The Forum > General Discussion > LAKE Vostock..baceria.. No evolution !
LAKE Vostock..baceria.. No evolution !
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- ...
- 14
- 15
- 16
-
- All
Posted by one under god, Monday, 8 July 2013 3:11:24 PM
| |
OUG....Good to see you back....I missed you and have all of us. So, lets get to work.
Planet3 Posted by PLANET3, Monday, 8 July 2013 9:53:21 PM
| |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=XKCVUbxpHjM
For you OUG...and its why we look up to the skies....EVO Planet3 Posted by PLANET3, Monday, 8 July 2013 10:31:48 PM
| |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VpQ-uK2DqhI
Just one more members....good night and sleep well. Planet3 Posted by PLANET3, Monday, 8 July 2013 10:54:53 PM
| |
yes..good day p3
three replies..from you,, but your other posts..seem to be music clips..not to topic sadly but as my soundcard is dead..i cant affirm or deney, ,so have asked they be checked out.. i do hope we can talk sensibly... to topic... as a theory isnt 'science',,and sadly evolution [of genus]..is a theory,,till you can present fact even my hero..[charles darwin,,knew enough to write ''evolution,,OF SPECIES'',not evolution of genus..!which must occur..and is implied yet without the definitive science proof its a theory..yet taught to kids as fact..ie possibly a lie one of the 3 seals..that must be broken.. revealed untrue..or proved true via fact if you have fact.. i look forward to hearing it, really,,i do want to know how god dun it, but recall 'natural selection',,,plus survival.. of 'fittest',..>>is nature......or chance..not science. Posted by one under god, Tuesday, 9 July 2013 12:25:31 AM
| |
Hey there, OUG,
Good to see you back. Will have a think about your topic. Cheers : ) Posted by Poirot, Tuesday, 9 July 2013 12:35:11 AM
|
BUT NOT EVOLUTION OF NEW GENUS..so i think this adds to my case
if not please provide science..[name one evolutionarily new genus
Extract from
http://rt.com/news/lake-vostok-bacteria-dna-745/
lets talk about evolution[lol]..of genus
quote..<<' Many had expected that if any life forms were to be found in the frozen crypt, they would be uniquely adapted to the harsh environment, and perhaps entirely different as a result of being shielded from evolution of life elsewhere on the planet for millions of years.
Rogers, who has just published his findings in PLOS One magazine, says this has not turned out to be the case.
"Many of the species we sequenced are what we would expect to find in a lake. Most of the organisms appear to be aquatic (freshwater), and many are species that usually live in ocean or lake sediments."
Rogers’ team believes the relative ordinariness of the organisms discovered may be due to the fact that they are left there as a legacy of when Antarctica had a temperate climate 35 million years ago, rather than as a result of evolution inside the lake.