Notices
Results 1 to 74 of 74
Like Tree6Likes
  • 1 Post By RedPanda
  • 1 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 1 Post By mat5592
  • 1 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 1 Post By RedPanda

Thread: How do we exactly define a thing as a "Living Thing"?

  1. #1 How do we exactly define a thing as a "Living Thing"? 
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    Example: metabolism.
    Situation: You have a cell.
    In a lab, you take out it's mitochondria.
    Its doomed to die.
    BUT IT IS NOT DEAD YET! ITS STILL ALIVE!!!!



    So, can a living thing be exactly defined?

    what about viruses?


    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    You're doomed to die.
    BUT YOU'RE NOT DEAD YET! YOU'RE STILL ALIVE????


    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    This is 4th or 5th grade (primary school to those outside the US) biology.

    Life (cf. biota) is a characteristic that distinguishes objects that have signaling and self-sustaining processes from those that do not,[1][2] either because such functions have ceased (death), or else because they lack such functions and are classified as inanimate.[3][4] Biology is the science concerned with the study of life.

    Any contiguous living system is called an organism. Life - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    In biology, an organism is any contiguous living system (such as animal, fungus, micro-organism, or plant). In at least some form, all types of organisms are capable of response to stimuli, reproduction, growth and development, and maintenance of homeostasis as a stable whole.Organism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    984
    Signs or characterists of living things: Motion, ingestion, excretion, respiration, reproduction, response to stimuli. Seventh grade science class, but then I went to school in The US of A. Viruses and prions are border line cases.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    I have yet to find a definition of 'Life' that doesn't also include politicians and lawyers.
    Dywyddyr likes this.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexG View Post
    You're doomed to die.
    BUT YOU'RE NOT DEAD YET! YOU'RE STILL ALIVE????
    yes, thats what i mean.

    Life - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Quote Originally Posted by wikipedia
    Life is considered a characteristic of organisms that exhibit all or most of the following: Homeostasis,Organization,Metabolism,Growth,Adaptation,Response to stimuli,Reproduction
    so if we take away most of these from a cell, cant it still be alive?
    which part of the cell is alive?
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    which part of the cell is alive?
    All of it! It is a system. There isn't one bit that contains "life" that keeps the rest of it going.

    Going back to the example of a human: if you remove someone's heart, they will die. Does that mean that "life" is contained in the heart?
    But if you remove their lungs, brain, kidneys, ... then they will die. So maybe life is not a "thing" we find in one part of the body or the cell, it is just a label to describe the behaviour of the system.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    So life = behavior of the system consisting of components?
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    So life = behavior of the system consisting of components?
    Sounds reasonable to me.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    doesn't: being able to think = being alive? (for the case of the human)

    cells differ..
    they dont think like human brains
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    doesn't: being able to think = being alive? (for the case of the human)
    I'm not sure. There are people who are severely brain-damaged, for example, who have little or no brain activity (as far as thinking/consciousness is concerned) and yet their bodies are alive.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    PhDemon,
    don't you consider the person (at that moment) to be alive, right after his head is decapitated, and still thinking?? (not brain dead)

    removing lungs (respiration)
    reproductive organs (reproduction)
    etcetc.
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,034
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    cells differ..
    they dont think like human brains
    What evidence do you have that cells think at all?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    you dont need evidence for it. or if you want to accept: reacting to stimuli, as a piece of evidence.


    show me evidence you do think?
    or evidence that i think?

    asking for evidence that shows the human brain thinks = absurd
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,034
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    you dont need evidence for it.
    Wrong.
    Of course you do.

    or if you want to accept: reacting to stimuli, as a piece of evidence.
    If I blow on a piece of fluff it moves.
    That's a "reaction to stimuli".
    Does fluff think?
    What about chemicals?
    Reacting to stimuli is NOT thinking.
    When you get cold do you have to think before you shiver?
    When you don't eat do you have to think before you feel hungry?

    show me evidence you do think?
    or evidence that i think?
    I'm not entirely sure that you do think.

