ydoaPs Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 u never explained it and it makes no sense. it is like saying 1+1=1. it just doesn't work.
Sayonara Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 u never explained it and it makes no sense. it is like saying 1+1=1. it just doesn't work. Metabolism is a function. The processes involved in our metabolism function are a mechanism. The mechanism is a property of the function, also called a child node (call it child 1). The processes involved in a yeast cell's metabolism function are also a mechanism. They are another property of the function: call it child 2. Child 1 and Child 2 are both properties of the function (the parent node). They are sibling nodes, but they are not identical. We have not changed the number of functions we know about. We have only ended up with different mechanisms that are properties of that function.
Martin Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 The chances of an alien life form being more intelligent than us is almost a dead certainty. They just won't be as good-looking.
Sayonara Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 You know that tag is still a prototype? To Fireworks with me -->
ydoaPs Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 wat makes u think the metabolism will be the same. metabolism is the sum of all chemical proccesses in an organism
senexa Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 I am confused, but then that isn't new. The original question was about a life form more intelligent than human beings, correct? How did the thread get sidetracked into body functions? If your assumption starts with the supposition that all intelligence must be essentially the same as ours then you would look for similarities in biological structures. But intelligence is the ability to learn and use what you learn and to reason without physical assistance. It is not exclusive to human beings, even on this planet. The assumption should be that we have already been exposed to many forms of intelligence, and that the fault of recognition lies in our limited abilities to think outside the box. .
ydoaPs Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 there is no proof that nething but humans r intelligent. it is only speculation
Sayonara Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 there is no proof that nething but humans r intelligent. it is only speculation There are various intelligent mammals, dolphins and the higher primates for a start.
Sayonara Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 where is the proof? ne1 give them the SAT? What you're doing now is crapping on the efforts of a not-inconsiderable number of researchers and pioneers.
ydoaPs Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 there are a not-inconsiderable number of researchers of string theory, yet u guys crap all over them
JaKiri Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 there are a not-inconsiderable number of researchers of string theory, yet u guys crap all over them Why isn't there an emoticon for 'putting your head into your hands and crying at the failings of your fellow man'? Sayo, get on this with thinking
STING Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 Well this is nethier here nor there but some thing in life are strange..example most every thing on earth has two of what ever.ie 2 eyes, 2 arms, 2 halfs of a brain, 2 exact sets on teeth on both sides,2 ears, 2 lungs, 2 nuts, 2,kidneys so and so on...same for animals/bugs and all that"right" my point is don't it seem weird we don't see an animal or what ever with one eye or on 3 legs or some shi? like that...it's just funny how so many things come in 2s....oh well just a rant...
Skye Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 That's because many animals are bilaterally symmetrical, they have two sides that are more or less mirror images of each other. Things like trees or bacteria don't have paired features very often.
admiral_ju00 Posted July 8, 2004 Posted July 8, 2004 where is the proof? I suggest you look up work done by Jane Goodall and other fellow primatologists. ne1 give them the SAT? Let's not take this into the realm of stupidity. But even so, a Chimp can be tought to do a great many things. I'm not going to go into the details, but for a better example, one where you don't have to read anything, when was the last time you've seen a circus?
bloodhound Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 I belive that Aliens would look like this /\ || ____ _____ | | | | | | | | |||||||| |||||||||||||| ||| ||| || || || ||
ydoaPs Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 you can train any animal to do things. positive reinforcement for when it does good, punishment for whenit does bad. that doesn't mean it is intelligent
admiral_ju00 Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 you can train any animal to do things. positive reinforcement for when it does good, punishment for whenit does bad. that doesn't mean it is intelligent Well, then why don't you try teaching a language to one. You've ever seen the movie "Congo"? Well, the guerilla using ASL was not science fiction(maybe the device was). Chimps have been taught a limited version of ASL, and then nature took over. They(chimps) took the ASL language that they were taught and created new and more colourful communication and forms of expression. But I'm sure you Knew that both before and after your last post, riiiiiiight?
Sayonara Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 I wouldn't bother wasting your time - he's stuck in the "if I don't know about it then it doesn't exist" dark ages.
ydoaPs Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 i thought that was u. dont look becuz we couldn't survive there?
Sayonara Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 i thought that was u. dont look becuz we couldn't survive there? Why don't you read the other threads on this topic.
JaKiri Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 i thought that was u. dont look becuz we couldn't survive there? You obviously haven't read anything Sayonara has said.
ydoaPs Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 or u guys haven't read wat i have written. i think u guys close your minds to anythin gu don't want to hear. u did the same thing on "Dark Energy"
Sayonara Posted July 9, 2004 Posted July 9, 2004 or u guys haven't read wat i have written. The fact that we told you why it was wrong, and that you just parrotted the same thing over and over, suggests otherwise.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now