If you disagree that God did it all for us...Do you know who`s your best scientist who can do it all simultaneously & spontaneously to suit different kinds of species alive?
2007-10-05 18:59:35 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
If you think you know the answer, just write your answer.
Never judges anybody from your own perspective. Your comments & descriptions written for me mirrors yourself, not me.
If you don`t know anything about the subject matter, just skip it.
It is very sad for me to know some uninformed, uneducated or unknowledgable individual. okay?
2007-10-07 04:20:06 · update #1
No one can, this is simply the wonder and awe of nature. Or so they will say.
2007-10-05 19:04:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
OK, maybe this IS where evolution and creation are opposing theories. Sure, you're right - if the air had been designed for the animals and trees, then it would show a degree of genius in a creative act. But even in the creation story, surely the earth and the waters and the air were made BEFORE the animals that breathed, right? Otherwise you'd have giraffes panting for oxygen and fish going "This can't be right, I hope he gives us a breathable atmosphere soon, I'm going blue in the face here..."
Evolution agrees with this idea that the atmosphere was there first and creatures developed that were able to process it. And the atmosphere we know today is in no way shape or form the atmosphere that existed at the beginning of the world. Even if we were to go back something like five or six hundred years, the atmosphere they had then would probably be way too oxygen-rich for the lungs and systems we have now.
But to answer your question, we didn't need a god or a great scientist to purify the air so we could breathe it. We needed possibly the humblest things on this planet. Stromatalites.
Stromatalites are nothing more complicated than algae-beds. The most ancient ones on Earth have been in existence for around 3 billion years, in Australia. They don't do anything very much, they just exist, and "breathe". They breathe in whatever gas they can use, and they breathe out oxygen.
They did this for a fairly long while before anything emerged that said "Oh yummy, oxygen!". In fact they did it for so long that they changed the gaseous balance of the planet almost single-handed. So rather than worship an intelligent designer or a scientist, I propose that if we're going to start getting all misty-eyed about the miraculous atmosphere, we start a new church - the Congregation of the Holy Stromatalites. Check out the link for an image of these incredible, simple things...
2007-10-05 23:03:30 · answer #2 · answered by mdfalco71 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It wasn't. As I understand it, the Earth formed with an atmosphere of carbon dioxide and other gases.
Life arose and some time later a group of organisms evolved photosynthesis, the process that makes large amounts of sugars from CO2 with free oxygen as a waste product. The photosynthesisers multiplied like crazy and converted most of the atmospheric CO2 to oxygen.
The vast majority of existing life died. Only those organisms that could exist in, indeed thrive off, this horribly poisonous toxic waste product survived. We're descended from them.
So it would be better to say that living species were purified to best suit the atmosphere.
2007-10-05 19:14:25 · answer #3 · answered by Voyager 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Damn you're dumb. I'm so stumped by your intricate question!
Earth had a lot of carbon dixode from all the volcanoes and ****. Plants love carbon dioxide due to phtosynthesis so plants thrived. The product of photosynthesis is oxygen. So there was higher and higher concentrations of oxygen over time. That gave rise to many animals that undergo cellular respirations which use oxygen so they can metabolize.
We evolve to suit our enviromnent.
Just try, just once to actually LEARN about evolution before posting such absurd scientifically ignorant questions.
2007-10-05 19:07:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Animals evolved to breath the air here on earth. The air was not designed to suit the animals.
2007-10-05 19:05:33 · answer #5 · answered by October 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You've got it a little backwards. Life evolved so that it was best suited for the environment around it. The air wasn't "created" to best suit life.
2007-10-05 19:14:50 · answer #6 · answered by Redac 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's more likely that the species evolved and adapted to the conditions around them rather than the conditions adapted to life.
2007-10-05 19:06:14 · answer #7 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Hmm.
You obviously don't understand evolution...
The animals adapted to the air, not the air to the animals.
Those who could breathe the air easily were more likely to survive; all of their offspring could breathe the air.
Didn't you take grade eight?
2007-10-05 19:05:16 · answer #8 · answered by CanadianFundamentalist 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You have it backwards. The species adapted to the air, not the other way around.
2007-10-05 19:10:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Trees?
2007-10-05 19:04:17 · answer #10 · answered by Yner 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
What went wrong with the other planets that are uninhabitable by us if it was all created perfectly for us?
2007-10-05 19:05:08 · answer #11 · answered by Dethklok 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