Conquer Club

Are Viruses the Primordial Descendents of Early Life?

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Are Viruses the Primordial Descendents of Early Life?

Postby DaGip on Sun Feb 15, 2015 6:12 am

Is it possible that viruses were the first replicating forms of early life? Is it possible that our sexual organs are a more evolutionarily advanced reflection of this most ancient of times? Viruses can infect all living things: ranging from bacteria, to insects and plants, and to animals. So why is this? Why do viruses seem to mimic cells in our bodies and then search out specific cells to replicate their DNA with? The answer maybe that viruses and early single celled proto-life (the first combination of membrane, nucleus, and amino acid) developed together as kind of a primordial Adam and Eve out of differing forms of clay that can be found in the bottom of oceans, rivers, lakes, and volcanic springs. Each form of clay gave "birth" to it's own versions of this unicellular Adam and Eve. Early forms of nucleobases may have been nothing more than a nitrogen husk with amino acid contained within the membrane. Other forms of this proto-life may have appeared out of methane as well.

As certain proto-cells randomly populated the oceans, they ran into one another. Some amino acids being positively charged, while others being negative. This created an attraction between these cell-like vectors and the amino acid contents of both proto-cells erupted within the nucleobase eventually creating RNA and DNA. Thus the birth of the first viruses.

Life then becomes the culmination of physical forces in nature. The culmination of weak and strong nuclear forces, of electromagnetism, of gravity...and viruses were the world's first step into a pseudo-living being. That the only thing that the virus did was transfer it's DNA into the nucleobase of an amino acid carrying sub-celled entity.

This was history's first copulation between the "sexes". Thus my conclusion on this matter is that men evolved from viruses and women from the first amino acid filled nucleobase. The sperm and the egg.

Cellular Eve came before Adam, at least 4 billion years ago.
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class DaGip
 
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:48 am
Location: Watertown, South Dakota

Re: Are Viruses the Primordial Descendents of Early Life?

Postby crispybits on Sun Feb 15, 2015 6:37 am

DaGip wrote:Is it possible that viruses were the first replicating forms of early life?


By definition no, viruses are small infectious agents that replicate only inside the living cells of other organisms. They need other life in order to reproduce so they couldn't have been the first form of life. They could have been very early still, just not the first.
User avatar
Major crispybits
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:29 pm

Re: Are Viruses the Primordial Descendents of Early Life?

Postby waauw on Sun Feb 15, 2015 7:49 am

The first replicating organisms would've been bacteria rather than viruses
User avatar
Lieutenant waauw
 
Posts: 4756
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 1:46 pm

Re: Are Viruses the Primordial Descendents of Early Life?

Postby DaGip on Sun Feb 15, 2015 10:42 am

crispybits wrote:
DaGip wrote:Is it possible that viruses were the first replicating forms of early life?


By definition no, viruses are small infectious agents that replicate only inside the living cells of other organisms. They need other life in order to reproduce so they couldn't have been the first form of life. They could have been very early still, just not the first.


I am not talking about organisms like bacteria, they came later. I am talking about the very first structures that made that leap possible. Not life, but something other than. I am talking about abiogenesis and how it was possible for life to form from non-life. Yes, viruses need a living cell; but it is only acting on what it was naturally formed to do. You are missing my point.

In the beginning you would have had ONLY a free floating nucleobase. Inside the nucleus of this membrane a bit of crystalline mineral would have been trapped. Depending on what material is nucleating in the clay (or a combination thereof) is what the nucleobase will contain in it's nucleus. More than likely (from what the evidence of our existence dictates) these crystalline minerals were amino sugars and salt.

Depending on the polarity strength of some of these housed crystalline minerals, some were attracted to others and eventually combined and formed a strand of DNA or RNA.

The virus would have been a remnant of this creative process, and perhaps the reason why viruses can fool the body into accepting it. Viruses gave birth to us.
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class DaGip
 
Posts: 4047
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:48 am
Location: Watertown, South Dakota

Re: Are Viruses the Primordial Descendents of Early Life?

Postby crispybits on Sun Feb 15, 2015 11:13 am

They still wouldn't have been viruses though. I'm not versed enough in cellular biology to know if you have an underlying point about the mechanism, but the things that formed in the primordial soup we probably wouldn't define as viruses is all. Terminology is important, especially in science. It might have been a viroid, but without later evolving characteristics it wouldn't be classified as a virus (we still have viroids in modern times btw).
User avatar
Major crispybits
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:29 pm

Re: Are Viruses the Primordial Descendents of Early Life?

Postby mrswdk on Mon Feb 16, 2015 5:08 am

HUMANS ARE A VIRUS, MR ANDERSON.
Lieutenant mrswdk
 
Posts: 14898
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 10:37 am
Location: Red Swastika School


Return to Acceptable Content

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users