Biological Hierarchy

[-Ebola-]

It has just as much right to exist as any other living thing.

Where does that leave you though?

I am also a living thing. Thanks for asking.

[The Alma Mater]

By what criteria?

God's criteria.

So where do angels and god himself rank ?

[-Ebola-]

By what criteria?

God's criteria.

What God?

[Trevor Phillip Enterprises]

HUMANS ARE THE BEST, HERE IS WHY!

[Aethrys]

Humans are at the top due to the fact that if we actually got our shit together we're the only ones capable of preventing a global extinction event next time a NEO decides to pay the planet a friendly call. Everything else is, by necessity a resource and should be treated as such, harvested when appropriate, conserved when necessary. We have been doing a rather poor job of the latter, obviously, but still.

[-Ebola-]

Humans are at the top due to the fact that if we actually got our shit together we're the only ones capable of preventing a global extinction event next time a NEO decides to pay the planet a friendly call. Everything else is, by necessity a resource and should be treated as such, harvested when appropriate, conserved when necessary. We have been doing a rather poor job of the latter, obviously, but still.

There are species that have survived the last several extinction events. I see no evidence that humans are doing anything that will make it easier for them to survive the next one, or that humans would prevent newer species from dying off.

[The Conez Imperium]

I am also a living thing. Thanks for asking.

Viruses fail to meet basic criteria for life.

1) Viruses do not self-reproduce
2) Viruses do not respond to the environment or stimuli
3) Viruses do not obtain or use energy
4) Viruses do not age or die
5) Viruses are not homeostatic
6) Viruses are not composed of cells

While they do meet others criteria such as the ability to evolve it can be concluded that the enormous discrepancy between "fail categories" and "pass categories" equate to Viruses being a non-living thing.

[The Risen Jaguar Warriors]

OP! Give yourself some rights in the poll---any rights!

Viruses are people too.

[-Ebola-]

OP! Give yourself some rights in the poll---any rights!

Viruses are people too.

Aww, thanks.

You should be careful who you kiss, though. Bodily fluids and all that.

[-Ebola-]

I am also a living thing. Thanks for asking.

Viruses fail to meet basic criteria for life.

1) Viruses do not self-reproduce

We do.

2) Viruses do not respond to the environment or stimuli
3) Viruses do not obtain or use energy

That doesn't mean we're not alive. It just means we are lazy.

If you don't respond to your alarm clock going off, it doesn't mean you are not a living thing. It just means you didn't feel like getting out of bed yet. I feel that way every morning.

4) Viruses do not age or die

You say that like it's a bad thing...

5) Viruses are not homeostatic
6) Viruses are not composed of cells

So?

[European Socialist Republic]

All species are equal but some more than others.

[The Conez Imperium]

Viruses fail to meet basic criteria for life.

1) Viruses do not self-reproduce

We do.

Let me redefine. Viruses do not self-reproduce by themselves.

[Xiahua (Ancient)]

All species are equal but some more than others.

Napoleon? Is that you?

[Xiahua (Ancient)]

We do.

Let me redefine. Viruses do not self-reproduce by themselves.

Neither do certain species of flowers, but we consider them to be alive, right?

As far as I know there is no consensus in the biological sciences about what defines "life".

[The Conez Imperium]

Let me redefine. Viruses do not self-reproduce by themselves.

Neither do certain species of flowers, but we consider them to be alive, right?

While they do meet others criteria such as the ability to evolve it can be concluded that the enormous discrepancy between "fail categories" and "pass categories" equate to Viruses being a non-living thing.

[-Ebola-]

Neither do certain species of flowers, but we consider them to be alive, right?

While they do meet others criteria such as the ability to evolve it can be concluded that the enormous discrepancy between "fail categories" and "pass categories" equate to a Viruses being a non-living thing.

The ability to evolve is not a requirement.

Antiviridists include the ability to grow and develop in their definition of "life," but that is the ability of a single organism to grow and develop within its lifetime, not the ability to evolve from one generation to the next.

[The Conez Imperium]

While they do meet others criteria such as the ability to evolve it can be concluded that the enormous discrepancy between "fail categories" and "pass categories" equate to a Viruses being a non-living thing.

The ability to evolve is not a requirement.

I never stated requirement. Only criterion's to meet and viruses fail to meet the majority of them.

[Orange-Bourgogne]

Are you hoping for someone to invent synthetic food so that you can stop exploiting plants and animals?

You don't have to wait anymore. It allready exists. A Dutch team of sientists, headed by dr. Mark Post, have allready made made the first synthetic hamburger. I belief their project has finished in the summer of last year.

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013 ... stem-cells

[-Ebola-]

The ability to evolve is not a requirement.

I never stated requirement. Only criterion's to meet and viruses fail to meet the majority of them.

If it's not required, then why did you bring it up? I am confused.

[The Conez Imperium]

I never stated requirement. Only criterion's to meet and viruses fail to meet the majority of them.

If it's not required, then why did you bring it up? I am confused.

Life is a very abstract term. One cannot make a specific list of requirements without taking into consideration a multitude of organisms that "break" those requirements yet display other requirements of life. I find it more fitting to use criterion's to determine life. EG if Z organism is able to justify showing X criterion then it passes. Take for example a plant seed.

A plant seed does not self-reproduce by itself. However it does

1) Respond to the environment
2) Use energy
3) Are composed of cells...and so on.

The problem I find with viruses are that there is an overwhelming amount of criterion's that viruses fail to meet that satisfy my requirement for "life".

[-Ebola-]

If it's not required, then why did you bring it up? I am confused.

Life is a very abstract term. One cannot make a specific list of requirements without taking into consideration a multitude of organisms that "break" those requirements yet display other requirements of life. I find it more fitting to use criterion's to determine life. EG if Z organism is able to justify showing X criterion then it passes. Take for example a plant seed.

A plant seed does not self-reproduce by itself. However it does

1) Respond to the environment
2) Use energy
3) Are composed of cells...and so on.

The problem I find with viruses are that there is an overwhelming amount of criterion's that viruses fail to meet that satisfy my requirement for "life".

Most plants do reproduce by themselves (or at least reproduce sexually with one of their own species), and they all reproduce in some way.

[The Conez Imperium]

Life is a very abstract term. One cannot make a specific list of requirements without taking into consideration a multitude of organisms that "break" those requirements yet display other requirements of life. I find it more fitting to use criterion's to determine life. EG if Z organism is able to justify showing X criterion then it passes. Take for example a plant seed.

A plant seed does not self-reproduce by itself. However it does

1) Respond to the environment
2) Use energy
3) Are composed of cells...and so on.

The problem I find with viruses are that there is an overwhelming amount of criterion's that viruses fail to meet that satisfy my requirement for "life".

Most plants do reproduce by themselves (or at least reproduce sexually with one of their own species), and they all reproduce in some way.

Plant seeds. Plant seeds cannot reproduce by themselves at their current state. Unless there's some new plant I haven't heard about...

[-Ebola-]

Most plants do reproduce by themselves (or at least reproduce sexually with one of their own species), and they all reproduce in some way.

Plant seeds. Plant seeds cannot reproduce by themselves at their current state. Unless there's some new plant I haven't heard about...

A seed and the plant that grows from it are the same thing.

[The Conez Imperium]

Plant seeds. Plant seeds cannot reproduce by themselves at their current state. Unless there's some new plant I haven't heard about...

A seed and the plant that grows from it are the same thing.

This is not a definition I did not take into account.

Well a seed is a different state to a plant. A seed is an embryo.

That makes an interesting argument if something is to be classified as "living" throughout its entire stage of growth. Imagine if in 1 million years time, viruses become something other than floating clumps of RNA and protein.

[-Ebola-]

A seed and the plant that grows from it are the same thing.

This is not a definition I did not take into account.

Well a seed is a different state to a plant. A seed is an embryo.

That makes an interesting argument if something is to be classified as "living" throughout its entire stage of growth.

If you make a distinction between different stages in the life cycle of a single species, then human children would not qualify as living beings because they can't reproduce until puberty.

Imagine if in 1 million years time, viruses become something other than floating clumps of RNA and protein.

Where do you think the first cells came from?