Origins of life

[Linn]

[

It is because most autosomal cells do not produce telomerase. Why they do not, is the problem I think.

[/quote]


thanx

[AstusAleator]

So who's gonna sell the telomerase pills? sign me up!

[pankaaj]

Hello,

I've joined here a few minutes ago. I've no impression to give other people, other than letting you people know that I am NOT A BIO STUDENT. I'm a civil engg undergrad student from India. I've recently been taking an interest in biology.

But you know, for the past one year I've been thinking of survival (as in survival of the fittest). I've come to independently think that every species on this earth tries to satisfy a requirement of survival. Confusing?! Well, in other words, evolution progressed in such a manner so as to NOT kill us, but make us somehow survive (or live), and then increase our chances of further survival (or surviving further). Still confusing?! Well, I think it serves to convey my idea.

I really want some one to comment about this thought seriously. Can this be true?
-arun

Nature operates & we play. Is it u thinking abt.?
Nature don't let us survive in any way. we have to survive for ourselves for our specie & not for nature.

[Linn]

Astus;
Name a "type" that could have evolved all of the evident diversity of it's class within the last 10,000 years.

I named one in the other thread but it got deleted.

I have to write it all over a again

The wolf and family. and it happened in our
present geological "day" My source is a book on
wolves with description of the evolutionary branching.

I will write more details later if your interested.

[alextemplet]

I'm interested.

[damien james]

Type and kind not really relevant. You should start with species, genus, etc. and work your way back I think.

[Linn]

Alex:I'm interested.

Ok please stand by
_________________

damien: Type and kind not really relevant. You should start with species, genus, etc. and work your way back I think

I am not sure whay you mean? by type and kind
but I am only going to write what the book says.

starting with canidae

but here is some net references for now:
If you feel like doing some reading

http://aolsearch.aol.com/aol/search?enc ... r&ie=UTF-8

[alextemplet]

I think what damien means to say is that you should use taxonomic terms for groups, such as genus, family, order, etc., instead of using generic terms like type or kind. Type or kind could be anything and might serve only to confuse us. It's better to specify exactly what you're talking about.

I don't have time right now to read over everything you posted, but I took a quick glance at one site and it says that all members of the Canidae family evolved from a common ancestor existing 7-10 million years ago, so I'm not sure how this supports your suggestion that this happened in less than 10,000 years. The website that I looked at is:

http://www.idir.net/~wolf2dog/wayne2.htm

I'd type more but I just got home from work and I'm tired; I'm sure you know the feeling. Have a nice day.

[Biologic26]

Ok, I understand the evolution of behavior an species from my intro to evolutionary principles class, but I am still lost on the definition of "life."
*In grade school difined as ablility to reproduce... I college it went to ablility to replicate, so a Virus can fit in to the definition, but now with pyrons??? where do we draw the line between biotic and abiotic?

[Linn]

Before I go on, I just want to clarify some things.
If you are looking for terms of class and divergence from,
I can not answer that because there are no facts that support
evolution from mammalia in general and which species came
from what. I believe we will be finding that out exactly in the
future with genetics:

"The pattern of genetic relatedness between all species indicates a branching tree that implies divergence from a common ancestor. Within this tree of life, there are also occasional reticulations where two branches fuse, rather than separate. (For example, mitochondria are organelles found in the cells of plants and animals. Mitochondria have their own genes"-Lenski

For now, there is only spectulation with
evolution. We do not have all the info yet
and I only look for facts.

remember I am a creationist and go by the bible as reference.
The original conversation I believe was focused on What
Noah would need to have brought on the ark that could
have in our present day evolved to the species we see.

Also I need to clarify what I believe tbecause I think
you are confused .

This is what I believe:

"The process that many people find most confusing about evolution is speciation, which is not a separate mechanism at all, but rather a consequence of the preceding mechanisms played out in time and space. Speciation occurs when a population changes sufficiently over time that it becomes convenient to refer to the early and late forms by different names. Speciation also occurs when one population splits into two distinct forms that can no longer interbreed. Reproductive isolation does not generally happen in one generation; it may require many thousands of generations when, for example, one part of a population becomes geographically separated from the rest and adapts to a new environment. Given time, it is inevitable that two populations that live apart will diverge by mutation, drift, and selection until eventually their genes are no longer compatible for successful reproduction. "

Ok with that out of the way...
I wanted to show the divergence of species that could come from one "kind" as described in the bible.

One kind would be members of the canidae family.
most specifically, canis. And would happen in our common "day"
or present geological period that we are in now.

For one thing,
"over a period of ten thousand to fifteen thousand years,
humans have experimented with and selectively shaped
the characterists of the wolf,
creating domestic dogs."

Then there are wolf-dog hybrids, coy-dog hybrids,
coy-wolf hybrids, etc
diferent species.
These are the kind of examples that are factual.
and not speculative.
I am not finished with my research,
as to fox, jackal, etc...
Later,
Lynne

[damien james]

That is fine you believe in creationism, but because biology all tied together by evolution, it is hard to understand biological concepts fully with creationist point of view.

Humans and domestic dog is example of artificial selection. But domesticated is of one species still, and speciation deals with seperate species, not breeds. Dog and wolf still same species. familiaris for domesticated dog refers to sub-species, not actual species. Both are species of Canis lupus. If this is argument for Noah, sorry, but not very convincing.

And "kind" still not relevant. As alex said, kind could be anything.

[Linn]

damien what creationist view are you referring to?
Everything in the bible is in full harmony with scientific
facts. It was scientific a long time before science was even
born.
Why is everyone so negative and closed minded, predudiced
and stuck in the box? Is it because of the uneducated religious
supersticious
people of the past who have made you think there
is no science in creationism or the bible? The bible was actualy
written for educated people. It is humans who kept people in the
dark ages so long that common people never even read the bible.


actualy dogs and wolves ARE seperate species,
different genera.
Wolf: Canis lupus
Dog: Canus familiaris
they are not subspecies.
An example of a sub species would be
lycaon (Eastern Timber Wolf)
one of the subspecies of Canus lupus in North America
(there are as many as 24 subspecies)

all Noah needed to bring on the ark was canis lupus
and we would get (to name a few):
rufus,latrans,adustus,familiaris,familiaris dingo,
and their subspecies .

I am researching about the south American fox
that is reputed to be able to breed with other canus.

And "kind" still not relevant. As alex said,
kind could be anything.

And I do not refute that.
but the point is it said in genesis according to their kind,
so that would be what geneticists will find out in the near future.

So the bible didn't say according to the class
or order or genus or species.
They didnt talk like that back then.