12 May 2009, 6:25 pm
claire333 wrote:
ZEGH8578 wrote:
:S
not really
im an atheist, and i say chicken, as i explained above. the fetus comes before the shell. its a matter of chronology
The question is not, 'Which came first, the chicken fetus or the shell?' not really
im an atheist, and i say chicken, as i explained above. the fetus comes before the shell. its a matter of chronology
well that just ruins my solution!
in that case, i'd have to be a nitpick, and say the archaeopteryx came first :]
13 May 2009, 3:13 am
ardea_rising
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Joined: 10 May 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 59
Location: The Grim North
13 May 2009, 11:43 pm
ardea_rising
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Joined: 10 May 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 59
Location: The Grim North
13 May 2009, 11:54 pm
14 May 2009, 8:31 am
scorpileo wrote:
in which case it would be a primitive insect. with the first egg.
technically vertebrates never evolved _from_ insects, we're "siblings"
insects are related to crustaceans, which in turn evolve from smaller trilobite-like beings
vertebrates come from sea-anemone-looking beings
together we come from more primitive creatures, we were just never evolved from insects
/nitpick
14 May 2009, 4:17 pm
14 May 2009, 6:19 pm
ZEGH8578 wrote:
scorpileo wrote:
in which case it would be a primitive insect. with the first egg.
technically vertebrates never evolved _from_ insects, we're "siblings"
insects are related to crustaceans, which in turn evolve from smaller trilobite-like beings
vertebrates come from sea-anemone-looking beings
together we come from more primitive creatures, we were just never evolved from insects
/nitpick
I was really very disappointed when I first looked up vertebrates heritage. I mean, crustaceans and cephalopods are glorious invertebrates, but what are we related to? Goddamn Sea Tulips.
15 May 2009, 8:16 am
twoshots wrote:
ZEGH8578 wrote:
scorpileo wrote:
in which case it would be a primitive insect. with the first egg.
technically vertebrates never evolved _from_ insects, we're "siblings"
insects are related to crustaceans, which in turn evolve from smaller trilobite-like beings
vertebrates come from sea-anemone-looking beings
together we come from more primitive creatures, we were just never evolved from insects
/nitpick
I was really very disappointed when I first looked up vertebrates heritage. I mean, crustaceans and cephalopods are glorious invertebrates, but what are we related to? Goddamn Sea Tulips.
haha, yeah, i must admit i found it kinda fascinating. i also like these bizarre transitional forms, like the earlyest non-stationary invertebrates, eel-like slimy little things, i think ONE such species still exists, but i cant remember what its called. its some sort of sea-parasite
15 May 2009, 10:35 am
15 May 2009, 11:53 am
15 May 2009, 11:57 am
15 May 2009, 12:45 pm
15 May 2009, 1:02 pm
Sand wrote:
... That's its purpose.
It does rather look that way, if purpose is what we actually do.
.
16 May 2009, 3:43 pm
16 May 2009, 4:20 pm
Sand wrote:
Humanity's purpose is quite obvious. Merely look at the way the world is going. Humanity's purpose is to multiply to the point of using up as many natural resources as possible and then create a series of interminable wars to give life on Earth as miserable a conclusion as can be managed.
Watching a documentary about "Snowball Earth" I did wonder if maybe we aren't the earths way to keep the planet a bit warmer and stop it freezing again!
Interminable wars hurt us mostly. It's not like the planet itself isn't averse to wiping out a load of lifeforms in a volcano. earthquake or flood every now and then.
Sand wrote:
The dodo and the passenger pigeon are a good start. Very soon it will be all the lions, tigers, elephants, gorillas and other primates. The fish are going fast. Most of the whales are defunct. Somehow frogs and bees and bats are getting eliminated also. If possible, mankind will be the last survivor, but without most other life, mankind will kick the bucket too. That's its purpose.
As we wipe out more species, so our life will become harder as we do depend on other lifeforms, not DVD's and cars. Eventually enough will notice this, might take many years yet, though. And whether it's possible to break the habits of a lifetime?
alba wrote:
Any suggestions on how we might proceed with that quest? Finding our purpose will do no good unless we can recognize it has been found and achieve concensus regarding that fact and just exactly what it is which has been uncovered that constitutes our purpose.
Yes, I doubt you'll ever get people to agree on it, anyway. Maybe somebody found it but nobody's listening?
alba wrote:
Having religions and spiritual paths has or has not helped?
Or somebody found it, but it got lost in translation.
alba wrote:
One of our human purposes may be to stop hurting each other...to stop forcing people into castes and classes with divisions between the valuable and the inferior. Another may be to realize we don't need to take more than we need. Less is more. A third purpose may be to work with as opposed to against---the universe.
In absence of a definite purpose, these would all be excellent avenues to devote attention to! It's odd that hardly anybody would stand up and say "I want to hurt people, categorize them according to status, take as much as possible and work against the universe". Yet that is actually what we end up doing.
16 May 2009, 5:11 pm
