Login

Join for Free!
118238 members


Is There A Living Thing With NO CELLS?

Debate and discussion of any biological questions not pertaining to a particular topic.

Moderator: BioTeam

Postby genovese » Tue Mar 04, 2008 1:17 pm

I would be more than happy to call a circulating RBC 'a dying cell on its last breath lasting 120 days'.
User avatar
genovese
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 12:56 pm

Postby MrMistery » Tue Mar 04, 2008 5:05 pm

well that's kinda what I was saying...
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter
User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
 
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)

Re: Is There A Living Thing With NO CELLS?

Postby hanhan2008 » Tue Mar 04, 2008 7:53 pm

Virus IS a good answer. Maybe prion is another answer.
hanhan2008
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 5:41 pm


Postby MrMistery » Tue Mar 04, 2008 7:59 pm

sorry, neither of them is alive. See your introductory biology book if you don't believe me
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter
User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
 
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)

Re:

Postby MichaelXY » Wed Mar 05, 2008 12:03 am

genovese wrote:I would be more than happy to call a circulating RBC 'a dying cell on its last breath lasting 120 days'.


I ran this question by my Bio instructor. He kinda agreed with your definition, but he sorta waivered on it. I could tell the question made him go Hmm.
User avatar
MichaelXY
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 7:03 pm
Location: San Diego, Ca

Postby genovese » Wed Mar 05, 2008 6:53 am

The problem with Biology is that there isn't an adequate definition of "Life".
There are always exceptions to be found.

A definition of life for me would simply state the ability of a collection of molecules to replicate and to act as a catalyst. Ie RNA alone would qualify as life. So in my definition
viruses would also have to be included just as any other 'parasite' which we see currently see as being alive, but which cannot survive without a host .
User avatar
genovese
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 12:56 pm

Postby MichaelXY » Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:08 am

Yeah, I guess there will always be a difference of opinion. People arre always telling me to get a life. I guess synthesis of protein is not good enough for them :)
User avatar
MichaelXY
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2007 7:03 pm
Location: San Diego, Ca

Re: Is There A Living Thing With NO CELLS?

Postby Darwin420 » Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:54 pm

Hahaha classic biology teacher method. My grade 12 bio teacher did a similar thing, he said anyone to make a lazer beam that can burn a piece of paper out of a lazer pointer would get an A. He is clearly proving a point, he is saying that, because living things without cells does not exist.

Sorry budday.
Darwin420
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:09 am

Postby sonawanes61 » Fri Mar 07, 2008 12:31 pm

are yaar life originated frm cell so how can their be organism alive without cell
sonawanes61
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:37 am

Postby genovese » Sat Mar 08, 2008 1:57 pm

Which came first, the cell wall or the molecules which provide the chemistry for life?
The chicken or the egg?
User avatar
genovese
Coral
Coral
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 12:56 pm

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests