Guest Welche Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Some scientists believe that viruses aren't alive. Discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeroshot Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 WHO KILLED THE DAMN VIRUSES? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Welche Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 The fact that they don't have cells. Meaning that if they were alive the entire Bio topic my class is doing right now would be all a lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willieh Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 WHO KILLED THE DAMN VIRUSES? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Shore Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 I always thought that was a known fact :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Welche Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Well, it isn't. In other news some people use viruses as proof of extraterrestrial life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Shore Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Orly? And what is the reasoning behind this exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JG. Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 I doubt. If they don't have cells, what do they have then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PANDORUM™ Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 I doubt. If they don't have cells' date=' what do they have then?[/quote'] Computer Cells? [/bad Joke] But seriously who really cares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Welche Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Orly? And what is the reasoning behind this exactly? They have found viruses on meteors. Unfortunately it is possible that the meteors were contaminated so this is not a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JG. Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Orly? And what is the reasoning behind this exactly? They have found viruses on meteors. Unfortunately it is possible that the meteors were contaminated so this is not a fact. *Points out that they were viruses never before seen on Sol 3* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Viruses aren't alive because it has be proven that although they do have some of the structures and exhibit some of the same activities of Organic life, they are also missing many of the others. Viruses lack most of the internal structure which characterize "Life." They survive by infecting a suitable host. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Lovegood Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Lol, non-living things don't 'survive'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Pluto isn't a planet. :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JG. Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Pluto isn't a planet. :/ That is correct, my good sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chaos Pudding Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Viruses aren't non-living because they don't have cells. They're non-living because they don't express all the characteristics of life on their own: they need to hyjack existing cells in order to reproduce, for example. This isn't the same as many parasites, which also need to be inside a host in order to reproduce, only because it is the parasite itself that is reproducing, whereas when the virus reproduces, it's the cell that produces the viruses like a virus-producing factory. Although, as our understanding of life increases, so could the definition of life. It could very well be that, at some later date, the definition of life could change in such a way as to include viruses, as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Energy Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 They could be but I doubt it. Its like they are small robots programmed to harm us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enrise Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 They could be but I doubt it. Its like they are small robots programmed to harm us. Iz in ur cellz' date=' makin virussys. Also:[img']http://images.retecool.com/uploads/BasTaart-NoShitSherlock.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Then everything I've learnt in Biology so far is wrong.Another reason to fail my test... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayy lmao Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 No crap, Sherlock.[/thread] "Viruses exist in two distinct states. When not in contact with a host cell, the virus remains entirely dormant. During this time there are no internal biological activities occurring within the virus, and in essence the virus is no more than a static organic particle. In this simple, clearly non-living state viruses are referred to as 'virions'. Virions can remain in this dormant state for extended periods of time, waiting patiently to come into contact with the appropriate host. When the virion comes into contact with the appropriate host, it becomes active and is then referred to as a virus. It now displays properties typified by living organisms, such as reacting to its environment and directing its efforts toward self-replication." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Thank you all for copying Wikipedia, the excellent source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Thank you all for copying Wikipedia' date=' the excellent source.[/quote'] I didn't copy wikipedia, thank you very much. I copied a science website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enrise Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Thank you all for copying Wikipedia' date=' the excellent source.[/quote'] I didn't copy wikipedia, thank you very much. I copied a science website. Still copypasta'd.Don't try to get around it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Thank you all for copying Wikipedia' date=' the excellent source.[/quote'] I didn't copy wikipedia, thank you very much. I copied a science website. Still copypasta'd.Don't try to get around it. No I didn't just directly copy and paste because I summed it up because it had too many dam big words in it. =/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dweller of Parables Posted January 13, 2010 Report Share Posted January 13, 2010 Thank you all for copying Wikipedia' date=' the excellent source.[/quote'] I didn't copy wikipedia, thank you very much. I copied a science website. Still copypasta'd.Don't try to get around it. She fell for the trap. <_<Thank you all for copying Wikipedia' date=' the excellent source.[/quote'] I didn't copy wikipedia, thank you very much. I copied a science website. Still copypasta'd.Don't try to get around it. No I didn't just directly copy and paste because I summed it up because it had too many dam big words in it. =/ Where do you think Wikipedia gets its info?They just don't pull it off out of nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.