Evolution, animals, space

Anyone else notice how no animals/insects have evolved to go into space? it seems we are the only species to do so - well apart from bacteria that is.

Quite a feat isn't it? Seems a bit, extraordinary..

Interesting, no?

Discuss!

I believe monkeys got there before us Joshier

Edit: G'won off in yer corner and read this, indestructible animal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tardigrade

  On 7/8/2010 at 2:40 AM, chassis said:

I believe monkeys got there before us Joshier

 

Edit: G'won off in yer corner and read this, indestructible animal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tardigrade

oh what, in their own custom made monkey spaceships?

Also I said insect/animals, the "moss pig" is incredibly tiny and has no bearing (nor right) to have the name moss pig.

  On 7/8/2010 at 2:45 AM, joshier said:

  On 7/8/2010 at 2:40 AM, chassis said:

I believe monkeys got there before us Joshier

 

Edit: G'won off in yer corner and read this, indestructible animal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tardigrade

oh what, in their own custom made monkey spaceships?

 

Also I said insect/animals, the "moss pig" is incredibly tiny and has no bearing (nor right) to have the name moss pig.

The gained forearm muscle big enough to fling themselves into space through evolutionary flinging of shit.

It's an animal none the less.

Looks Joshier I'm taking the piss out of you because your point seems like one of those statements like:

"Oh my look at this fossil, look where we found it. Isn't that funny now that we found it here."

No. If it wasnt there you wouldnt have found it.

That was a terrible explanation of my point, but I'm tired. I'll try keep it shorter. The fact that we have the intelligence to go into space is the same reason you're asking this question.

I'm fully aware of the fact of 'it's not special because so and so' but it remains they we appear to be the first ones penetrating the ozone layer. I'm shocked and surprised that of all of evolution, there hasn't come about a sizeable animal or insect to pass through the ozone layer into space.

Think about it - sea/water - that was a big step to get onto land!incredibly big. Different preassure, air you name it! But hey evolution conquered that for the equlubrium of animals/insects, why not space?

Sure we could be the first ones, but we are cheating - we are runnin before we can walk - we haven't setup the equilibrium yet. Evolution creates a stable environment that has many layers of structures.

I'm just baffled how it hasn't yet penetrated space.

I think you don't understand evolution.

Also, tardigrades are awesome :)

I think you're over estimating evolution. Why would animals move from a nurturing planet into space?

That's because humans are the precipice of biological evolution on earth; ever since the first organism inhabited the very beginnings of the planet it has spurred off a chain reaction of random gene mutations and natural selections that has taken billions of years to finally produce what the human DNA has come to be. It's the same reason why early homo sapiens ascertained the knowledge of traveling outside one's home, onto traversing vast seas, and finally rocketing out of orbit into an even vaster space.

  On 7/8/2010 at 3:22 AM, chassis said:

I think you're over estimating evolution. Why would animals move from a nurturing planet into space?

Well that's the face value reasoning, but think of it this way -

There's tons of stuff we don't know, even animals abilities, skills, senses and so on. Yet, despite space being an absolutely vast... space, not one 'fairly big' creature has done so after 2.1 billion years ***YET*** we still keep discovering creatures in more and more shockingly and hazardous environments that to this decade (10 years I think) had no idea was possible. E.g, recently fish discovery under ice at north/south pole.

So, really it's amazing the feats these creatures can do (boiling water by lava spurs in oceans, extremely high preassure depths under water again) but space? Apparently that's too much.

Perhaps there has been but by the time that happens - they are so advanced they fuck off and live in some big party space area.

I dont think you're to say that there isn't animals in space. Or on some other planet where the atmospheric level is that similar to above the stratosphere or troposphere.

You just said yourself, were only now finding animal is strange places in on earth. We've been on the earth a lot longer than we have been capable to go into space.

I still think the question is baffling. The point of evolution is to make your situation better, how is space better?

Space isn't better or worse for an adapted species. It's just hospitable, just like the extreme high pressures of the ocean.

I really dont think it is hospitable, thats probably why there is no animals up there.

I'm still shocked it isn't hospitable though. Amazes me that we see these amazing things thought impossible, yet space is seemingly devoid of proper life forms (massive slang term I made there)

So are we saying that "proper animals" can only get to that stage with conditions planets bring that are similar to earth? Orbit. Gravity, land

  On 7/8/2010 at 4:12 AM, joshier said:

I'm still shocked it isn't hospitable though. Amazes me that we see these amazing things thought impossible, yet space is seemingly devoid of proper life forms (massive slang term I made there)

 

So are we saying that "proper animals" can only get to that stage with conditions planets bring that are similar to earth? Orbit. Gravity, land

To be fair we are actually living in space. We're just peached on a ball of mass surrounded by a 50km deep atmosphere.

