Dr. Dalek

Perhaps; however I think that they have to have some cognitive abilities to go against their instinct, we do not create the cognitive abilities we just creat circumstance in which they will appaer and be observable. Similar circumstances probably occur in nature

They probably do learn both ways but to what degree, and how does that degree change between species. It would be interesting if an animal psychologist were to use tests on different animals to determine a profile of how they learn, what types of intelligence they have and to what degree. Different animals could have a Sort of intelligence "Pie Chart" that profiles how they learn and think. The chart would be used as a baseline for how much different mental aspects such as experience, intelligence, instinct, and emotions contribute to their behavior.

Ask the Mythbusters! http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythbusters/mythbusters.html

I edited that out of my post before I saw your response because I realized it didn't make sense.

That is true, it may be similar to the sickle cell trait which prevents malaria in Africans, however if the gene appears more than once in the genome it can result in sickle cell anemia. Yes I know to well about the blunder of immunity, allergies.

I read an article in Discover that suggested that Viruses once had the means to multiply on their own and over time their evolution favored simplification, eventually leading to a parasitic form.

He didn't call the Chimp a monkey, he said monkeys were lower primates than monkeys. I know Humans aren’t the only animals that learn by imitation, I merely said that Human Babies learn through imitation as opposed to baby chimps which learn from experience. Also there are other animals that learn through imitation besides primates a common example would be the Parrots, Ravens and other talking birds.

No one can say how a thermosynthetic creature would work because no one has ever observed one. Try this website: http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Node/5345/

Light could work, but life tends to take advantage of the highest energy scorce, if the ammount of heat from the star is greater than the ammount of light it might use heat rather than light out of sheer abundance. Also in space might be a hard place for respiration or photo/themosynthesis, or any kind of gass exchange. You could say the organism lives on an asteroid orbiting the star, or other small rocky body, or in a cloud of dust and exchanges organic minerals from these.

Try looking them up on wikipedia, I did.

Actually there are still a lot of questions regarding that part. Science has yet to create life in a lab to prove how exactly it could happen in nature, but they keep getting closer.

I read about this. Apparently there are photosynthetic organisms on the ocean floor that gain some of their energy from light in the near infrared range that is emmited from the vents.

They are in 9th grade, it’s just supposed to encourage the students to be creative and do research

While I was researching I found an article on wikipedia. One part described a study done on human and chimp babies. The study was made to compare how the two different species learn while young. It was determined that young chimps learn from experience while baby humans learn by imitation. I saw something on the discovery channel a while ago, it was about Neanderthals. At one point they described how neanderthals had mature brains at a young age for survival in the wild. Could this difference between humans and chimps be for a similar reasons?

I once read about the possibility of a life form existing on a high gravity planet, neutron stars have a powerful gravitational pull. A life form on a neutron star would probably very compact, small, flat etc. We don't know weather a life form could exist without water or not because scientific agencys have never observed one that didn't. Just say the Life form is a Xerophile so it can live without much water. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerophile

Once again our simple views of our own supremacy are defeated! I have often believed we were closer to animals than we were made our selves out to be, but never had enough information on the matter! They can plan, I wonder what else they can do. I'll do some reasearch and come back.

Wait, do you have a choice of were you put it?

Well, have you ever heard of themosynthesis? It's a theoretical process by which an organism gains energy from thermal cycling similar to the way plants get energy from light. Does the creature life on the star or in the space around it?

Is EMF similar to EMP? Were is the distinction?

My brain is fine, . . .

If there is a way to do-in a system like that you know someone will figure it out and do it.

There have been measurements of the size of the Universe. Check out: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_040524.html also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe The wikipedia article suggests that the observable universe is finite, but the spatial universe may be infinite.

I don't crap up my mind, I say things that seem unlikely could happen. I don't believe in creationism, or the Christian God, or Adam and Eve! I just like to remind myself that I might be wrong! I don't want to be over sure of anything!