Total Posts:44|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Ask me anything you want about biology!

Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 6:35:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Hey guys,

I'm opening this thread to hopefully be able to learn a bit more about biology myself and teach it to members of the forum.

This is an open Q&A session where you can ask me any question you want about biology and evolution. I am going to major in biology and thought this would be a good "precursor" to my college lab studies.
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 6:42:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 6:39:21 PM, drafterman wrote:
What is life?

Life is any individual thing that can react to stimuli, reproduce, grow, and maintain homeostasis. It can be a virus, bacterium, protist, fungus, plant, or an animal.

http://www.biology-online.org...
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 6:51:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I didn't realize it was so cut and dried, especially with regards to the whole virus issue. Glad to see that you have to all figured out.
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 6:53:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 6:51:05 PM, drafterman wrote:
I didn't realize it was so cut and dried, especially with regards to the whole virus issue. Glad to see that you have to all figured out.

And that a consensus on the properties of life and what constitutes as life has already been reached.:)
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 7:10:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Hmm...let's see.

-How did virus form or evolve?
-What is the rate of the procession of evolution?
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 7:11:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 7:06:55 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
Do neurons have mitochondria?

Can you explain what you mean by "have" mitochondria?

Neurons are similar to other cells in the body because:

1. Neurons are surrounded by a cell membrane.
2. Neurons have a nucleus that contains genes.
3. Neurons contain cytoplasm, mitochondria and other organelles.
4. Neurons carry out basic cellular processes such as protein synthesis and energy production.

However, neurons differ from other cells in the body because:

1.Neurons have specialized extensions called dendrites and axons. Dendrites bring information to the cell body and axons take information away from the cell body.
2. Neurons communicate with each other through an electrochemical process.
Neurons contain some specialized structures (for example, synapses) and chemicals (for example, neurotransmitters).

<http://faculty.washington.edu... >
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 7:27:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 7:11:51 PM, Microsuck wrote:
At 6/24/2012 7:06:55 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
Do neurons have mitochondria?

Can you explain what you mean by "have" mitochondria?


Neurons are similar to other cells in the body because:

1. Neurons are surrounded by a cell membrane.
2. Neurons have a nucleus that contains genes.
3. Neurons contain cytoplasm, mitochondria and other organelles.
4. Neurons carry out basic cellular processes such as protein synthesis and energy production.

However, neurons differ from other cells in the body because:

1.Neurons have specialized extensions called dendrites and axons. Dendrites bring information to the cell body and axons take information away from the cell body.
2. Neurons communicate with each other through an electrochemical process.
Neurons contain some specialized structures (for example, synapses) and chemicals (for example, neurotransmitters).

<http://faculty.washington.edu... >

I think that's supposed to answer Chrisyppus' answer (????).
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 7:39:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 7:11:51 PM, Microsuck wrote:
At 6/24/2012 7:06:55 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
Do neurons have mitochondria?

Can you explain what you mean by "have" mitochondria?



3. Neurons contain cytoplasm, mitochondria and other organelles.

T'was all I was asking. I could have looked it up, but you wanted people to ask you questions.
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 7:42:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 7:10:45 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
Hmm...let's see.

-How did virus form or evolve?
-What is the rate of the procession of evolution?
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:21:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 7:10:45 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
Hmm...let's see.

-How did virus form or evolve?
-What is the rate of the procession of evolution?

It's 9:30 est and I'm off to bed. I'll give a full response tomorrow. That is a good question though
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2012 12:30:13 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
If we evolved from monkeys...
...why are there still monkeys?
...why haven't we ever seen a monkey give birth to a human?
...why aren't there any part-monkey/part-human fossils?
...why can't you produce video footage of a monkey turning into a man?

The answer: because evolution is false.

God hates you and you'll burn forever, you Satan worshipper!
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2012 12:36:42 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Dwight asks what I never had the courage to ask myself.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 9:20:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Well, we're all waiting for responses.
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 9:40:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 7:42:35 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 6/24/2012 7:10:45 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
Hmm...let's see.


Sorry it took me a while to reply. I've been super busy.

-How did virus form or evolve?