    asking for evidence that shows the human brain thinks = absurd
    What crap.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    asking for evidence that shows the human brain thinks = absurd
    It is very important when it comes to people in a coma, persistent vegetative state, locked-in syndrome, etc.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    What is your evidence that it is still thinking?
    Consciousness after decapitation Mind Hacksthe test done, where a person sentenced to death is asked to keep blinking when he still brain-alive.
    he seen blinking for 11seconds after head is chopped off then died. for some, some are longer a bit.
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Why is that relevant to the definition of life?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,034
    @ ryanawe123
    Your link does not support your claim.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Why is that relevant to the definition of life?
    the definition of life is still unclear at the moment.
    that why i am discussing it here?

    the person is still alive. but doomed to die (does not have the required components to support life), and since those components do not exist,

    you claim of
    life = behavior of the system consisting of components?
    does not apply to this situation?

    then what definition could life have?
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    you claim of
    life = behavior of the system consisting of components?
    does not apply to this situation?
    a) That was your description, not mine.

    b) Why doesn't it apply?

    c) As you say, the person is about to die, so the questions seems somewhat irrelevant (and gruesome).
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    a) That was your description, not mine.
    sort off, but it seemed reasonable to you
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Sounds reasonable to me.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    b) Why doesn't it apply?
    because its just the human brain, not the
    behavior of the system consisting of components
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    c) As you say, the person is about to die, so the questions seems somewhat irrelevant (and gruesome).
    yes, lost the components used to SUPPORT LIFE but not lost: life.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    life = brain?
    but single cells/plants dont have brains......
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Why does the definition of life require thought?
    Do plants "think"? Are they alive?
    Why is the definition different for humans than other things? Either something is alive or it isn't
    "Cells differ" so bacteria aren't alive?

    You need to start thinking things through before you post...
    the difference that we are complex living organisms, we use brains.... plants dont.

    isn't describing "alive concious" the same as "living thing"? (in the term of an animal, which is different from other kinds of organisms)?
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    a) That was your description, not mine.
    sort off, but it seemed reasonable to you
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Sounds reasonable to me.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    b) Why doesn't it apply?
    because its just the human brain, not the
    behavior of the system consisting of components
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    c) As you say, the person is about to die, so the questions seems somewhat irrelevant (and gruesome).
    yes, lost the components used to SUPPORT LIFE but not lost: life.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    life = brain?
    but single cells/plants dont have brains......
    I don't really see your point. The system has been cut in half and is in the process of losing life. If anything this confirms your description of "life = behavior of the system consisting of components". Break up the system and the organism dies.

    And "life=brain" does not make sense because single celled organisms, plants and fungi are generally considered to be alive.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    I don't really see your point. The system has been cut in half and is in the process of losing life.
    either alive or dead. no in-between.

    cutting the system in half will doom the person's conscious to die (the head)
    but is he still alive? yes.

    is there half-alive? i reckon not.
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    either alive or dead. no in-between.
    Maybe. Maybe not. I don't know. What about people whose bodies are alive but have no conscious brain activity.

    And what about viruses or prions?

    I still don't really see what this means for the definition of life (except to show that it is not simple thing to define).
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    except to show that it is not simple thing to define.
    yes, perhaps along this is idea is one that is something that the human mind is unable to understand?
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,034
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    either alive or dead. no in-between.
    Really?
    Evidence please.
    Regardless, it doesn't matter in this cae.
    The guy is alive but dying.
    It's that simple.

    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123
    yes, perhaps along this is idea is one that is something that the human mind is unable to understand?
    Well, apparently something at least one human 1 can't understand.
    Otherwise you're wrong.


    1 Yes, I know it's an assumption on my part, but I'm giving you the benefit of doubt.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    except to show that it is not simple thing to define.
    yes, perhaps along this is idea is one that is something that the human mind is unable to understand?
    There is a difference between being able to understand and being able to define.

