First, I feel a need to point out that I do not consider myself religious OR atheist. I am a seeker of logical truth.

My question is, in order for the very first living cell to to have evolved, how could it have been at some early stage 99% non-living, and 1% living? Then evolve into 98% non-living and 2% living? And so on and so on. This doesn't make sense to me. Actually, it sounds impossible. Either a living cell is 100% alive, or it's just a dab of inert material.

Any thoughts on this?

Originally posted by jiggerj
First, I feel a need to point out that I do not consider myself religious OR atheist. I am a seeker of logical truth.

My question is, in order for the very first living cell to to have evolved, how could it have been at some early stage 99% non-living, and 1% living? Then evolve into 98% non-living and 2% living? And so on and so on. This doesn't make sense to me. Actually, it sounds impossible. Either a living cell is 100% alive, or it's just a dab of inert material.

Any thoughts on this?

edit on 7/11/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)

Simple if you think about it.

We were planted here.

It's the only logical explaination.

---

---

---

---

And I always thought the chicken and the egg question was hard to answer.

Suppose amino acids and tiny electric currents so created are the answer.

I pass on the how though.

Originally posted by jiggerj

Even the plasma material isn't enough. How did the INFORMATION to build the DNA and mitochondria get into this plasma?

THE CREATOR

Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13

Originally posted by jiggerj

Even the plasma material isn't enough. How did the INFORMATION to build the DNA and mitochondria get into this plasma?

THE CREATOR

You have no idea how much I want to argue with that. But I can't! Instead, I have to go with, who or what created the creator. I simply will NOT buy that he/she/it always was and always will be.

1 - This is the SCIENCE forum, speculations outside the scientific method have THEIR OWN forum.
2 - It would help to stop viewing life as a "Thing", instead try to visualize it as a continual Process that began a loong time ago (probably at the Big Bang, at least) and, in George Carlin's words "keep rolling and rolling and rolling".
There probably WASN'T just THE first living cell, it's likely several different prebiotic compounds were interacting and linking for a looong time before what we know as "modern" cells were established.
That's why life can't be easily defined in terms of "starts here" and "ends here". It's (as far as we know) an intrinsic part or phase of the movement of matter/energy.
3 - And here comes the hard part, the process of biochemical evolution that every living organism is an example of, it's just one of the "complexity forms" of this matter/energy movement.
Hegel and Engels are both good reading material about this subject. (From a philosophical POV)

Originally posted by Wifibrains
I'm in no way saying this is truth. Just a perseptions from an angle. Life, DNA, is a signal. If the cell/molecule has the right qualities to receive the signal. If fires into life. Single cell organism to start. To see how it progressed watch a video of how the egg of a human embryo splits from one cell to two. It just pops and suddenly there are two, then four and so on. Magic! It just copy's itself.

My friend, it ain't magic, it's called meiosis/mitosis. We have a pretty good idea how that works, what's more, we have actually recorded the process
Which doesn't mean it's not awesome.

Originally posted by drakus
1 - This is the SCIENCE forum, speculations outside the scientific method have THEIR OWN forum.
2 - It would help to stop viewing life as a "Thing", instead try to visualize it as a continual Process that began a loong time ago (probably at the Big Bang, at least) and, in George Carlin's words "keep rolling and rolling and rolling".
There probably WASN'T just THE first living cell, it's likely several different prebiotic compounds were interacting and linking for a looong time before what we know as "modern" cells were established.
That's why life can't be easily defined in terms of "starts here" and "ends here". It's (as far as we know) an intrinsic part or phase of the movement of matter/energy.
3 - And here comes the hard part, the process of biochemical evolution that every living organism is an example of, it's just one of the "complexity forms" of this matter/energy movement.
Hegel and Engels are both good reading material about this subject. (From a philosophical POV)

And, who are you to say this isn't a scientific topic? Especially since you offered quite a scientific explanation. Duh! Is, "How does gravity work" a scientific question? Then, "how does inert matter become living matter' most certainly belongs in this forum.

all cells are made from the elements, out of the billions of differant combinations of these elements there is at least one combination that can make up primative cells, all of these differant combinations would be played out at some point or another given enough time. and if theres one thing we know about the universe its that it has been around for a while.

Originally posted by jiggerj
You have no idea how much I want to argue with that. But I can't! Instead, I have to go with, who or what created the creator. I simply will NOT buy that he/she/it always was and always will be.

I knew it was going to strike a nerve as I posted it but it is what it is. Maybe the process of continous ascension done by INTERNAL INHABITANTS involves learning the ways of the CREATOR weither you ascend into the higher positive feilds or ascend into the lower dimension fields. So is it hard to accept that maybe just maybe its not ment to be understood. Just as a srimp thats half way thru its life cannot undestand what going on near PLUTO.. SOme things like information truth high intelligence may be gifts obtained thru OUR experiences. I didnt say Creator to upset you just how I feel.