Depends on the virus. Let's use the HIV virus as an example of how a virus may evolve. This is one of the most well-documented cases of evolution.

Here is an image diagram for their evolution: http://evolution.berkeley.edu...

My source for the following information comes from the book Evolving by Fairbanks. (p. 38-203)

HiV is a retrovius meaning that i uses RNA instead of DNA. Because of that, and the fact that it replicates very quickly, means that it can rapidly reproduce and evolve. The virus traces its history to a related virus called SIVs, which first infected apes and monkeys.

In the heart of Africa, an unknown wild chimpanzee became infected with two different SIVs, one called SIVrmc and another SIVgsn. In the infected chimp, the RNA of these two viruses fused to form a hybrid called SIVcpz.

The most common form of HIV called HIV-1 group M arose when SIVcpz jumped from chimps to humans. From there, the virus quickly spread from person to person transmission. Infected people carried the virus to the city of Kinshasa in Democratic Repubic of Congo, where an urban area of multiple sexual transmissions alllowed the virus to infect a large number of people.

Mammals have a protein called tetherin which makes them immune to SIV and other retroviruses. Consequently, it had to evolve to overcome that problem. Tetherine works by conferring resitance to retroviruses by tethering them to the inside of the cell they infect, and prevents the virus from replicating.

The chimp virus SIVcpz evolved by acquiring two antitetherin genes called nef and vpu, one from each of the original monkey viruses that fused to form the chimpanzee virus. The nef gene mutated to overcome the chimpanzee tetherin, but the vpu gene remained inert. When the virus jumped to humans, tetherin was so different that the nef gene could not overcome human tetherin. Insetead, the previously latent vpu gene mutated to overcome human tetherin, allowined HIV01 group M to infect humans.

A mutation in the second gene, called gag, was also required from the virus to jump to humans. Interestingly, a case in which HIV infected a chimpanzee is known, and the gag gene of this virus mutated back to its original form in the chimpanzee to reinfect its host, strong evidence that the gag gene is essential for infection.

Another case is malaria. Malaria is a virus; though it cannot be transmitted from person to person. Humans were once resistant to malaria via the gene CMAH. Those who inherited it were favoured via natural selection. Today, all humans alive have this pseudogene and everyone at one point was resistant to Malaria. Interestingly, Neanderthals also carried the same pseudo gene.

So, why is Malaria such a huge problem today if we are resistant to it? Because of pretty much the same thing as the example above. Malara parasites overcame human resistance via a gene called EBA 175 which allowed those parasites to infect humans. The result was a disease worse than the original malaria.

-What is the rate of the procession of evolution?

Depends. There is a measurement of time called a Darwin that measures the rate of time. See the video to the right for more.
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 9:43:34 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 7:42:35 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 6/24/2012 7:10:45 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
-What is the rate of the procession of evolution?

In short, here is the formula if you are wondering:

r = (ln(x2) - ln(x1)) / Dt
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2012 8:22:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
How wide is your "t'aint"
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2012 8:31:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
he Fool: this is a little quiz for those you understand the theory of evolution well enough

1. What are some examples in our time which are examples of evolution?(easy)

2. What are some unanswered problems in evolution?(easy)

3.
In Evolution there seems to be a muttled conception between the direction in which evolution take place:

A. Now if Animals are shaped/organized via environmental selection. Does that mean that we are designed by the environment?
This explanation, infers that that life is accidental or random.

B. On the other hand we speak in terms of life evolving, and adapting to the environment, where claws, on a Crab serve a function possible for grabbing and snipping enemies.
As for humans we explain ourselves as superior because or brain enables us to adapt to much more situations. Thus the brain serves a function in increasing our change of survival.

What is important to notice is that these are two types of directions taken, A the environment is designing us. And in B life is making the appropriate adaptations too the environment in order to Survive(acts with intention).

A. if A is true and every think is based from coincidence can we really talk about, functions? For how do we jump from meaningless changes in the environment, to thinking of functions if they are all accidental happenings?

B, According to B life is getting more and more organized, and now we are shaping the environment.(the opposite of the general theory)

Which is the best over all explanation or combination, which doesn't reguire an irrational Leap of faith!. (I have my own answers)

Straight from the Hill!
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 10:19:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/26/2012 9:43:34 AM, Microsuck wrote:
At 6/24/2012 7:42:35 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 6/24/2012 7:10:45 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
-What is the rate of the procession of evolution?

In short, here is the formula if you are wondering:


r = (ln(x2) - ln(x1)) / Dt

The Fool: yeah ...I don't think so!
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 12:04:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/28/2012 8:31:04 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
he Fool: this is a little quiz for those you understand the theory of evolution well enough
OK, hopefully it isn't a Foolish quiz!

1. What are some examples in our time which are examples of evolution?(easy)

2. What are some unanswered problems in evolution?(easy)
What is the biological basis of consciousness?

3. In Evolution there seems to be a muttled conception between the direction in which evolution take place:

A. Now if Animals are shaped/organized via environmental selection. Does that mean that we are designed by the environment?
In a sense, yes. We are designed by the environment AND our reaction to it.

This explanation, infers that that life is accidental or random.
Accidental? I wouldn't say that. Random? Certainly, as their is randomness inherent in virtually everything; however, I would not say that it is the primary force.

B. On the other hand we speak in terms of life evolving, and adapting to the environment, where claws, on a Crab serve a function possible for grabbing and snipping enemies.
OK.

As for humans we explain ourselves as superior because or brain enables us to adapt to much more situations. Thus the brain serves a function in increasing our change of survival.
OK.

What is important to notice is that these are two types of directions taken, A the environment is designing us. And in B life is making the appropriate adaptations too the environment in order to Survive(acts with intention).
These 2 are not mutually exclusive: it is BOTH that contribute to evolution.

A. if A is true and every think is based from coincidence can we really talk about, functions?
False assumption; randomness isn't the primary force.

For how do we jump from meaningless changes in the environment, to thinking of functions if they are all accidental happenings?
False assumption. Natural selection isn't a "blind roll of the dice" scenario; there is an environment and things living in it. This severely limits the outcomes compared to a "blind roll of the dice" scenario.

B, According to B life is getting more and more organized, and now we are shaping the environment.(the opposite of the general theory)
Not really opposite.

Which is the best over all explanation or combination, which doesn't reguire an irrational Leap of faith!. (I have my own answers)
A and B.

Straight from the Hill!
Is that the Sugar Hill?
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 1:26:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 12:04:27 PM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 6/28/2012 8:31:04 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
he Fool: this is a little quiz for those you understand the theory of evolution well enough
OK, hopefully it isn't a Foolish quiz!

The Fool: They are meant to be fun. Make to not confuse me with argueing against evolution, I definitly believe in evolution.

1. What are some examples in our time which are examples of evolution?(easy)
tBoonePickens: internet video

The Fool: Bacteria would be Good enough. That is why we you must take all your Anti-biotics. There are lots of examples, that is why it was an easy question.


2. What are some unanswered problems in evolution?(easy)
tBoonePickens: What is the biological basis of consciousness?
No that is a problematic question, because all notions of biological basis are experienced from conscious. We never see consciousnes in the biology, we just make inductive reference to it.

The Fool:What I was going for here RANDOM MUTATIONS.( aka sh!t happens to genes!) Random means 'we don't know'
A scientific theory is useless If it can't predict anything! and random can't predict anything.

The Fool: The mind learnes about the world by picking up patterns. Random=no pattern=Sh!t happens. AKA No knowledge.


3. In Evolution there seems to be a muttled conception between the direction in which evolution take place:

muttled conception: it when there are really two types of concepts "being Squished into one."

A. Now if Animals are shaped/organized via environmental selection. Does that mean that we are designed by the environment?

This explanation, infers that that life is accidental or random.

tBoonePickens: Accidental? I wouldn't say that. Random? Certainly, as their is randomness inherent in virtually everything; however, I would not say that it is the primary force.

The Fool: I mean accidental as in random chance.( random =accidental)

B. On the other hand we speak in terms of life evolving, and adapting to the environment, where claws, on a Crab serve a function possible for grabbing and snipping enemies.
OK.

