kitkat

I have trouble understanding for example the flowering plant and the bee evolving to end up depending on each other for survival. What were they before they entered into this partnership of existence? If evolution is a long process and uneven at best how did these two evolve in different stages simultaneously in both species?

If you look up, "What It Relly Means to be 99% Chimpanzee and "The Differences Between Human and Chimpanzee is in the Junk DNA is just two of many articles. Doesn't HGT have a part in this also with respect to retroviruses?

The mirror test is not a good one for all animals since our senses vary wildly among different creatures. Awareness cannot be measured across the board with this test since how it is defined does not take in account each of the sensory input variation that is involved in how each species obtains their information.

People with severe anxiety disorder is a case where your thoughts act to release more flee and flight response chemicals. This disorder acts as a form of brain terroism since the person inflicted with it must try to take control of their thoughts of imaginary catastrophic events that its reaction pumps more chemicals in the system becoming toxic temporarily to the body. The part that you consider "you" in consciousness is being held hostage by this disorder while this terroist creates havoc in your system. Free will, I believe is the mechanism for thinking of new ideas that work to evolve us that improves our survival. If we had no free will, we would be programmed instinctive animals where repetition to stimuli would remain constant with little room for evolution to take place. Chemistry of thought involves many chemicals which provides many combinations to react to much more stimuli in the environment therefore allowing us to obtain a bigger picture which we can make a plan based on this information. Of course, this is just my opinion on it and obviously there is more to it then what is mentioned.

There are many articles that state they are almost 100% identical and epigenetics is the differences between the two. Compared to birds though, there should be many more DNA sequences that mutated since the split between humans and chimps, there were several species of bipelalism pre-humans after the split until homo sapiens emerged. In birds, their body shape has very few variations in structure across the entire species so I do not think they had more time since their common ancestor split. The variation of birds of Darwin's finches happened rapidly in speciation so one would assume that their DNA sequences are almost identical too.

We have not reached the point where we have driven all other biodiversity to extinction, we are getting close though. We do not know what the reaction from nature will be when it is just humans left. Logically the quality of life will be reduced significantly for humans since they chose to be parasites instead of being a cooperating species.

Your comment that the U.S. is growing through immigration is correct and those people produce more children then our average of 2.5 but I don't beleive that we can view the problem at the local level but at the global level. We depend on global economics and this is the new norm so even though the U.S. may show lower growth rates, we are still affected by increase rates in other countries such as Africa. This is evident in that we send them money to enable their growth further which is the worst thing we can do. We most certainly are capable of controling our reproductive system which no other species have this capability. We claim we are intelligent and you don't have to be a scientists to understand that human activity without responsibility is destroying the global environment. The claim that species will expand in numbers that rapidly deplete their resources which result in reduced populations is most often seen with species with high reproductive rates and a problem with the species that prey on them. Otherwise nature, without humans, has no problem with checks and balances that allow stability to continue for eons. We are over populated right now and have been for some time due to the fact that we have so many endangered species that do not have anywhere to live. It is arrogant to think we don't need the biodiversity of species and can exist by ourselves. Animals in zoos or game parks is not an effective way to continue their existance nor is storing the DNA in a genome bank. We are currently in the 6th mass extinction and yet some people think that population growth is not a problem, insanity comes to mind here. Population growth is a global problem and every nation must unite on this problem and find a solution. They must all take responsibility to reduce their growth otherwise it isn't going to work on a global scale in preserving our resources.

I recently read where the DNA sequences between Humans and Chimps are nearly identical 100% but in bird species they are not identical across the board. It is now believed that the differences between us and chimps is how these sequences are turned on and off and to what degree in protein produced in each group. My question is why are there differences in different species of bird sequences? Shouldn't they be all identical in sequences but different in how they are expressed?

Human Intelligence is the emergent property of interacting and sharing information which we call the ability to learn and this is the same concept that can be applied to bacteria by quorum sensing. It is also noted that bacteria colonies when threatened they will make decisions - to disperse from the colony - to suspend all biochemical activity until conditions improve - HGT from other bacteria to use different chemical processes to sustain their existence. We have a brain and a central nervous system while bacteria do not and this is believed to be a requirement for intelligence, however the biochemical processes that enable our brain and nervous system to work is also in bacterial colonies. If our origin is microbial and our current status is that we are 90% microbial/10% Human that it is logical to believe that our abilities as a entity able to process information and to make decisions comes from our microbial origin and our current microbial fingerprint.

If there is no intelligence of bacteria colonies then why are they now measuring social intelligence among bacteria and assigned P. Voltex as the smartest bacteria?

Many people think especially here in the U.S. is that we still have alot of land terrain that is not currently occupied by man. They believe that since we have not expanded to use up all of our land mass that we can continue our population rates. If we turn this land into cities with concrete covering most of it, extinct all creatures that previously lived there, do you actually believe that our existence alone is sufficient to sustain human survival? Life here was built from the bottom levels that support each level of biodiversity on up to us and if you take away any of these tiers you have a total collapse of the ecosystem. Every creature on this planet contributes to the stabilty of the global environment. A complete system of many biochemical reactions occuring simultaneously between all entities of life. There is no one species that can accomplish all the these essential biochemical interactions by themselves to sustain life on earth. So it is completely insane that humans can keep on increasing their numbers with total disregard to how we effect the other biodiversity we share land mass and still survive. If we leave it up to nature to fix this problem, I believe that humans will regret that they did not take responsibility for their reproduction rates. It is amazing to me how people believe that we are the superior species due to intelligence but how is that superior when we don't take responsibilty for our actions by using our intelligence?

Could single celled organisms produce enough oxygen without multi-cellular organisms existing for our atmosphere? The planet's only residents were single celled organisms for over half the earth's history. The majority of successful single celled organisms is determined by population status and its vital role in supporting other organisms ability to survive. I do not see how we could emerge especially with so many complicated processes that require so much energy to produce and maintain during a lifespan. isn't the law of physics state that energy works to reduce itself? It seems to me that single celled organisms could do just fine without larger life forms.

You are right in no one individual bacteria rivals a crown Euk. That is why 2 or more individual bacteria cooperated or became captive to become the modern eukaryote that we are today. That is a very valid point in that the cockroach has not changed due to its success. There are many others that since their origin have appeared then as they are today. How could evolution that is not directed exclude the successful ones while the rest went through undirected modification through time? Not only that but all of the ones that are successful live close to the base of the food chain web where life begins for larger life to evolve.

I finally have to admit that we are beings of excited atoms via chemical reactions. Microbes are the most experienced biochemists on the planet, although they are not aware of it or even us for that matter. Yet our origin is apparently a fusion event between archaea and eubacteria and later mitochondria that all together made eukaryotes without any directed purpose. Eukaryotes are actually a larger bacterial species since we are made of them, shouldn't we finally admit it to ourselves? We are apparently built from the inside out with genes that automatically were programmed to manufacture engineered proteins and was able to place all of our body parts and its system that support it in the right place without any coordinator or any other living entity involved in making special materials that are those special proteins needed in building body plans. Wait a minute, it is retroviruses that infect us is how we obtain new genes and these retroviruses (previously a non living entity until inside us) are able to use transporons to jump and place their genes in the right place and the right time without killing the host. These non thinking automated entities of life is how we obtain new innovations that allow our form to change over time. Am I correct so far? The entire food web consists of living machines made of bacteria and serve as a host for communities of bacteria living in or on every individual being that are members of the web. No rules other than pre-programmed behavior that install the requirements of energy by eating other members of the web to survive and live long enough to reproduce offspring before we die so the cycle can repeat itself. No intelligence required since all life is programmed by software (origin and updates unknown) with its own unique adaptation skills, specific body plan that enables those skills, unique sensory capabilities and limitations that vary from group to group, etc. Is anyone feeling depressed or worthless right now? Then as time moved along a miracle was forming, the living pre-programmed machines evolved a side effect of their own undirected engineering. Awareness then later self awareness emerged (we are still bacteria) and we call this intelligence since we can now create our own environment. of course there is much more to this and it is a very complicated process. To really explain the intricate details it would give you the impression that intelligence, direction, coordination, cooperation driven is the only logical conclusion to make it all work. No wonder most people want to stick to their religious beliefs.

The same process is going on in the sea slug in that the chloroplasts genome is slowing becoming a permanent member of the sea slug's DNA. These are perfect examples of showing us in real time how we obtain the entire genome of other species (mitochondria origin) or genes from other species that provide traits that improve reproduction.

Photosynthesis 6CO2 + 6H2O + energy = 6O2 + C6H12O6 Respiration 6O2 + C6H12O6 = 6H2O + 6CO2 + energy okay no life has intelligence including humans. You can't believe that you are intelligent since your body is made of and is a home for a community of living organisms.

Eukaryotes are believed to be fusion of an archaea single celled organism and a eubacteria single celled organism that eventually created the nucleus and then consumed a mitochondrial cell which is believed to be actually a proteobacteria cell. The nucleus that protects our DNA is not found in archaea, eubacteria or a proteobacteria organism. In plants, another eukaryote consumed a chloroplast cell which is believed to be actually colonies of cyanobacteria. Further evolution involved acquired retroviruses in addition to cell duplicate and random mutation. This does not appear to be an accident if this is indeed how it happened. All of these single celled organisms involved in a dependent lifestyle that makes us complex also live in nature as individuals. Also doesn't it make us just another bacteria that is unique in how we are put together? I know evolution does not cover origin but it does include single celled organisms. Eukaryotes did evolve from single celled organisms that formed a "permanent partnership" within a specific generation time frame that only those individuals participating in this union. Since they replicate, a few cells used in this process would not have any affect on the other offspring. (In theory of course) Which makes sense since single celled organisms dominate the planet as a whole. Correct me if I am wrong, but if take away the mitochondria which is its own identity separate from our cell, we cannot exist as a larger complex life form with many specialized parts. This all comes back to the initiator -photosynthesis using the sun's energy by cyanobacteria. Respiration is photosynthesis in reverse. The entire food web automatically participates in stabilization of the earth's sensitive atmosphere. This conflicts with evolution in that there is underlying direction that occurs at the cellular level. It is not an entirely automated system of chemical reactions. There is intelligence if you define it in its simplest terms meaning "memory." If you cannot remember it, there is no intelligence. Our own body could never form without cellular memory. perfection costs too much in energy and life works to reduce energy. Anyway, the point I am trying to make is cyanobacteria is responsible for our existence and we are cyanobacteria's web of life that provide the solution to the oxygen crisis.

All of the large animals living today are not the same animals that lived with early humans. We have been around a lot longer then in comparison to other large animals.

I understand that if a species is separated by environmental barriers where enough changes occur in their DNA so that if both populations were to come together again they were no longer compatible for breeding. Correct? Why can humans that are separated by continents can still reproduce together?

Science has reduced us to being nothing more then chemicals reactions that keep the atoms that we are made of in a constant animated state of existence. Negative chemical reactions that produce mental illness that currently medication can only treat its symptoms. Most people that require the services of psychology is their inability to understand their behavior which is directly connected to the chemical in-balance in their brains and they need tools to gain some control over their behavior. We are chemical beings of life and behavior is the result of those chemical reactions. Until there is a cure for these mental issues they will still require behavior modification tools that psychology can provide. Our society that we interact with on a daily basis sets the standards of behavior so therefore this science is extremely valuable for human survival. Behavior modification is by no means limited to people suffering from mental issues but to the entire human race. Happier, well adjusted beings will interact more cooperatively with other beings and this is the foundation that is critical for human survival. To say that other sciences are more valuable strictly because it can be tested and fits mathematical models proves nothing. Life is reduced to its physics and its chemical reactions so if that is the case then why is there no cures for diseases. Diseases would also be reduced to negative chemical reactions as a result of malfunctions of the atoms that make up its chemical reaction. Physics and biochemists that have mapped out all of the elements and its reactions should by now found cures for human diseases. If life came into existence purely by accident and it evolves with no direction but by chaos and mutations that somehow end up producing new innovations simply by chance could never fit any mathematical model. Those models require purposeful direction to make the equation accurate. Physics deal with non living matter made of atoms so mathematical models works in that respect. It is the complete opposite in sciences dealing with living matter. It is not an exact science so believing that psychology is less of a science that other sciences that deal with life is wrong.

When humans began to study all of the animals that we share this planet with, many of them thought that these animals only acting on instincts (purely pre-programmed behavior responses). However we have learned that this is not entirely true. Ask anyone that has a pet and they will tell you that their animal does think and will create new methods in training their owners. Though we like to believe it is completely under our control. Bacteria are studied in a controlled environment and not in their natural habitats. Reactions in a controlled environment does not provide any other options but to react to what is stimulating them. I am not saying you are wrong, you are the expert, but microbes studied in a lab may not prove conclusive in observing behavior correctly. The microscopic parasites that have all kinds of new strategies which are quite impressive that one can only conclude that they are thinking. How can science insist that this is not the case, I don't get it.

I realize that they do not have a complex nervous system but they do react to their environment, isn't this kind of the same thing? They have an eye spot, they do communicate by quorum sensing, they can smell according to the recent studies done on them. This implies self awareness to some extant, doesn't it? I really want to understand and learn the truth but internet research on microbes is misleading.

How does science know what the center of earth consists of? We certainly cannot drill into the center of the earth so where is all this data arrived from?

Is there any scientists on this forum who studies cells? I am curious of how you view single celled organism, do you see them as actual beings of lifeforms or just simply life cells that react to chemicals and convert chemicals as waste production?