reply to post by rockintitz
I think most can agree with inheritance, ie we pass our genetics to our offspring and evolution is an extension of that. Over time small genetic
mutations or changes accumulate, some may lie dormant, others may cause noticeable differences, in sever cases deformities. Such would not last long
and would die off, however in rare cases such mutations may be beneficial. For example in the case of dormant genes, an animal that had dormant genes
for baldness, that lived in a cold climate, any offspring with this mutation would die in the cold, however if the climate changed to a hotter one
such may have an advantage. Evolution does not work to a plan, it is a brutal process of survival of the fittest, only those that can survive in
earth's environment do.
A curiosity look at the fossil record will tell you that, fish came before the more evolved amphibians. They came before reptiles that came before
birds and mammals. Such drastic changes are thought to have come about through major climate events, allowing niece life forms to survive. For example
the fossil record shows evidence of both reptiles that could fly or had wings, but also feathers and beaks. In other words the ancestor of birds. Even
if you look at a fetus, of any animal develop you can see it go through the stages, starting of as two single cells. Even human fetuses have a tail,
and gills (that develop in to nose and mouth). Then if you look at DNA you can trace ancestral lineage to a common ancestor, ie we share DNA with not
only apes but also things like salmon and bananas. It has been said that there is no such thing as a fish, as genetically some fish have more DNA in
common with other animals than with other fish. we also hold a lot of “junk” DNA that does not serve a purpose (well maybe in some unforeseen
future circumstance might). You can see evolution every day in hospitals, ie bacterial resistance to antibiotics, the more complex the life form is
the the more time its going to take before such changes take effect. But you're looking for the link between living and nonliving matter.
Viruses are not alive, ie have no metabolism, however once inside a host cell incorporate their DNA, and use the host cell to copy itself. Viruses
occupy a space between living and nonliving matter. not alive but can reproduce and evolve. When early single cellular life is considered, this and
similar methods of DNA transfer may also have played a part in early evolution/ survival of organisms. To go further back before DNA we see single RNA
strands in nature, these complex chemical proteins, are not living but are the precursor to DNA ie are chemical capable of retaining and copying
information. RNA molecules have been observed in not only samples from earth but also from samples taken from space. This is not to say that this was
life's origin, but that the building blocks of life do exist in nature, have been observed and created in a laboratory. I think the important thing to
realize that the theory of evolution is not one single fact,but gathered from a body of facts in many different fields, ie geneticists,
DNA research, Biologists etc.
To go even further back I suppose you could say that the atoms that made such complex chemicals “evolved”. The first element was hydrogen, and
through the nuclear process, other elements were created which in turn would create more, sometimes simply through decay. even the protons and
neutrons came before hydrogen and the electrons and sub atomic particles before them. Before then our universe was much smaller was infinitely small
and infinitely dense, in various stages of its history, its nature has changed and evolved, at one point all forces were united as one single force.
If “the big crunch” theory is to be believed then such laws will change again. Nothing is static, everything is changing, only on different
So the real argument, I think with this thread, is to deduce everything into there must have been a prime mover to set everything up, the chain of
events that would ultimately lead to intelligent people. That all these unique events are statistically imposable on there own let alone the complex
chain of events to the beginning of time for life to be eventual possible. What people are mistaken for randomness for an extremely complicated
system, ie the initial state of the universe created conditions that could only have one outcome. ie the force of gravity not only that stars would
form but also where.
Everything is connected, indeed nature has evolved, to the point it can question its own existence. It would be foolish not to think so, we are a
product of nature. You could argue that nature is “god”, many religions do, however to believe that this is an individual, self aware entity, by
definition is contradictory if all that is is contained with it. Which makes it even less plausible that such an entity will care what rituals I do,
what food I eat on specific days, what is moral or evil. The universe would exist without us. I think its pretty cool that i'm witness to it, but that
does not convince me of intelligent design.
There is no such thing as a fish
viris is not living
RNA found in space
RNA created in a lab
edit on 12-6-2013 by Redarguo because:
edit on 12-6-2013 by Redarguo because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-6-2013 by Redarguo because: (no reason