    The first may be due to complexity. The latter may be due to "fuzzy edges" and special cases; things aren't always black and white.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,397
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    I don't really see your point. The system has been cut in half and is in the process of losing life.
    either alive or dead. no in-between.

    cutting the system in half will doom the person's conscious to die (the head)
    but is he still alive? yes.

    is there half-alive? i reckon not.
    you seem to be purposly missing the major problem with this example. Will the decapitated head continue to live, grow, eat, maintain homeostasis, reproduce, and evolve? NO it will not, in a very short time it wil cease to function and decay. thus while it is still functioning, it is not living anymore in the overarching meaning of the term.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Masters Degree mat5592's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    601
    i don't think i even understand what point is trying to be made here.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,034
    Quote Originally Posted by mat5592 View Post
    i don't think i even understand what point is trying to be made here.
    I think the whole point is that ryanawe123 is attempting an on-line written emulation of a decapitated gallus gallus domesticus.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,840
    Decapitations.

    There are cases where people have been executed by Madam Guillotine, and had their heads lifted up for display. The watchers have seen lips move in what are obviously attempts to swear at the crowd. There is even one famous case when a scientist who was condemned agreed to an experiment with a friend who was to be a watcher, which involved him continuing to blink till he was unconscious. He blinked for over 10 seconds.

    This thread seems to have devolved into two questions.

    1. Definition of life.
    2. When can an individual human be said to be dead.

    1. Individual cells can be said to be alive till their energy consuming activities cease.
    2. This is variable. A human is alive until he/she is unconscious and can no longer be resuscitated. This will obviously be different under different conditions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,034
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic View Post
    here is even one famous case when a scientist who was condemned agreed to an experiment with a friend who was to be a watcher, which involved him continuing to blink till he was unconscious. He blinked for over 10 seconds.
    That's the Lavoisier one - it's a fake.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,840
    Well, maybe so. I do not have enough info to argue fake or not. There is little doubt though that the brain survives for some seconds after decapitation,. While I have never seen a human decapitation, I have seen it done to sheep and goats, and seen the severed head trying to bleat.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    And a decapitated chook might flap for some time while hanging from a hook. I realise that's the "other side" of decapitation, but it's really the same phenomenon - nerves and neurons still firing. The big difference being that the brain might briefly be conscious - but that's what its neuronal activity does, just like the neuronal activity within muscles of flapping wings.

    I don't know why people think that every cell and process must be instantly finalised, dead as a doornail in a split second. It's like expecting your bath to drain away and leave the surface dry. Even though something is certainly and obviously "final" it doesn't mean that the whole process has to be completed between one thousandth of a second and the next.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    adelady, so it would be
    a dead person who is conscious
    ?
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,397
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    adelady, so it would be
    a dead person who is conscious
    ?
    Her post is spot on, the head may be coherent for a short time, but there is NO way to keep it living, its is essentially dead and hasn't realized it yet.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    984
    Charateristics of life refer to charateristics of a healthy specimen. A horse, even a dead horse, is an example of a species that is alive . A Rock is not.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    adelady, so it would be
    a dead person who is conscious


    No. The person has not yet completed the dying process.
    There's potential for a living being, say a bacterium that is forming a split but has not yet separated into two or more identifiably separate living things,
    there's alive,
    there's dying, which might take a split second, might take a minute or so (but see Sam Parnia)

    Then there's dead. Where all processes that sustain a living organism have entirely ceased.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    I assume the problem is trying to reconcile the idea of death as a process or not-completely-dead with the idea of the departure of a "soul"?

    But surely that (and the whole relationship of consciousness/thought to life) is not relevant to the vast majority of living things; e.g. plants, yeast, bacteria, chickens, etc.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    not-completely-dead
    How I feel most mornings.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    No. The person has not yet completed the dying process.
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    either alive or dead. no in-between.
    so what i said is wrong, there is half-dead/or half-alive/ or fully alive/ or fully dead?


    at first i only thought:

    YES its alive, orrr............... NO its dead.
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    Example: metabolism.
    Situation: You have a cell.
    In a lab, you take out it's mitochondria.
    Its doomed to die.
    BUT IT IS NOT DEAD YET! ITS STILL ALIVE!!!!



    So, can a living thing be exactly defined?

    what about viruses?
    "living" is simply an opinion

    i belive planets are living
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,397
    Quote Originally Posted by DR. BLUEPRINT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    Example: metabolism.
    Situation: You have a cell.
    In a lab, you take out it's mitochondria.
    Its doomed to die.
    BUT IT IS NOT DEAD YET! ITS STILL ALIVE!!!!



    So, can a living thing be exactly defined?

    what about viruses?
    "living" is simply an opinion

    i belive planets are living
    Plantes are not alive, as they do not fulfill the seven requirements to be considered living.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,034
    Quote Originally Posted by DR. BLUEPRINT View Post
    "living" is simply an opinion
    Of course "living" and "life" are just opinions.
    After all, that's why they have a scientific definition.

    i belive planets are living
    Yeah well.
    Some people believe in angels.
    They're no more correct than you are.
    seagypsy likes this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Has the forum recently been inundated with cranks? Or is this a normal pattern? It seems like most of the recent additions in the last couple months have all been cranks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    who sees through things
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    UK now, US before
    Posts
    269
    Is the OP possibly thinking of an alleged "life force" like qi or prana? I'm speaking unscientifically now.

    If you include in your definition of the Earth everything contained within its atmosphere, you could say parts of it are living, so calling it a living planet in that sense isn't so bad.

    If you define a planet as a ball of rock or gas, then no.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Masters Degree mat5592's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    601
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Has the forum recently been inundated with cranks? Or is this a normal pattern? It seems like most of the recent additions in the last couple months have all been cranks.
    thanks!
    Neverfly likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    I did use the word, "most" not the word, "all..."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Forum Masters Degree mat5592's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    601
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    I did use the word, "most" not the word, "all..."
    i know, i caught that, just felt like messing with you haha
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    It seems to be a whole new flavor of stupid, though.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,840
    It is a new flavor of religious. To say planets are living is a religious statement, based on blind faith rather than data. Venus is a hot, lifeless hell, and to call it living is to blind yourself to reality, just like all religious belief.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    It's not new. It's Gaea.
    The idea is that the Earth is Motherly, it heals from inflicted "wounds" and it supports and 'encourages' life. Earth abides, it provides and it sustains.
    Stars reproduce and produce plants. They produce the elements- the raw materials used to create more complex functions, through emergence.

    It is quite religious, all the way down to claiming that the Earth has a Spirit.

    Needless to say, I do not share this belief...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56 Great Question ! 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    2
    This is a major debate worthy issue. To decide what is 'alive' and what is not.

    I thought that Professor Brian Cox's recent book "Wonders of Life" has a true and very interesting statement concerned with this, stating that "When I die, I will be nothing more than an inanimate bag of chemicals slumped on the floor. Nothing has left, yet what is left is no longer me". Discussing some people's belief in a 'soul' despite how unscientific it sounds.

    I also thought is is interesting when looking at the common ancestor of all living things today, that mixture of chemicals in a hydrothermal vent, when did it become 'alive'. Virus' for example are termed not alive, due to the fact that they cannot reproduce without a host cell. I think for something to be 'alive' it has to have something. Perhaps just the ability to reproduce, but there's something else I think, a bit like a spark.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Joshua H View Post
    Nothing has left, yet what is left is no longer me".
    Correct.
    Nothing has left.
    But something has ceased. The "pattern".
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Planet X
    Posts
    34
    A living thing is an organism made up of cells, takes up space, goes through a life cycle, needs water and food, and has hereditary material (i.e. DNA). Virus's for example, can't be organisms because they don't have their own DNA; they use the cellular functions of another cell to make more copies of itself.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,840
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewEinstein View Post
    Virus's for example, can't be organisms because they don't have their own DNA; they use the cellular functions of another cell to make more copies of itself.
    I have always disagreed with any definition of life that excludes viruses. Any such definition must, by its nature, also exclude the first living protocells. Those protocells would have used environmental sources for all of their organic components, since the first life had not yet evolved means of synthesizing such materials.