Just? (in reference to atmosphere vs non atmosphere) I'd say that's quite a big difference, if it weren't we may just see the types of animals I'm talking about evolve to utilise the vastness of physical space outside our planet. So, again I'm presuming life has constraints and either a) it can overcome the vacuum of space but needs more time or b) it may be just impossible due to no natural gravitational fields, atmosphere and all the rest that comes with it.

Can we merge this with the ICP Miracles thread?

Also...

Fuck you, Joshier

lol at your advise in subtitle " NAVT (not a vegeterian thread)"

i guess we need that to avoid more vegan discuss

i only read the OP, but the vast emptiness of space the only reason necessary when understanding why nothing lives there. even if there was a creature that required only sunlight (no water, no anything else), it would have to remain close enough to a star to make use of it. it would have to put itself into orbit or else it would just drift into space, eventually too far from the star that is the source of its energy..

the other factor, physically, is that in order to escape the pull of the earth's gravity, you must be able to reach the escape velocity, which creates heat that no known living being could come close to surviving and that humans have taken thousands of years of technological development to do it once with synthesized materials.

of course it's silly to conclude nothing lives or can live in space, but given what we know about the requirements of lifeforms, i would be hard pressed to think of a more inhospitable environment for continuous life.

there are anaerobes, that is organisms that can live without oxygen. They recently discovered an actual animal that can live without oxygen: http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/04/scienceshot-animals-that-live-wi.html

(If you'd like the full publication it is available here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/8/30)

Some issues - it is most likely highly immobile, and it doesn't appear to have much in the way of opposable thumbs.

Finally, this animal still needs a chemical rich environment in which to survive - since (uninhabited) space is a vacuum, there is no chemical rich environment. Now, I don't want to speak for all scientists, but I would think that all life forms we know of require some basic chemicals to survive. Since this not possible in space, that's the reason no animals from Earth have gone on to live in space.

Also - you still don't understand evolution well.

Additionally - stop it.

yes that's true, even deep underground where those tiny shits that lived off the heat vents deep in the ocean at the beginning-ish of life had minerals, warmth, water; sources of energy basically. in space it's deathly cold and there is no abundance of any element, unless you're in a gaseous cloud and even then it's not evenly concentrated and varies wildly in chemical composition.

imo if anything could survive out there it would be able to expend so little energy that we might not even notice/acknowledge its existence as a lifeform. for example if we discovered self replicating amino acids in some specific environment, is it alive?

  On 7/8/2010 at 8:25 PM, chenGOD said:

Also - you still don't understand evolution well.

 

Additionally - stop it.

You pin point some things I'm not so educated on very well yet you disregard any effort to explain and even discourage my posting.

If you don't want to discuss the topic then don't post and if you don't like what I post, block me. This is the internet and you aren't ever going to be able to stop me from posting on this forum about stuff I think about on a daily basis.

  On 7/8/2010 at 8:37 PM, theSun said:

yes that's true, even deep underground where those tiny shits that lived off the heat vents deep in the ocean at the beginning-ish of life had minerals, warmth, water; sources of energy basically. in space it's deathly cold and there is no abundance of any element, unless you're in a gaseous cloud and even then it's not evenly concentrated and varies wildly in chemical composition.

 

imo if anything could survive out there it would be able to expend so little energy that we might not even notice/acknowledge its existence as a lifeform. for example if we discovered self replicating amino acids in some specific environment, is it alive?

good point, i can understand this.

amazing how even after 20 billion years or so; mars hasn't ever had any life forms like our planet has because the history is all on the surface and you just see dirt/rocks/creators

  On 7/8/2010 at 11:23 PM, joshier said:

  On 7/8/2010 at 8:25 PM, chenGOD said:

Also - you still don't understand evolution well.

 

Additionally - stop it.

You pin point some things I'm not so educated on very well yet you disregard any effort to explain and even discourage my posting.

 

If you don't want to discuss the topic then don't post and if you don't like what I post, block me. This is the internet and you aren't ever going to be able to stop me from posting on this forum about stuff I think about on a daily basis.

Really?

Yeah, really. I'm here with good intentions. If you want to hate, hate in pm's so there's less pointless verbal abuse on the boards.