User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 17 to 24 of 29

Thread: Bees

  1. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Markham, Ontairo
    Posts
    462
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thats one way of looking at it, but without the sun actually dissappearing its hard to tell if life can or cannot live. Geological activites can help sustain life for a small periode of time, but with such a large and fairly stable earth, the amount of chemicals released would not benifit the organisms much (again just my guess. My thinking is that the effects of volcanos and techtonic plate movements will get diluted in such a big earth). Deep sea vents may be an exeption, but my initial idea was that there would not be enough chemicals, food, etc. for the organisms that are left that cannot be produced in ample amounts without biological activity (where will the oxygen come from? etc). The temperature shock should wipe the majority out anyways, leaveing a vast population of perhaps the same few species that will compete for food and gases.

    The other ultimate scenario is that these creatures will live and thrive, but eventually produce so much pollution that they will eventually wipe themselves out (ie. ocean of sulfer), which may be converted into other chemicals when bacteria evolve to use it but the cycle will eventually run into a road block where the chemical can't be used any further, like the iron in the core of the sun). Of course, this may take billions of years, but my idea was that the earth will remain in its same state in our models.

    Evolution has surprised us and maybe some electronic creatures will be made to munch on rocks, but thats a bit far fetched [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile_n_32.gif[/img] . Zongyi
    What you want to do is illeagle here in Canada.
    Email does not work! Use PM or yangzongyi@hotmail.com instead.

  2. #18
    Whats it to ya? Finch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    3,472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Some bacterial species can subsist on metals and rocks. Many Sub-benthos creatures far below the floor of the ocean simotaniously are creating methane while others in the same habitat are consuming it.

    Earth is unstable and our geology is unique in the solar system. If the sun ended now experts theorize life can exist for 30 billion years off the earth heat and chemicals. Oxygen is not necessary for all photosynthetic life either, nor does just photosynthetic life give off oxygen as a byproduct. Nor does all life need oxygen, as it was the poison of earths earliest life forms and relegated them to oxygen-free environments. Gasses escaping from hot vents replaces oxygen in the immediate area, just as large emissions of carbon dioxide from lakes and hot springs is known to suffocate life forms in the area if a large resovor of co2 is released at once.

    Alpha: so my theory (well, guess) on solitary bee stingers was correct?! Wow. It feels good to be right.

    Also I want to speak to you sometimes on someone who I think you would be very interested in, as his similarity to you is striking,> Ever heard of Richard Dawkins, the foremost preeminent think tank on evolution today? Perhaps you’ve heard of one of his early works: THE SELFISH GENE?

    Known by some as “Darwin’s Rottweiler”, he loves debates, especially on evolution, as he is one of THE experts. He “exhibits scorched earth vocabulary on religion the evangelical right, and faith-based political philosophy” He apparently feels the need to be both precise and right. I disagree with both him and you on the suggestion that evolution and religion are inherently incompatible... you to are similar. I suggest you read one of his books. You might further your knowledge base on evolution for those debates which you are so fond of. Some new ammo, prehaps?

    I like this quote on him and you might be wise to remember it as well- “You can be the world’s greatest apostle of scientific rationalism, but if you come across as a....Rottweiler, its very difficult to make a sale.”
    that makes no logic

  3. #19
    StifflerMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    339
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Endparenthesis was right when he said that labels are manmade and the universe does not cater well them. What we are looking at with the bees and so forth is just this. Taxonomists (people who define species) are constantly in debate as they are trying to force a manmade arrangement on nature: nature fits, just not 100%, the definitions we assign.

    Finch, if you want some good stuff to argue about evolution on you should come see my data in the lab--it is never consistant--constantly defying all the theories. Lol!!

  4. #20

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Markham, Ontairo
    Posts
    462
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Bah, I'm being overpowered here, lol.

    What I'm saying is that eventually without outside imput, there would be a lack of one of the essential ingredients that life needs. I am no expert, but examples I gave were oxygen and such, but definantly not limited to the examples I gave. There are many other chemicals that are constantly required. Without sunlight as a energy imput, eventually a roadblock would occur around a element or compound that can't be used any further by biological processes. Now if the bacteria thrives, than in a few billion years, the needed chemicals would be consumed and their waste would not be converted any further to produce energy for biological funcions. I do know the earth is constantly changeing and has some capability of recycling some of these unusable chemicals, but it is slow compared to the rate of chemical conversion created by liveing organisms.

    Bacteria may produce a cycle, like what you have described with methane, but as I have argued, and simular to friction, there would be an ultimate waste or lack of something that would eventually kill off life.

    And as far as I know (so don't quote me on this [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile_n_32.gif[/img] ) oxygen came only when uv rays broke up particles to free oxygen, but once this oxygen built up an ozone layer, biological function had to take over. But since the sun is now gone, then there would be no uv rays and therefor no oxygen. If vents produced oxygen then early earth would contain higher traces of oxgygen amoung the H2O, CO2, etc. Now I'm not saying there there cant be life without oxygen, but the sunless earth would be a planet devoide of oxygen.

    But of course, its easier argueing than something is possible that argueing that something is impossible [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img] . Zongyi
    What you want to do is illeagle here in Canada.
    Email does not work! Use PM or yangzongyi@hotmail.com instead.

  5. #21

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]I disagree with both him and you on the suggestion that evolution and religion are inherently incompatible
    I had never heard of him (or was he that guy mentioned in the "was darwing wrong?" issue of the nat. geo. magazine?) I'll see if I can get one of his books.
    I don't think RELIGION is inherently incompatible with evolution (I don't see how buddhism (sp) contradicts evolution) but that christianity is, unless you totally twist everything the bible says. Yeah, I've heard all the rationalizing they've done about a "day" meaning a period of time and not just 24 hours, blah blah, but I don't buy it.

    oh and about the bees, the book said that: "native North American bees do not have barbed stingers and may therefore sting more than once". I'm guessing not all NA bees are solitary, so it's not because of that.
    Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish-Euripides
    wikipedia rocks! (except for species info)(CPers-add your vast knowledge of CPs to wikipedia&#33
    A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it
    Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything

  6. #22

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Markham, Ontairo
    Posts
    462
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Speaking of evolution, have any of you read the book
    Evolution : The Triumph of an Idea by Carl Zimmer?
    At the end of the book, he describes the feud between creationist and evolution. Although its not my idea of a great ending in such an informative book, it is a very interesting read.

    Heres 3 quotes someone got from the book on Amazon.com. Its about the authors defence of evolution;
    1) "The scientific method does not claim that events can have only natural causes but that the only causes that we can understand scientifically are natural ones. As powerful as the scientific method may be, it must be mute about things beyond its scope. Supernatural forces are, by definition, above the laws of nature, and thus beyond the scope of science (p. 332)." And 2) "When microbiologists study an outbreak of resistant tuberculosis, they do not research the possibility that it is an act of God. When astrophysicists try to figure out the sequence of events by which a primordial cloud condensed into our solar system, they do not simply draw a big box between the hazy cloud and the well-formed planets and write inside it, `Here a miracle happened.' When meteorologists fail to predict the path of a hurricane, they do not claim that God's will pushed it off course (p. 333)." And finally 3) "Science cannot simply cede the unknown in nature to the divine. If it did, there would be no science at all. As University of Chicago geneticist Jerry Coyne puts it, `If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance `God'`(p. 333)."

    It's a great book [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile.gif[/img] . Zongyi
    What you want to do is illeagle here in Canada.
    Email does not work! Use PM or yangzongyi@hotmail.com instead.

  7. #23
    Whats it to ya? Finch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    3,472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Oyr essential nutrients and minerals come from the earth itself and are recycled. the sun provides the easiest energy to fuel the life precesses, but the sun does not give essential chemicals or nutrients, they come from the rocks themselves as they are broken down by wethering. Bactereal waste is reaialy absorbed by other living things, including other bacteria. if this were not so, then we would be up to our wastes in it by now.

    Alpha: the vast majority of our bees are solitary or loosly colonial. those the do form colonies make small ones. The major hive-producing bees are introductions.
    that makes no logic

  8. #24

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Markham, Ontairo
    Posts
    462
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ok, you win for now, but I wont believe that life can exist without the sun until I see life on other planets deep undergound or deep underwater that is devoid of surface organisms dependent on the sun [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile_n_32.gif[/img] . Zongyi
    What you want to do is illeagle here in Canada.
    Email does not work! Use PM or yangzongyi@hotmail.com instead.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •