Biologists called themselves “The Study of Life”, some 200 years ago. They did so with very little knowledge, and lots of ambition. Also known as hubris.
I’m not sure you’re a good advocate for the sciences.
I also think you might have reading comprehension issues. I did explain, I think four times, how fire isn’t technically alive, but in certain circumstances it can be a useful analogy. I don’t know why you keep banging on that drum.
you just said it can be considered alive, but then you say isn’t
my point is simple, ask anyone with a biology degree,. that highschool definition is oversimplified and not useful. there is no working definition of life
But really, it’s more accurately a chain reaction. Fire isn’t a ‘thing’, it’s not a system of repetitively interacting parts.
Fire is not a thing, because it is not a system of reusable parts that interact with each other multiple times. It’s better described as a chemical chain reaction. Every molecule is used exactly once.
I never mentioned high school. I never took biology in high school. I took physics instead. I gave you my specific definition. You thought it sounded like something you remember from high school, and ignored what I actually said.
That which takes in nutrients, processes them to support itself, and expels waste products.
Fire doesn’t actually support itself. Each flame is gone in an instant, unique to the molecule it came from.
But is creates the illusion of continuity, which can make life a useful analogy for it sometimes.
If you still don’t understand. I don’t know how better I can explain it for you. I’ve already given you too much credit. I’m done.
Fire 100% supports itself, each flame dies but that is like saying each of your proteins get denatured and recycled, the carbon you eat eventually turns into CO2, all your matter changes at some point.
That which takes in nutrients, processes them to support itself, and expels waste products.
It is not a good definition of life, as it also excludes spores or many creatures in stasis, where they have absolutely no metabolism, wont take nutrients, process them or expel anything.
Biology is the study is life.
If it is alive, it is under the purview of Biology.
what you’re doing, is trying to fit anything that fits the Highschool definition as alive. and you end up with chemistry rather than life.
You are very hunged up on highschool oversimplifications.
if fire is alive, would using a lighter count as abiogenesis?
Do you see how that doesn’t work?
Biologists called themselves “The Study of Life”, some 200 years ago. They did so with very little knowledge, and lots of ambition. Also known as hubris.
And fire is clearly chemistry and not biology.
We just study life and don’t bother with the definition, its a “you know it when you see it” kind of thing
I’m not sure you’re a good advocate for the sciences.
I also think you might have reading comprehension issues. I did explain, I think four times, how fire isn’t technically alive, but in certain circumstances it can be a useful analogy. I don’t know why you keep banging on that drum.
‘how fire isn’t technically alive’
Why not?
It fits all the high school definition?
I explained that.
See. You didn’t actually read what I wrote. You’re not good at this.
you just said it can be considered alive, but then you say isn’t
my point is simple, ask anyone with a biology degree,. that highschool definition is oversimplified and not useful. there is no working definition of life
You really don’t know how to read do you?
I never mentioned high school. I never took biology in high school. I took physics instead. I gave you my specific definition. You thought it sounded like something you remember from high school, and ignored what I actually said.
Fire doesn’t actually support itself. Each flame is gone in an instant, unique to the molecule it came from.
But is creates the illusion of continuity, which can make life a useful analogy for it sometimes.
If you still don’t understand. I don’t know how better I can explain it for you. I’ve already given you too much credit. I’m done.
Fire 100% supports itself, each flame dies but that is like saying each of your proteins get denatured and recycled, the carbon you eat eventually turns into CO2, all your matter changes at some point.