Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanite
why are those things you said suddenly the criteria for life? There are many life forms which don't breath, many that don't even have a respiratory system.
|
You are bright enough to know that breathing is nothing more and nothing less than the mundane term for respiration and respiration describes the sum total of the physical and chemical processes in an organism by which oxygen is conveyed to tissues and cells, and the oxidation products, carbon dioxide and water, are given off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanite
You'll come to realize there is no scientific definition possible, and that the distinction itself is a false dichotomy.
|
No scientific definition possible? Are you kidding? Of course it is possible to scientifically define life. Life is the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, it is manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally.
There, wasn't that easy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanite
Life is just a pattern repeating itself of a select few combinations of atoms, though the combination is never the exact same from creature to creature of species to species.
|
But certain characteristics of that "repeating pattern" exhibit themselves in creatures that are alive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburbanite
Not all life can think or contains a nervous system. Things other than life consume and combust energy, are even born and die. These things are still not life. So come up with a working definition for life first and then lets talk.
|
Been there, done that. There is no requirement that a thing be able to think in order to be alive, or that it contain a nervous system. The things you mention that consume energy do not fit the definition of life.