. . . peanut butter is not living -- it is dead. Evolution in living organisms is something entirely different: selection of the fittest.
That being true, we cannot speak of the "evolution of life." What shall we call it, simply the "origin of life?" To me, a spontaneous origin sounds more difficult to prove than an evolution.
That being true, we cannot speak of the "evolution of life." What shall we call it, simply the "origin of life?" To me, a spontaneous origin sounds more difficult to prove than an evolution.
Anyone for panspermia?
How do we know if peanut butter doesn't have early stages of life in it?
The video shows a spoiled jar. But that isn't even close to what we suspect early life would look like. I contend that EVERY jar of peanut butter has early forms of life in it, and you can't prove otherwise.
Not to mention that peanut butter is not living -- it is dead. Evolution in living organisms is something entirely different: selection of the fittest.
Mold does not grow on "dead" biochemistry.
If it doesn't you got a jar of substitute peanut butter synthesized from crude. That's dead.
Peanuts hold all the genetic information to grow more peanuts, how is this dead?
Plants are maybe an even more convincing example of "selection of the fittest". Plant "evolution" only takes 1 generation. Bacteria can "evolve" in hours.
The spores that become the mold are part of the jar fauna. Indeed one can only marvel as to what kind of amazing microcosm a jar of peanut butter contains. I would guess there are a few 100 species involved but I admit that I am not a biologist.
Comments
. . . peanut butter is not living -- it is dead. Evolution in living organisms is something entirely different: selection of the fittest.
That being true, we cannot speak of the "evolution of life." What shall we call it, simply the "origin of life?" To me, a spontaneous origin sounds more difficult to prove than an evolution.
Anyone for panspermia?
That being true, we cannot speak of the "evolution of life." What shall we call it, simply the "origin of life?" To me, a spontaneous origin sounds more difficult to prove than an evolution.
Anyone for panspermia?
How do we know if peanut butter doesn't have early stages of life in it?
The video shows a spoiled jar. But that isn't even close to what we suspect early life would look like. I contend that EVERY jar of peanut butter has early forms of life in it, and you can't prove otherwise.
No comments about this image is from the wrong ST movie.
Not to mention that peanut butter is not living -- it is dead. Evolution in living organisms is something entirely different: selection of the fittest.
Mold does not grow on "dead" biochemistry.
If it doesn't you got a jar of substitute peanut butter synthesized from crude. That's dead.
Peanuts hold all the genetic information to grow more peanuts, how is this dead?
Plants are maybe an even more convincing example of "selection of the fittest". Plant "evolution" only takes 1 generation. Bacteria can "evolve" in hours.
The spores that become the mold are part of the jar fauna. Indeed one can only marvel as to what kind of amazing microcosm a jar of peanut butter contains. I would guess there are a few 100 species involved but I admit that I am not a biologist.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/h...re/6520965.stm
The information doth increase