    To me, the primary characteristics of life are replication and evolution. Viruses exhibit those qualities perfectly.

    Another reason to include viruses is that there is a very strong likelihood that they began as more complex bacteria, and evolved a simpler form of existence. It is bizarre to suggest that a life form undergoes evolution to become non living.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    425
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    cells differ..
    they dont think like human brains
    What evidence do you have that cells think at all?
    You are made of cells, do you think? What evidence do you have that you think?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Therapy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanawe123 View Post
    cells differ..
    they dont think like human brains
    What evidence do you have that cells think at all?
    You are made of cells, do you think? What evidence do you have that you think?
    You haven't quite grasped the idea of supporting your statements, have you?
    PhDemon likes this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Forum Professor Zwirko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    55 N, 3 W
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewEinstein View Post
    Virus's for example, can't be organisms because they don't have their own DNA [..]
    Not sure where you get that idea from. Here's the complete DNA sequence of the ΦX174 virus:


    1 gagttttatc gcttccatga cgcagaagtt aacactttcg gatatttctg atgagtcgaa
    61 aaattatctt gataaagcag gaattactac tgcttgttta cgaattaaat cgaagtggac
    121 tgctggcgga aaatgagaaa attcgaccta tccttgcgca gctcgagaag ctcttacttt
    181 gcgacctttc gccatcaact aacgattctg tcaaaaactg acgcgttgga tgaggagaag
    241 tggcttaata tgcttggcac gttcgtcaag gactggttta gatatgagtc acattttgtt
    301 catggtagag attctcttgt tgacatttta aaagagcgtg gattactatc tgagtccgat
    361 gctgttcaac cactaatagg taagaaatca tgagtcaagt tactgaacaa tccgtacgtt
    421 tccagaccgc tttggcctct attaagctca ttcaggcttc tgccgttttg gatttaaccg
    481 aagatgattt cgattttctg acgagtaaca aagtttggat tgctactgac cgctctcgtg
    541 ctcgtcgctg cgttgaggct tgcgtttatg gtacgctgga ctttgtggga taccctcgct
    601 ttcctgctcc tgttgagttt attgctgccg tcattgctta ttatgttcat cccgtcaaca
    661 ttcaaacggc ctgtctcatc atggaaggcg ctgaatttac ggaaaacatt attaatggcg
    721 tcgagcgtcc ggttaaagcc gctgaattgt tcgcgtttac cttgcgtgta cgcgcaggaa
    781 acactgacgt tcttactgac gcagaagaaa acgtgcgtca aaaattacgt gcggaaggag
    841 tgatgtaatg tctaaaggta aaaaacgttc tggcgctcgc cctggtcgtc cgcagccgtt
    901 gcgaggtact aaaggcaagc gtaaaggcgc tcgtctttgg tatgtaggtg gtcaacaatt
    961 ttaattgcag gggcttcggc cccttacttg aggataaatt atgtctaata ttcaaactgg
    1021 cgccgagcgt atgccgcatg acctttccca tcttggcttc cttgctggtc agattggtcg
    1081 tcttattacc atttcaacta ctccggttat cgctggcgac tccttcgaga tggacgccgt
    1141 tggcgctctc cgtctttctc cattgcgtcg tggccttgct attgactcta ctgtagacat
    1201 ttttactttt tatgtccctc atcgtcacgt ttatggtgaa cagtggatta agttcatgaa
    1261 ggatggtgtt aatgccactc ctctcccgac tgttaacact actggttata ttgaccatgc
    1321 cgcttttctt ggcacgatta accctgatac caataaaatc cctaagcatt tgtttcaggg
    1381 ttatttgaat atctataaca actattttaa agcgccgtgg atgcctgacc gtaccgaggc
    1441 taaccctaat gagcttaatc aagatgatgc tcgttatggt ttccgttgct gccatctcaa
    1501 aaacatttgg actgctccgc ttcctcctga gactgagctt tctcgccaaa tgacgacttc
    1561 taccacatct attgacatta tgggtctgca agctgcttat gctaatttgc atactgacca
    1621 agaacgtgat tacttcatgc agcgttacca tgatgttatt tcttcatttg gaggtaaaac
    1681 ctcttatgac gctgacaacc gtcctttact tgtcatgcgc tctaatctct gggcatctgg
    1741 ctatgatgtt gatggaactg accaaacgtc gttaggccag ttttctggtc gtgttcaaca
    1801 gacctataaa cattctgtgc cgcgtttctt tgttcctgag catggcacta tgtttactct
    1861 tgcgcttgtt cgttttccgc ctactgcgac taaagagatt cagtacctta acgctaaagg
    1921 tgctttgact tataccgata ttgctggcga ccctgttttg tatggcaact tgccgccgcg
    1981 tgaaatttct atgaaggatg ttttccgttc tggtgattcg tctaagaagt ttaagattgc
    2041 tgagggtcag tggtatcgtt atgcgccttc gtatgtttct cctgcttatc accttcttga
    2101 aggcttccca ttcattcagg aaccgccttc tggtgatttg caagaacgcg tacttattcg
    2161 ccaccatgat tatgaccagt gtttccagtc cgttcagttg ttgcagtgga atagtcaggt
    2221 taaatttaat gtgaccgttt atcgcaatct gccgaccact cgcgattcaa tcatgacttc
    2281 gtgataaaag attgagtgtg aggttataac gccgaagcgg taaaaatttt aatttttgcc
    2341 gctgaggggt tgaccaagcg aagcgcggta ggttttctgc ttaggagttt aatcatgttt
    2401 cagactttta tttctcgcca taattcaaac tttttttctg ataagctggt tctcacttct
    2461 gttactccag cttcttcggc acctgtttta cagacaccta aagctacatc gtcaacgtta
    2521 tattttgata gtttgacggt taatgctggt aatggtggtt ttcttcattg cattcagatg
    2581 gatacatctg tcaacgccgc taatcaggtt gtttctgttg gtgctgatat tgcttttgat
    2641 gccgacccta aattttttgc ctgtttggtt cgctttgagt cttcttcggt tccgactacc
    2701 ctcccgactg cctatgatgt ttatcctttg aatggtcgcc atgatggtgg ttattatacc
    2761 gtcaaggact gtgtgactat tgacgtcctt ccccgtacgc cgggcaataa cgtttatgtt
    2821 ggtttcatgg tttggtctaa ctttaccgct actaaatgcc gcggattggt ttcgctgaat
    2881 caggttatta aagagattat ttgtctccag ccacttaagt gaggtgattt atgtttggtg
    2941 ctattgctgg cggtattgct tctgctcttg ctggtggcgc catgtctaaa ttgtttggag
    3001 gcggtcaaaa agccgcctcc ggtggcattc aaggtgatgt gcttgctacc gataacaata
    3061 ctgtaggcat gggtgatgct ggtattaaat ctgccattca aggctctaat gttcctaacc
    3121 ctgatgaggc cgcccctagt tttgtttctg gtgctatggc taaagctggt aaaggacttc
