E
Edward Dolan
Guest
"Mike Rice" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 05:41:47 -0600, "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>><snip>
>>
>>So then, we can assume that there is life on Mars and the other planets
>>since sunlight is relatively unimportant to the origins of life. All you
>>need is some sulfur? Hmmm ... this can't be right. No, I think I will
>>stick
>>to my photosynthesis and you can have your freaking sulfur and the
>>freaking
>>bacteria that thrive on it.
>
> I doubt there is currently life on Mars, but it must be common
> everywhere conditions coincide as fortuiously as we are seeing on
> Earth these days.
>
> Photosynthesis is certainly a very important link in the chain of
> life, but I wonder if it may not have been a more recent evolutionary
> step than that of some simpler organism able to take nourishment from
> inorganic coumpounds.
>
> I am fairly certain that inorganic compounds predate photosynthesis,
> at least locally.
My point was that there is a vast chain of life of which we humans are only
a very small segment. All life depends on other life. It may be that the
lowly bacteria began it all, but it surely did not take off until
photosynthesis came into being with plant life. Animals are totally
dependent upon plants (directly or indirectly) at least in their origins.
The paleontological record is crystal clear on this as well as all of
biology.
There will be no other life in our solar system because of the primordial
conditions relating to the sun and the planets themselves. I would stake my
life on it.
>>Sequoia Trees or Great Wholly Mammoths, anybody?
>
> Planning a large bar-b-que?
Just my way of sayiing that I do not think much of bacteria as a criterion
of life, unlike GaryG. I think it is because I am so Great and he is such a
dwarf.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 05:41:47 -0600, "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>><snip>
>>
>>So then, we can assume that there is life on Mars and the other planets
>>since sunlight is relatively unimportant to the origins of life. All you
>>need is some sulfur? Hmmm ... this can't be right. No, I think I will
>>stick
>>to my photosynthesis and you can have your freaking sulfur and the
>>freaking
>>bacteria that thrive on it.
>
> I doubt there is currently life on Mars, but it must be common
> everywhere conditions coincide as fortuiously as we are seeing on
> Earth these days.
>
> Photosynthesis is certainly a very important link in the chain of
> life, but I wonder if it may not have been a more recent evolutionary
> step than that of some simpler organism able to take nourishment from
> inorganic coumpounds.
>
> I am fairly certain that inorganic compounds predate photosynthesis,
> at least locally.
My point was that there is a vast chain of life of which we humans are only
a very small segment. All life depends on other life. It may be that the
lowly bacteria began it all, but it surely did not take off until
photosynthesis came into being with plant life. Animals are totally
dependent upon plants (directly or indirectly) at least in their origins.
The paleontological record is crystal clear on this as well as all of
biology.
There will be no other life in our solar system because of the primordial
conditions relating to the sun and the planets themselves. I would stake my
life on it.
>>Sequoia Trees or Great Wholly Mammoths, anybody?
>
> Planning a large bar-b-que?
Just my way of sayiing that I do not think much of bacteria as a criterion
of life, unlike GaryG. I think it is because I am so Great and he is such a
dwarf.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota