The nature of the universe, whether God(s) exist, and how we define them

Into the Night said:
Can't. Photosynthesis requires complex structures to function, even for cyanobacteria. There isn't any! There is no 'chemical energy' that just comes by itself. You cannot create energy out of nothing.
Click to expand...

The first bacteria were probably archea, some of which used the chemical energy derived from redox reactions with sulfur or iron to support their metabolic functions. Cyanobacteria have been around at least two billion years, so they were using sunlight to support metabolism.


When you asked what the first cells were "eating" it makes you sound like a child.
 
Cypress said:
So why not just admit you didn't understand biochemistry or the nature of early life on earth?
Click to expand...
Neither do you.
Cypress said:
Cyanobacteria have existed for billions of years.
Click to expand...
How do you know? Were you there to observe them?
Cypress said:
You don't need to have protozoa be the first cells.
The first cells could use sunlight through photosynthesis or chemical energy for metabolic functions.
Click to expand...

Cyanobacteria form colonies with cells set aside for specialized functions.
Photosynthesis requires complex structures. It also only provides sugar for the plant (or cells). It doesn't provide for it's other needs.
 
Perry Phimosis said:
You are wrong my friend. And if you were right you could find a reference that supports it. But you can't. So I'll give you a reference that supports my explanation:

https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution-today/what-is-a-theory

Also this:

The-false-hierarchical-relationship-between-facts-hypotheses-theories-and-laws.png
Click to expand...

Holy Link Worship. This is wrong. I have already explained why. Repeating yourself won't change the philosophy. Philosophy is not cut and paste either.
 
Cypress said:
The first bacteria were probably archea, some of which used the chemical energy derived from redox reactions with sulfur or iron to support their metabolic functions. Cyanobacteria have been around at least two billion years, so they were using sunlight to support metabolism.


When you asked what the first cells were "eating" it makes you sound like a child.
Click to expand...

Archea cannot exist on their own. They need other species of cells to survive intact.
Cyanobacteria live in colonies, using specialized cells within the colony to perform vital functions for the colony.

So...what did the first cell eat?
 
Cypress said:
The first cells, like cyanobacteria, used photosynthesis or chemical energy for metabolism.
Click to expand...

Photosynthesis is not chemical energy.
Cyanobacteria live in colonies with specialized cells. Not a single cell.
Photosynthesis requires complex structures. You cannot call a colony of cells with specialized functions within the colony a single cell.
 
I don't believe in things that lack evidence. Since there is no evidence for gods or any other mythological beings, I am necessarily atheist.
 
Into the Night said:
Archea cannot exist on their own. They need other species of cells to survive intact.
Cyanobacteria live in colonies, using specialized cells within the colony to perform vital functions for the colony.

So...what did the first cell eat?
Click to expand...
You never even heard of archea or cyanobacteria until you read my posts about them, and then you frantically googled for ten seconds for any scrap of information you could stumble across about them.

Living in colonies is not what you demanded to know.

You demanded to know what they "ate".

I told you, their metabolic functions could be supported by chemical energy via redox reactions or sunlight via photosynthesis.
 
Perry Phimosis said:
Incorrect. "Theory" as it is used in science is a very specific thing. It is one of the highest degrees of certainty of anything in science.

Now, COMMON LANUGAGE use of "theory" means more of a "guess". "It is my theory that....". But in science it all starts with HYPOTHESIS and then repeated observation and testing until the proper hypothesis is found and with even more testing and confirmation it graduates up to a "Theory".

Again, this is very different from how we commonly use the word "theory" in regular conversation.



Wrong.
Click to expand...
testing....
herein lies the problem......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top