    3181 ttgaaggtac gttgcaggct ggcacttctg ccgtttctga taagttgctt gatttggttg
    3241 gacttggtgg caagtctgcc gctgataaag gaaaggatac tcgtgattat cttgctgctg
    3301 catttcctga gcttaatgct tgggagcgtg ctggtgctga tgcttcctct gctggtatgg
    3361 ttgacgccgg atttgagaat caaaaagagc ttactaaaat gcaactggac aatcagaaag
    3421 agattgccga gatgcaaaat gagactcaaa aagagattgc tggcattcag tcggcgactt
    3481 cacgccagaa tacgaaagac caggtatatg cacaaaatga gatgcttgct tatcaacaga
    3541 aggagtctac tgctcgcgtt gcgtctatta tggaaaacac caatctttcc aagcaacagc
    3601 aggtttccga gattatgcgc caaatgctta ctcaagctca aacggctggt cagtatttta
    3661 ccaatgacca aatcaaagaa atgactcgca aggttagtgc tgaggttgac ttagttcatc
    3721 agcaaacgca gaatcagcgg tatggctctt ctcatattgg cgctactgca aaggatattt
    3781 ctaatgtcgt cactgatgct gcttctggtg tggttgatat ttttcatggt attgataaag
    3841 ctgttgccga tacttggaac aatttctgga aagacggtaa agctgatggt attggctcta
    3901 atttgtctag gaaataaccg tcaggattga caccctccca attgtatgtt ttcatgcctc
    3961 caaatcttgg aggctttttt atggttcgtt cttattaccc ttctgaatgt cacgctgatt
    4021 attttgactt tgagcgtatc gaggctctta aacctgctat tgaggcttgt ggcatttcta
    4081 ctctttctca atccccaatg cttggcttcc ataagcagat ggataaccgc atcaagctct
    4141 tggaagagat tctgtctttt cgtatgcagg gcgttgagtt cgataatggt gatatgtatg
    4201 ttgacggcca taaggctgct tctgacgttc gtgatgagtt tgtatctgtt actgagaagt
    4261 taatggatga attggcacaa tgctacaatg tgctccccca acttgatatt aataacacta
    4321 tagaccaccg ccccgaaggg gacgaaaaat ggtttttaga gaacgagaag acggttacgc
    4381 agttttgccg caagctggct gctgaacgcc ctcttaagga tattcgcgat gagtataatt
    4441 accccaaaaa gaaaggtatt aaggatgagt gttcaagatt gctggaggcc tccactatga
    4501 aatcgcgtag aggctttgct attcagcgtt tgatgaatgc aatgcgacag gctcatgctg
    4561 atggttggtt tatcgttttt gacactctca cgttggctga cgaccgatta gaggcgtttt
    4621 atgataatcc caatgctttg cgtgactatt ttcgtgatat tggtcgtatg gttcttgctg
    4681 ccgagggtcg caaggctaat gattcacacg ccgactgcta tcagtatttt tgtgtgcctg
    4741 agtatggtac agctaatggc cgtcttcatt tccatgcggt gcactttatg cggacacttc
    4801 ctacaggtag cgttgaccct aattttggtc gtcgggtacg caatcgccgc cagttaaata
    4861 gcttgcaaaa tacgtggcct tatggttaca gtatgcccat cgcagttcgc tacacgcagg
    4921 acgctttttc acgttctggt tggttgtggc ctgttgatgc taaaggtgag ccgcttaaag
    4981 ctaccagtta tatggctgtt ggtttctatg tggctaaata cgttaacaaa aagtcagata
    5041 tggaccttgc tgctaaaggt ctaggagcta aagaatggaa caactcacta aaaaccaagc
    5101 tgtcgctact tcccaagaag ctgttcagaa tcagaatgag ccgcaacttc gggatgaaaa
    5161 tgctcacaat gacaaatctg tccacggagt gcttaatcca acttaccaag ctgggttacg
    5221 acgcgacgcc gttcaaccag atattgaagc agaacgcaaa aagagagatg agattgaggc
    5281 tgggaaaagt tactgtagcc gacgttttgg cggcgcaacc tgtgacgaca aatctgctca
    5341 aatttatgcg cgcttcgata aaaatgattg gcgtatccaa cctgca


