Isn’t the latest thinking that not all dinosaur species became extinct at the end of the Cretaceous?

Some of them survived the mass extinction event and carried on evolving.

I’m looking at one now. Its sitting on a branch and going “coo”

But is it just chemicals and electricity?

I don’t know and neither do you, you just think you know, because that’s what someone told you…

By that same logic, we are but ugly bags of mostly water…

And the universe is just loads of rocks n stuff of varying temperature

Somehow though, those descriptions lack depth and dare I say it, life.

We are mostly bags of water, you know that other organisms can get inside your brain, alter the ratio of chemicals and make you behave differently. Do you think they’re changing your thoughts?

What about bacteria then, do they have thoughts, or are they a series of proteins and lipids reacting in a certain way to chemical and light stimulus?

I’m not doing too badly, I spend a few years studying it. I did, as your mantra goes, “my own research”.

But is it just chemicals and electricity?

Yes.

Oh and water is just chemicals.

I spend a few years studying it

Did you study phenomena such as the placebo effect?

no, I didn’t study medicine, but as phenomena go, it’s fairly well understood.

The placebo effect can also be applied to sport

Those participants who were given the caffeine based drink showed a 1.7 per cent improvement in their performance, however, the results also showed that when they were given a placebo drink and convinced it contained caffeine that would enhance performance – an identical improvement of 1.7 per cent was also shown

STW takes on The Big Issues – life, the universe and everything – loving it, nice one guys!
OP – if this is doing you’re head in, that’s great. Feed your curiosity, go back to school and do biology A-level, then do a degree and maybe some post-grad stuff. In the meantime, and to get you started, try reading some of Richard Dawkins and especially, The Greatest Show on Earth (2009) where he sets out in lay terms a good description of evolution debunks common/popular misconceptions like – “if monkeys evolved into humans, how come we still have monkeys” (LOL).
The more we know and deeper we go into this sort of stuff, the more we find out and the more questions that new knowledge generates. Science won’t give closure on most of the big issues – see for example the LHC discovering the Higg’s Boson a few years back, but now they’re about to go even deeper.
Meanwhile, some of the stuff on this thread from arm-chair scientists is absolutely brilliant.
Thought… if life came to earth on an asteroid, where did the life on the asteroid come from?

I don’t know and neither do you, you just think you know, because that’s what someone told you.

Well not quite. I think we’re just chemicals because that’s the conclusion I’ve drawn from the evidence, based on what pepole have told me and solidy proven by what a lot of other people have told me, which is all consistent. Subtle difference.

The problem with a guy being able to create the building blocks of life here and now is that the atmosphere is abundant with all kinds of little beasties, wriggling and jiggling for dudes with a microscope to find.

You really think that hadn’t occurred to the scientists who did the experiement or who reviewed it, and you’re the only one who’s thought of it? Scientists are quite clever generally (but not always).

Life could be something more than chemicals, you’re right. It could all be wondrous magic – but then, what’s magic?

Interestingly (and slightly ironically) there is a lot of science surrounding WHY people like you want it to be magic, and why people like me think it probably isn’t 🙂

jivehoneyjive – Member

The problem with a guy being able to create the building blocks of life here and now is that the atmosphere is abundant with all kinds of little beasties, wriggling and jiggling for dudes with a microscope to find.

not sure if trolling, or serious…

This thread kind of explains the process rather nicley. The same old crap’s replicated time after time with minor variations that over the course of time leads to the thread turning into a entirely new organism bearing little or no resemblance to the original

Do you believe in a supreme being pictonroad?

I believe in a supreme being.

It’s me. Or my dog. One of the two, I forget which. 😀

No, I don’t. It struck me as unlikely from about 6 years old.

Then how did you become a freemason?

pictonroad – Member

fair enough, the people have spoken.

I am a freemason been one for years. I also live in a house with a clear triangle motif on the front.

You got me.

😆

😆 The subterfuge!

Plenty of ugly and ‘inferior’ people get to continue their gene lines

We’re a social animal, perhaps our success as a species relies on our genetic diversity – ‘inferior’ is pretty subjective. Faced with any particular environmental hardship only a few of us need to be best adapted to that specific condition for the rest to survive, and amongst those survivors are carried the diverse traits required to survive the next obstacle or to thrive in between periods of hardship

is that evolution or is that a recessive trait coming to the fore? The same with the school-book example of peppered moths and pollution. The moths didn’t evolve to be black in the face of pollution – the black condition existed as a recessive gene – it just didn’t appear very frequently. Pollution made that recessive gene express itself much more commonly but it was the same moth.

Those lizards would have ‘evolved’ if when you’d reintroduced them to the original population and they were unable to interbreed and remained a separate species. Otherwise all you’ve done is effectively bred a variety of the same species. In the same way thousands of years of selectively breeding dogs with extremely different physical characteristics and with very different behavioural traits but hasn’t turned any of those breeds into a new or separate species.