The Cell

[mad_matt]

Anyone watch this incredible documentary on BBC 3 the other night? Concrete proof that every single living organism on the planet came from 1 common cell!

Seems Darwins theory was light years ahead of its time and to make it more scary Harvard Medical School are 1 year away of producing fully synthetic cells!

Mind blowing stuff when you think about it, apparently the implications for man kind will be on par with a second geneses.

Comments?

 

[loz]

Yes. It was one of mine.

All your base are belong to me.

 

[johntheexpat]

Didn't see it, but from your resume of the programme it sounds like a load of old tosh, the importance of which has been greatly over-blown.

Visit The carbon footprint forum for many long and detailed arguments about '100% proof'. It just doesn't exist in science.

I thought the second Genesis was the Phil Collins incarnation?

 

[7ofnine]

Didn't see it, but from your resume of the programme it sounds like a load of old tosh, the importance of which has been greatly over-blown.

Visit The carbon footprint forum for many long and detailed arguments about '100% proof'. It just doesn't exist in science.

I thought the second Genesis was the Phil Collins incarnation?

Well I'm much more inclined to believe Darwin's theories, which are based on actual observations, than the creationist garbage promoted by Christians.

 

[Pack Dude]

Visit The carbon footprint forum for many long and detailed arguments about '100% proof'. It just doesn't exist in science.

You mean theres still a chance that the world is flat?

 

[johntheexpat]

Well I'm much more inclined to believe Darwin's theories, which are based on actual observations, than the creationist garbage promoted by Christians.

If we could keep God out of this, as it was about science.....

 

[Codehead]

You mean theres still a chance that the world is flat?

The Flat Earth Society

WARNING! Here be trolls.

 

[johntheexpat]

[/b]

You mean theres still a chance that the world is flat?

And how would you prove, and I do mean prove, to me that the world isn't flat?

 

[KhalJimbo]

The Flat Earth Society

WARNING! Here be trolls.

HAHAHA!!! what a bunch of bozos!

I like this one:

After making that post I took a little time reading some of the FE's views. The are indeed very warped and if you really had any common sense you would be able to sensibly look at the evidence given to you and realize the EARTH IS ROUND.
Saying something like (and I quote):

I once broke my leg after jumping off a rock into a swimming pool (I didn't jump far enough and my leg hit the side). This is clear evidence that the Earth gained enough momentum while I was not in contact with it to fracture solid bone.

 

[IronGiant]

And how would you prove, and I do mean prove, to me that the world isn't flat?

Walk out your front door and keep going for 24900 miles, then explain to me why you are now standing outside your back door if the earth is flat

Dave

 

[Codehead]

HAHAHA!!! what a bunch of bozos!

I lost three perfectly good days at that site. It's a dangerous place.

 

[KhalJimbo]

Its so funny, I like the way they say

third party videos and photos have already been discredited as evidence on this site

Ok what counts as evidence then

 

[johntheexpat]

Walk out your front door and keep going for 24900 miles, then explain to me why you are now standing outside your back door if the earth is flat

Dave

I would, but unlike some on this forum, I can't walk on water so I wouldn't get very far

 

[imightbewrong]

The thing about science is we can say something is 'proved' based on all our current knowledge and experience, but what is to say we won't 'discover' something that disproves it later.

E.g. given all we know the earth is spherical, but how do we know it isn't really flat, but some wierd dimension/force/invisible space monster just makes it appear/behave round to us?

To me, proof means "given all we know this is definitely true' as opposed to "this is definitely true and nothing will ever be discovered that disproves it or doesn't follow the rule".

 

[mad_matt]

Not sure how you can argue against solid facts, scientists have identified the building blocks of cells, DNA, the cell membrane and how the cell works, what more can they do to convince someone 100%?

 

[Fozzybear]

Walk out your front door and keep going for 24900 miles, then explain to me why you are now standing outside your back door if the earth is flat

Dave

The disc is spinning and while you were walking it rotated in front of you, bringing you eventually to your own house again.

Edit: and while you were away the 'disc elves' came and spun your house around 180 degrees.

 

[johntheexpat]

Walk out your front door and keep going for 24900 miles, then explain to me why you are now standing outside your back door if the earth is flat

Dave

OK, so lets run with this experiment.
Dr Dave sez, if I walk in a straight line for 24,900 miles I will end up back at my house. (I intend to run, it will save time)
But to show the Earth is round, I would have to conduct this experiment at different latitudes, travelling due east (or west) each time, with each circuit of the globe being shorter and shorter (see the drawing below, on the left).

I will assume that when Dr Dave sez 'keep going' he means in a straight line. Which because the Earth is round would mean at some point after leaving home, I would actually leave the surface of the planet, (see picture on the right), otherwise my path would not be straight, but curved. (It's a 3 dimensional world we live in)
Be that as it may, I will still work with the original game-plan.

Now, if we assume that the Earth is round, the North Pole is only really an arbitrary point, so to make things easier, I intend to base my 'walks' around a point in my back garden. So, instead of the top most point on the original drawing being the North Pole, it is the pear tree in the back garden. And instead of the longest circumference first, I will start with the smaller ones nearer the pole/pear tree. (getting some good data in quickly is always a good thing in research)

So, in a nutshell, Dr Dave's experiment to show the world isn't flat involves me running round and round the pear tree in ever decreasing circles while flapping my arms vigorously shouting "I can fly, I can fly"

Fortunately it's raining at the moment, so I won't conduct this cutting edge research just yet.

 

[BISHI]

Didn't see it, but from your resume of the programme it sounds like a load of old tosh, the importance of which has been greatly over-blown.

I think you should watch the show on catch up if you can before casting such aspertions. The fact that scientist have genetically engineered bacteria to sythesise diesel fuel just shows how much control human scientists are developing over the natural world. One scientist ( who's surname ironically is Church) has developed a process to produce synthetic rhibozomes ( the nano factories in cells that read the instructions in DNA/RNA to produce all the different proteins that make organic entities). He believes that in a year he will be able to custom produce all the seperate parts that make up a single cell which will be able to synthesise any compund. This is where the term 'second genesis' arises, humans have 'taken the place of God' by creating a brand new lifeform completely seperate from the tree of life and unrelated to that single cell that must be THE single ancestor of ALL life on the planet.............until now.

 

[johntheexpat]

and unrelated to that single cell that must be THE single ancestor of ALL life on the planet.............until now.

Must be? Why must all life have come from one single cell? And where did that single cell come from anyhow?
This is the general gist of the problem for me. Think along the lines of which came first the chicken or the egg. I can well believe that cells developed from the 'Primordial soup' in a gradual process of evolution, but for only one cell to suddenly appear and from that everything else sounds a little unlikely.
Two other general rules. When scientists make extraordinary claims, beware. Science is a gradual process of iteration and improvement.
This was Television and thus sensationalised because that is what television does.

 

[Duncan G]

Walk out your front door and keep going for 24900 miles, then explain to me why you are now standing outside your back door if the earth is flat

Dave

Because the flat Earth rotates anti clockwise as you walk forwards, thus you end up at the backdoor of your house.

 

[imightbewrong]

Must be? Why must all life have come from one single cell? And where did that single cell come from anyhow?
This is the general gist of the problem for me. Think along the lines of which came first the chicken or the egg. I can well believe that cells developed from the 'Primordial soup' in a gradual process of evolution, but for only one cell to suddenly appear and from that everything else sounds a little unlikely.
Two other general rules. When scientists make extraordinary claims, beware. Science is a gradual process of iteration and improvement.
This was Television and thus sensationalised because that is what television does.

I haven't watched the program but I would assume it means 'all life evolved from a single-celled species, rather than a single cell' - although they are effectively the same thing if you consider one cell evolving from chemical evolution, and then splitting, and then ..... and then us. This species is referred to as MRCA - most recent common ancestor (of all life on Earth)

 

[IronGiant]

John, did you conduct your initial research after dark last night? because I can't see anything in the diagram... Which makes a detailed analysis of your post rather difficult.

Of course in GC perhaps it's sufficient to just say that I can prove it's round because I saw a grainy youtube video about it once. (NB this is not a dig aimed at any one in this thread)

On the other hand if I say:

The Earth is not round it's completely flat. It's a CIA funded conspiracy that the earth is round, cooked up to allow the Americans an excuse to stay in bed hours after we hard working Europeans have had to get up...

That should get plenty of people explaining why I'm wrong and it really is round

Dave

 

[BISHI]

Must be? Why must all life have come from one single cell? And where did that single cell come from anyhow?
This is the general gist of the problem for me. Think along the lines of which came first the chicken or the egg. I can well believe that cells developed from the 'Primordial soup' in a gradual process of evolution, but for only one cell to suddenly appear and from that everything else sounds a little unlikely.
Two other general rules. When scientists make extraordinary claims, beware. Science is a gradual process of iteration and improvement.
This was Television and thus sensationalised because that is what television does.

I surmise that you only have a very basic understanding of the process of evolution. There was not suddenly a single cell created in the primordial soup but billions of variations competing for the same resources. A single body/cell plan proved more advantageous than the others and outcompeted every other variation. There must have been a single individual cell that was the first to have this advantage, even if it was for a split second, before it divided and divided again. That genetic line eventually led to the life we have around us now and to a myriad other dead ends. Thats why taxonomy is called the tree of life and like a tree it starts from a single seed.