    You can restrict the definition of life to exclude viruses or you can broaden the defintion of life to include them. Since life itself has no agreed upon definition. viruses are left in limbo, their status depending on which definition of life you find appealing. There is no agreed upon answer to this question - even after over 100 years since their discovery. Part of the problem too is our love of pigeonholing - we like something to be either in this box or that box. In reality, the biological world can be fuzzy and ill-defined. Thus, there is a spectrum of the living with viruses lying near one end of it - but not at the end. Drawing any kind of solid line around viruses is likey going to be somewhat arbitrary and controversial.


    Skeptic,


    I don't think I'd have a problem with things evolving into a non-living state. I'd agree that it seems bizarre though. Raises interesting questions about things like mitochondria, chloroplasts, the nucleus (hypothesised to have it's origin in a large DNA virus) and probably some other cellular features too.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    480
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    It's not new. It's Gaea.
    The idea is that the Earth is Motherly, it heals from inflicted "wounds" and it supports and 'encourages' life. Earth abides, it provides and it sustains.
    Stars reproduce and produce plants. They produce the elements- the raw materials used to create more complex functions, through emergence.

    It is quite religious, all the way down to claiming that the Earth has a Spirit.

    Needless to say, I do not share this belief...
    Same here, I think Earth is more fatherly, cold and not very caring but provides and functions whereas the suns should be the mother as it brings life.
    Depression is the uncertainty of the unknown, I know one day I'll die so I'm happy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    480
    Come on, all I was saying is that what I said holds as much weight as the Earth being a Mother just because a couple of tree's grow off her ass.
    Depression is the uncertainty of the unknown, I know one day I'll die so I'm happy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,786
    I sometimes define life "not in the biological sense" as the ability of an organism to be aware of its existence. Preferably able to think out its actions, and not just instinctual responses "though thinking could be considered instinctual.". Ugh, I just confused myself.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    480
    Hmmm if thinking could be considered instinctual then does consciousness go out of the window :/
    Depression is the uncertainty of the unknown, I know one day I'll die so I'm happy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Planet X
    Posts
    34
    I disagree because viruses don't have their own DNA; which is the info that defines an organism: It's like they are identity-less. Also, protocells still had DNA, even if they did use their environment quite extensively, thus making them organisms.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,397
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewEinstein View Post
    I disagree because viruses don't have their own DNA; which is the info that defines an organism: It's like they are identity-less. Also, protocells still had DNA, even if they did use their environment quite extensively, thus making them organisms.
    Where do you get the idae that viruses dont have DNA? That is a very incorrect statement. All viruses have DNA.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    932
    If they have no DNA they wouldn't be viruses...
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    If thy right nipple offend thee, pluck it off! Goes for the other, too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,034
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewEinstein View Post
    I disagree because viruses don't have their own DNA
    So how do you explain post #66?
    How do you explain Wiki's "error"? Virus particles (known as virions) consist of two or three parts: i) the genetic material made from either DNA or RNA.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Planet X
    Posts
    34
    Yes, but viruses' DNA is different; it can't go through mitosis to replicate itself which is why it isn't considered an organism.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewEinstein View Post
    Yes, but viruses' DNA is different; it can't go through mitosis to replicate itself which is why it isn't considered an organism.
    That is a huge amount of organisms that you have now defined as 'not an organism'...
    Prokaryote - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    PumaMan likes this.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,786
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewEinstein View Post
    Yes, but viruses' DNA is different; it can't go through mitosis to replicate itself which is why it isn't considered an organism.
    That is a huge amount of organisms that you have now defined as 'not an organism'...
    Prokaryote - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    So, are the prokaryotes for karyotism, and the eukaryotes against it?
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    So, are the prokaryotes for karyotism, and the eukaryotes against it?
    No, you are confused.
    It is Karaoke that divides the prokaraokes from the eukaraokes.
    The prokaraokes go crazy for it; insist on singing My Way all the time.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Define "Trekkie"
    By seagypsy in forum Science-Fiction and Non-Fiction
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: February 7th, 2013, 01:56 PM
  2. Replies: 47
    Last Post: April 17th, 2010, 07:12 PM
  3. How does this "quote" thing work?
    By GiantEvil in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: April 13th, 2010, 02:22 PM
  4. How to define "species" of an organism if...
    By gattaca in forum Biology
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: December 18th, 2009, 05:06 PM
  5. Define a "System"
    By leohopkins in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: April 15th, 2007, 01:52 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •