2007-10-21 09:41:58 · 5 answers · asked by The Inquirer 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
Its not a bacteria unless ur a evoultionist
2007-10-21 09:44:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
First responder is only half right. The first cells were not amoebas, but almost certainly somthing that used either RNA or some other genetic system for reproduction. The actual nature of the first living organism is the great mystery of biology; we don't know what sort of thing it was. Indeed, we will probably never know; present-day life has had billions of years to obliterate traces of earlier types, and has been quite successful in doing so. It is a good bet that people will be able to create life from non-living substances within the next hundred years, it is a poor bet indeed that the process will have any resemblance to how it happened in the first instance.
2007-10-21 16:48:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Good question! I don't believe bacteria could have survived early earth's atmosphere from all the documentaries I've seen on the science channel, According to them, it was almost impossible to sustain life because the air was so toxic. Our earth was also extremely hot. Yet, there is evidence that cells were able to survive. The scientist are not even sure how some form of life survived. They have rocks that show these life forms. If they didn't survive, perhaps we wouldn't be here. So, I'm glad they did, aren't you?
2007-10-21 17:22:28 · answer #3 · answered by Memere RN/BA 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The point of evolution is that some type of mutation or selection has gone on. The mutation would have slightly changed the DNA of the new cell possibly making it in to something better and high up on the evolutionary scale.
2007-10-21 16:51:25 · answer #4 · answered by Pat 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think about that much.
2007-10-21 20:03:17 · answer #5 · answered by Kristi P 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