It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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)
Originally posted by Ophiuchus 13
reply to post by jiggerj
EA*RTH was a plasma ball once. COSMIC radiated Materials back then became living organisims now. So maybe during the cooling phase another radiation/ENERGY was added to FORCE EVOLUTION maybe from a STAR or PLANET ASTERIOD/COMET still forming/or flying by as well interacting with the EA*RTHs plasma materials as it formed.
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?
Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by jiggerj
Or maybe the easier answer to all of everything. There is actually a God who created us.
I know, I know, you don't want to hear that......But regardless of what people think about evolution, you can't have something alive from nothing unless something or someone in this case created it.
Sorry for all of you non creationists, but god is real....
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
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.
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)
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.
www.google.co.uk... %3D6lnr4HWiz9M&ei=U-f9T8TMMYKG4gTa6fWTBw&usg=AFQjCNFxFjBCcGMtcMmaNt7REVNm3RsQyAedit on 11-7-2012 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)
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.