As for humans we explain ourselves as superior because or brain enables us to adapt to much more situations. Thus the brain serves a function in increasing our change of survival.
OK.

What is important to notice is that these are two types of directions taken, A the environment is designing us. And in B life is making the appropriate adaptations too the environment in order to Survive(acts with intention).

These 2 are not mutually exclusive: it is BOTH that contribute to evolution.

Remember the question:
In Evolution there seems to be a muttled conception between the direction in which evolution take place. aka It is a philosophic problem with the general theory. For they are opposite directions.

A. if A is true and every think is based from coincidence can we really talk about, functions?

tBoonePickens:: False assumption;

The Fool: That is a false assumption. You need to first know that I don't have a reason for thinking so.

tBoonePickens: randomness isn't the primary force.

The Fool: Okay Cool, now justify it without begging the question. Keep in mind, random is a lack of explanation. (sh!t happens is not a very answer!)

The Fool:: : For how do we jump from meaningless changes in the environment, to thinking of functions if they are all accidental happenings?

tBoonePickens:: False assumption.

The Fool: Tboone that is a false assumption. You don't know if I have reasons for why it is said. What I mean by happenings, of enviroment(not organisms. I know the organisms become a part of the enviroment but that is after the fact)

The Fool: okay Good Justify this. What I mean by meaningless is changes in the enviroment.

tBoonePickens:: Natural selection isn't a "blind roll of the dice" scenario; there is an environment and things living in it.

The Fool: I personally don;'t think it is. This are wholes in the theories in which we need to find answer. Just getting lazy and saying its random, prevents us from trying to figure it out. Again remember I am not against Evolution I am about improving the theory.

As you said natural selection is not "blind roll of the dice" scenario; there is an environment and things living in it.

Now justify that with out begging the question. And we are getting some where
According to evolution those living things came about in the first place via meaningless enviromental changes.

tBoonePickens:: This severely limits the outcomes compared to a "blind roll of the dice" scenario.

The Fool: what is the meaning of a probability which is OUT OF NOTHING. How is this measure being taken. How are these limitations measure without simply begging the question, that is what the question is all about. I am aware of that explanation, and I am challenging it.

The Fool: : B, According to B life is getting more and more organized, and now we are shaping the environment.(the opposite of the general theory)

tBoonePickens:: Not really opposite.

The Fool: They are opposite in directions. If not defend it.
A. life came about and are designed by the enviroment.
B. Organisms, have functions, and intentions, and are Self-adapting.

The Fool:: : Which is the best over all explanation or combination, which doesn't
require an irrational Leap of faith!. (I have my own answers)

tBoonePickens:: A and B.

The Fool: you havent answered the question. We all know they are part of the evolutionary explanation. They problem is why should we accept it as a rational explanation.

Leap of faith:
It is not analytic to (enviromental happenings) aka it does not exist withing this concept, that there are intentional organism. (a function presupposes intention, in most cases intention to Survive.)

Straight from the Hill!
Is that the Sugar Hill?

Just go to the store an buy sugar, its not that expensive.

The Fool: some positive criticisms. Tboone I tend to notice that you tend to answer line by line before reading the whole. And I find it blinds you from seeing the whole picture.
Because you are giving answers which are often accounted for in the next, few lines. I think you are trying to refute to hard. You are overlooking the crucial importance to the question. Which was about the justifcation of the concepts within evolutionary theory. Not merly whether they were a part of the explanation or not. (everybody knows that)
(That is my hypothisis, maybe I am wrong.)

Reminder:
But I am asking you guys. For an intresting debate topic, Not just againsts me but each other. These are the moderns issues about wholes in the theories. Memorizing what you have read, has a place and time. But this is a test of your understanding of what has been memorized.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 4:57:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 2:37:30 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
How long before we evolve wings to fly?
If you are a good Christian, it's right after you die!
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 6:00:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
A classmate and I had a question for my Bio 1 teacher, which he failed miserably to answer. I'm interested to see if you can do better.

Mitochondria and chloroplasts are said to have evolved from foreign cells that invaded the cells of plants and animals and then evolved into them (I believe this is called endosymbiosis). I cannot make logical sense of this. Evolution is attained through changes in DNA, so how could an organism just evolve into another like this? It seems as implausible as a mother with breast implants giving birth to a child with them as well :P
Rob
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 6:21:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 6:00:55 PM, Lasagna wrote:
A classmate and I had a question for my Bio 1 teacher, which he failed miserably to answer. I'm interested to see if you can do better.

Its called the hypotheses of endosymbioses.

The theory is the mitochondria and chloroplast use to types of bacteria. Aka cells in there own right.

evidence: they both have part of circular, Dna, that are only found in bacteria. But now some of it come from the eukarote.

The idea is that these bacteria generate extra atp, which was advatage for eukarates, and that there was advantages for these prokarotes, being inside, the eukarates, creating a symbioses,(a relationship which was advantages to both)
Remember the prokaryote are much much smaller.

Mitochondria and chloroplasts are said to have evolved from foreign cells that invaded the cells of plants and animals and then evolved into them (I believe this is called endosymbiosis). I cannot make logical sense of this. Evolution is attained through changes in DNA, so how could an organism just evolve into another like this? It seems as implausible as a mother with breast implants giving birth to a child with them as well :P
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 6:25:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 6:21:20 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 6/29/2012 6:00:55 PM, Lasagna wrote:
A classmate and I had a question for my Bio 1 teacher, which he failed miserably to answer. I'm interested to see if you can do better.

Edit 1.0 watch for more edits first. (I think I need to write this all the time)

Its called the hypotheses of endosymbioses.

The theory is that the mitochondria and chloroplast used to be types of bacteria. Aka cells in there own right.

Evidence: they both have parts of circular, Dna, that are only found in bacteria(there own dna). But now some of it come from the eukarote. They have fused in some way..

The idea is that these bacteria generate extra atp, which was advatage for eukarates to subsum them, and that there was advantages for these prokarotes, being inside, the eukarates, (maybe some form of extra protection.)creating a symbioses,(a relationship which was advantages to both)
Remember the prokaryote are much much smaller.

Mitochondria and chloroplasts are said to have evolved from foreign cells that invaded the cells of plants and animals and then evolved into them (I believe this is called endosymbiosis). I cannot make logical sense of this. Evolution is attained through changes in DNA, so how could an organism just evolve into another like this? It seems as implausible as a mother with breast implants giving birth to a child with them as well :P
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 6:30:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Fool: They Keep hyposthesis in the name to remind us that its not that complete a theory, aka a weak theory. its just a current best explanation. It could use more Evidence.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2012 6:50:38 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 6:35:32 PM, Microsuck wrote:
Hey guys,

I'm opening this thread to hopefully be able to learn a bit more about biology myself and teach it to members of the forum.

This is an open Q&A session where you can ask me any question you want about biology and evolution. I am going to major in biology and thought this would be a good "precursor" to my college lab studies.

I have several questions that are all one question really, proposed as a fruitful line of investigation for your studies.

How did the components for the first cell come together within a membrane, and by what mechanism did this come to self replicate as a unified whole?

What caused the various prokaryotes to assemble into a symbiotic whole to become the first eukaryotic cells?

When the single cell paramecium came into existence, how and why did cilia attach and why did this amalgam of independent organisms become a single self replicating entity? What mental state can there be in a single celled creature with no brain that causes the protozoa to be able to "will" the attached cilia to work in such harmony to make the unified whole such a great swimmer? Is the paramecium sentient, is it conscious?

At what point in the evolution of inanimate to life complex living beings did sentience come into existence, how about consciousness, how did a complex arrangement of inanimate matter become living, sentient, and conscious?

There is some unexplained principle involved that certainly appears to manifest itself in self organizing wholes. Is the principle that caused the first self replicating cell to become a single unified whole the same principle that caused single celled creatures to form colonies that became multi-cellular creatures, and become unified into single sentient entities at some point? Is the same principle at work in ant and termite colonies, social organization, culture and civilization, and if so, what's next?

I'm not suggesting that you look outside of science for answers, ‘God did it" isn't an answer, it just begs questions, and the word emergent is descriptive rather than explanatory, it isn't an answer either, in effect it says "something from nothing", which also begs questions.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Thaumaturgy
Posts: 166
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2012 10:59:26 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/1/2012 6:50:38 AM, Sidewalker wrote:

How did the components for the first cell come together within a membrane, and by what mechanism did this come to self replicate as a unified whole?

When you put soap into water at sufficient concentration it forms what are called "micelles". Micelles form because the hydrophobic tails of the soal molecule orient away to a place that is free of water and the hydrophilic heads of the soap molecule orient outward into a water-environment. The interior of these micelles is proper for the hydrophobic side and the exterior is comfortable to the hydrophilic side.

This technique happens spontaneously at certain concentrations of a SURFACTANT.

Cell walls are similar except they are made up of two layers of amphiphilic compounds. A polar (hydrophillic) head and a non-polar (hydrophobic) tail. The layers form similarly to provide a condition comfortable to the hydrophobic tails and exterior that is comfrotabe in an aqueous surrounding.

So now you have a first step that explains a great deal of the process.

When the single cell paramecium came into existence, how and why did cilia attach

I doubt they 'attached' but rather formed from the cell itself. Do you have a citation that they are colonial or exogenous to the paramecium?

and why did this amalgam of independent organisms become a single self replicating entity?

DNA and RNA work quite well to direct (bias) the selection of compounds. It is a base structure that selectively binds with component compounds and the formation of a copy of itself (through, albeit, rather complex chemistry. But plain old chemistry nonetheless).

In a sense the formation of a mineral crystal is a simple form of "replication". The crystal face that is growing provides a template upon which only certain atoms and in only certain configurations will be allowed to bind and so the crystal grows.

Not always without defect either, so in a very real sense it can "evolve". A cubic crystal can have defects which induce the shape of the crystal to change direction somewhat.

What mental state can there be in a single celled creature with no brain that causes the protozoa to be able to "will" the attached cilia to work in such harmony to make the unified whole such a great swimmer?

There need be no "mental state" or even "will". Many protozoa are essentially "chemical detectors". They will go in directions that are not "disfavored".

Again the idea of the appearance of motivation and will are deceptive anthropomorphisms.

At what point in the evolution of inanimate to life complex living beings did sentience come into existence, how about consciousness, how did a complex arrangement of inanimate matter become living, sentient, and conscious?

There are many examples of the development of the "brain". Everything from the development of nerve cells to anterior ganglia to simple up to more complex brains.

The concept of "sentience" is probably so fraught with nebulous ideals that one would have to have a specific question around this. Overall something as difficult ot nail down as "sentience" is probably a function of the complexity of the system. A secondary trait of a neural network.

There is some unexplained principle involved that certainly appears to manifest itself in self organizing wholes.

Actually not necessarily so. In the case of your first questions the "driving mechanism" is little more than basic chemistry, albeit complex, but still underlain by standard chemical concepts. There is little to really break down "life" from "non-life". They both use the same chemistry.

The higher order questions are probably still manifestly underlain by purely natural processes.

Is the principle that caused the first self replicating cell to become a single unified whole the same principle that caused single celled creatures to form colonies that became multi-cellular creatures, and become unified into single sentient entities at some point?

Sponges are a great example of a "living thing" which may actually be a colony. No one would probably call it "sentient" but it shows a stepping stone from individuals in a colonial setting (such as a coral) up to a colony of specialized cells and so forth. The fact that ultimately we wind up with animals like us is not an indication of any sort of guidance or causative principal. It could have just happened. We all use the same chemistry and the same elements largely.

I'm not suggesting that you look outside of science for answers, ‘God did it" isn't an answer, it just begs questions, and the word emergent is descriptive rather than explanatory, it isn't an answer either, in effect it says "something from nothing", which also begs questions.

The "something from nothing" in this case doesn't really apply. The "nothing" in this case is actually just plain old chemistry. The rules that drive reactions in the sink when you put some soap in the water are at their heart electrostatic interactions. Polar-nonpolar, chemical affinity, quantum mechanical interactions, electron affinity, electronegativity, size/charge ratios, etc. etc.