why a luca bacterium

[Z10]

Bonjour,

la réaction chimique à l'orgine de la vie peut continuer au-delà d'un espace d'une bactérie

luca human ou des bactéries peuvent expliquer la diversité de la vie sur terre.

It's stupid that nature chose the weakest solution to start.

Edited November 5, 2018 by Z10

[CharonY]

The LUCA is the genetic ancestor of all life, including archaea and bacteria. As such it is not a bacterium, but likely something structurally akin to one. Unless you propose that humans were around 4 billion years ago and then evolved into bacteria and archaea, the claim does not make a lot of sense.

[Z10]

I propose that the chemical reaction that created life directly engender the strongest element of nature a human with 100% celebral capacity.

 

the passage from the unicellular to the multicellular as well as the extermination of mass will be well explained by a human luca very inteligent

Edited November 5, 2018 by Z10

[Strange]

43 minutes ago, Z10 said:

I propose that the chemical reaction that created life directly engender the strongest element of nature a human with 100% celebral capacity.

How can a human spring from a chemical reaction? And why is there no evidence to support this?

[Z10]

 

if the elements of this reaction are there, there is no reason why it stops at a simple unicellular.

 

the knowledge of the ancients is not primitive
 it sometimes exceeds our current technology

Edited November 5, 2018 by Z10

[Strange]

24 minutes ago, Z10 said:

if the elements of this reaction are there, there is no reason why it stops at a simple unicellular.

You need to provide some evidence that (a) this is possible and (b) that it happened.

24 minutes ago, Z10 said:

the knowledge of the ancients is not primitive it sometimes exceeds our current technology

What ancients? And how is this relevant?

[Z10]

all the experience that has tried to create life from a small amount of amino acid they have failed. You have to test with large quantities to see if you can create a complete human.

[John Cuthber]

4 hours ago, Z10 said:

It's stupid that nature chose the weakest solution to start.

Nature never "chose" anything.

 

2 hours ago, Z10 said:

all the experience that has tried to create life from a small amount of amino acid they have failed.

I have never heard of any serious experiment which tried to create life.

There have been many where people tried (and succeeded) to make molecules that might have formed early life.

2 hours ago, Z10 said:

You have to test with large quantities to see if you can create a complete human.

We have never even created a bacterium. Suggesting we could make a human (except by the traditional method: man + woman + 9 months )  is absurd.

[Strange]

!

Moderator Note

There is no science here. Please try harder.