LIFE

[CoolJay221]

LIFE

• Quote

Post by CoolJay221 » Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:50 pm

Is it true that all life came from a single and the same ancester

[MrMistery]

• Quote

Post by MrMistery » Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:40 pm

According to evolution, yes

[chicoguardian]

• Quote

Post by chicoguardian » Tue Jan 10, 2006 12:51 pm

I don't think we came from just one cell alone on earth, maybe spanning across the end of time that we started as one cell and split into many, but with earth, we came from many cells

[victor]

Re: LIFE

• Quote

Post by victor » Tue Jan 10, 2006 1:37 pm

Is it true that all life came from a single and the same ancester

according to me, yes...singularity.

[trunild]

• Quote

Post by trunild » Sat Jan 14, 2006 1:12 pm

I think yes!
But our memory is not that strong?

[cool A-level student]

• Quote

Post by cool A-level student » Mon Jan 16, 2006 12:12 pm

apparently all humans originally evolved in africa too, intrestin huh?
cos thats were our closest buddies are
only 2.4% genetic difference between us and chimps!!!
and yes we all evolved from a kind of prokaryotic cell in which had a single strand of circlular DNA
we've come along way since then
now where the good old eurkaryotic cells with fully defined organelles with there only membranes rather than the mess that are bacteria with everything all mixed together!

[Mjhavok]

• Quote

Post by Mjhavok » Mon Jan 16, 2006 3:04 pm

We came from self replicating molecules that eventually evolved into the simplest cells. As for if its just 1 cell or 2 slightly different very simple cells. We just don't know 100%.

[playboy bunny]

• Quote

Post by playboy bunny » Fri Jan 27, 2006 5:16 pm

you have all got it wrong! our parents had sex and that is how we evolved. who needs all the technico stuff!

[AstusAleator]

• Quote

Post by AstusAleator » Fri Jan 27, 2006 8:53 pm

If conditions were just right to form the initial self replicating ribozyme-ish molecules and their accomanying lipid vessicles, I think that the possibility of simultaneous formation of many of these proto-cells is more probable than the formation of only one and that one surviving long enough to produce an entire evolutionary lineage. The initial presence of many proto-cells would increase the chance of survival. The evolution of sexual reproduction, or at least evolution of mechanisms for injecting and splicing genetic materials, would further increase the chances of survival by having a larger base genome. There's my hypothesis.

[Linn]

• Quote

Post by Linn » Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:02 am

geneticaly we are from one common ancestor.
And they were not apes.

[AstusAleator]

• Quote

Post by AstusAleator » Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:12 pm

No one is going to argue against my multiple ancestral proto-cell hypothesis?

Linn, when you're talking about a single ancestor are you talking about the ancestor of homonids? Or of all life?
If you're going to talk about ancestors of individual clades or phylogenetic trees, then there have been cases multiple organisms forming new phylogenetic trees. Take hybridization and endosymbiosis for example.

[Linn]

• Quote

Post by Linn » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:52 am

If conditions were just right to form the initial self replicating ribozyme-ish molecules and their accomanying lipid vessicles, I think that the possibility of simultaneous formation of many of these proto-cells is more probable than the formation of only one and that one surviving long enough to produce an entire evolutionary lineage. The initial presence of many proto-cells would increase the chance of survival. The evolution of sexual reproduction, or at least evolution of mechanisms for injecting and splicing genetic materials, would further increase the chances of survival by having a larger base genome. There's my hypothesis.

how would the conditions be just right?
PS:
thanx for the clarification
all life began each according to their kind as stated in creationism.