creature,so I am quite content to think that my my lot came down from the trees.Now I am homo sapiensie intelligent life. Why is there so much stress in my life.I want to go back to climb some trees and ponder the meaning of life

LOL

[Razer]

When I was a kid they did not even know about life in deep thermal vents in the ocean, we were taught that life came from the oceans but nothing about extremophiles.  Anyway, maybe early life developed in different conditions on this planet at or around the same time.  Be it a thermal vent, a freshwater pond, or on the shores of an ocean. I love the debate, but for anyone to say there is only one way it happened seems a bit silly.

[spud the mackem]

What bothers me is not where live began,but how is it going to end ?.Nevermind live to be a hundred and you have made it,because not many people die after that.

[27vet]

We came here on a comet.

[Spock_the_Future]

Is this just a suggestion or a Scientific Theory (Based on FACTS I presume and not assumptions) ?

Edited by Spock_the_Future, 16 February 2012 - 08:14 PM.

[Spock_the_Future]

Double Quote (deleted and added into the first original), I got an message that my I earlier post was not accepted as I posted again withing 15 Secs of some other post that I made. Then how did the double post happen ? Is the PHP POST code check correct ?  (Sorry, back to being a computer nerd again). Wouldn't hurt to recheck though.

Edited by Spock_the_Future, 16 February 2012 - 08:13 PM.

[oly]

Did I miss the announcement of conclusive evidence of evolution?
Or any inconclusive evidence?

Edited by oly, 22 February 2012 - 07:51 PM.

[oly]

"Not one change of species into another is on record... we cannot prove that a single species has been changed."
Darwin: "My Life and Letters", Volume 1.
Any updates?

[aquatus1]

oly, on 22 February 2012 - 07:47 PM, said:

Did I miss the announcement of conclusive evidence of evolution?

By about a century, give or take.

Quote

Any updates?

Have we made any new discoveries in the field of evolution in the last century and a half? 150 years?

Yeah...quite a few.

Edited by aquatus1, 23 February 2012 - 01:35 AM.

[oly]

aquatus1, on 23 February 2012 - 12:55 AM, said:

By about a century, give or take.
Have we made any new discoveries in the field of evolution in the last century and a half? 150 years?
Yeah...quite a few.

Do you mean mongrels, mutants, freaks, cross-breeds & hybrids? & the odd misrepresented skull?
Evolution hasn't been accepted, looks more like its been enforced for political reasons.
Even Darwin didn't base it on reality. People have just tried to fit evidence to the theory.

[aquatus1]

oly, on 23 February 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

Do you mean mongrels, mutants, freaks, cross-breeds & hybrids? & the odd misrepresented skull?

No.  I'm talking about science.

Quote

Evolution hasn't been accepted, looks more like its been enforced for political reasons.

Accepted?

We passed "accepted" decades ago, centuries if you count practical application as opposed to theoretical understanding.  Today, evolution is commercialized, industrialized, and mass-produced.  You think of evolution as some sort of brand image; as if the purpose of everything that is done is to make evolution look good.  The academic and business world spends as much time thinking of evolution as they do contemplating the concrete sidewalk; it is so commonplace and functional that hearing people question whether the sidewalk actually makes travel any easier is a little bit silly in its obviousness.

Quote

Even Darwin didn't base it on reality. People have just tried to fit evidence to the theory.

Oly, c'mon...you know, I know, everyone here knows, that you don't have the faintest clue what Darwin said about his theory beyond the most general concept of it.

[oly]

aquatus1, on 23 February 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

Oly, c'mon...you know, I know, everyone here knows, that you don't have the faintest clue what Darwin said about his theory beyond the most general concept of it.

evidence of gutenberg deleting this very quote?
Anyone got an old copy?