Genome of largest viruses yet discovered hints at 'fourth domain' of life. - Polidicks

[quote]Genome of largest viruses yet discovered hints at 'fourth domain' of life.[/quote] [url=http://www.nature.com/news/giant-viruses-open-pandora-s-box-1.13410?WT.ec_id=NEWS-20130723]Read the fucking article, inferior[/url] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Shitty titled thread." - Swebonny))[/highlight]

Viruses aren't even considered life. You can't "find" a domain of life, you create it because it's a classification system and if we created such a domain, we'd likely be splitting some current organisms out of current domains. How about a title equally sensationalist but more accurate like "massive virus is taking over the gulf" or "Mega viruses growing in size 20 times faster than a human child"

i want to make a virus that turns people into copies of me

[QUOTE=Mattk50;41731052]Viruses aren't even considered life. You can't "find" a domain of life, you create it because it's a classification system and if we created such a domain, we'd likely be splitting some current organisms out of current domains. How about a title equally sensationalist but more accurate like "massive virus is taking over the gulf" or "Mega viruses growing in size 20 times faster than a human child"[/QUOTE] You can find a species that does not fit in any categories. You're nitpicking at semantics.

[QUOTE=Slacker996;41731064]i want to make a virus that turns people into copies of me[/QUOTE] i'm already pretty lazy so i guess someone already has

I just made the title based on what was written in the title of the article, chill out

[QUOTE=Mattk50;41731052]Viruses aren't even considered life. You can't "find" a domain of life, you create it because it's a classification system and if we created such a domain, we'd likely be splitting some current organisms out of current domains. How about a title equally sensationalist but more accurate like "massive virus is taking over the gulf" or "Mega viruses growing in size 20 times faster than a human child"[/QUOTE] Obviously you know more about life than all those biologists who're pushing for this new classification. [editline]6th August 2013[/editline] Also, this news is late, it's about the Pandora virus that scientists are suspecting to have origins in space/Mars due to it's extremely unique DNA structure.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;41731124]Obviously you know more about life than all those biologists who're pushing for this new classification. [editline]6th August 2013[/editline] Also, this news is late, it's about the Pandora virus that scientists are suspecting to have origins in space/Mars due to it's extremely unique DNA structure.[/QUOTE] I know more about it than you and the OP apparantly. Im fully aware that a new domain might be created to include existing viruses, and i actually agree. I don't like the definition of life that excludes viruses. However, creating a new classification to include viruses is not "finding another domain" by any stretch. [QUOTE=Bletotum;41731072]You can find a species that does not fit in any categories. You're nitpicking at semantics.[/QUOTE] Domains are the highest level of category and go in order. When a new species is discovered it's sorted into one of the domains, then through each level of subcategory. At this stage creating a new domain makes no sense because of how taxonomy has sorted current organisms, the problem here is that viruses aren't considered organisms, and people are pushing for them to be a literal new definition of life. This is not just "finding a new species"

[QUOTE=Mattk50;41731209]I know more about it than you and the OP apparantly. Im fully aware that a new domain might be created to include existing viruses, and i actually agree. I don't like the definition of life that excludes viruses. However, creating a new classification to include viruses is not "finding another domain" by any stretch.[/QUOTE] [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Biological_classification_L_Pengo.svg/230px-Biological_classification_L_Pengo.svg.png[/img] Finding a new domain just means that they found something that doesn't belong in the other domains. It's just like finding a new genus; it becomes a new genus when it doesn't fit into other ones. [editline]6th August 2013[/editline] And I'm pretty sure this thing doesn't fit into any other domain, so yeah, it's getting it's own now.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;41731224][img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Biological_classification_L_Pengo.svg/230px-Biological_classification_L_Pengo.svg.png[/img] Finding a new domain just means that they found something that doesn't belong in the other domains. It's just like finding a new genus; it becomes a new genus when it doesn't fit into other ones. [editline]6th August 2013[/editline] And I'm pretty sure this thing doesn't fit into any other domain, so yeah, it's getting it's own now.[/QUOTE] [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Phylogenetic_Tree_of_Life.png[/img] Notice how they all start in the same place. Stuff is sorted not based on traits, adaptations, appearance, or anything of the sort. It is sorted, where possible, by the lineage of evolved organisms.

[QUOTE=Mattk50;41731241][img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Phylogenetic_Tree_of_Life.png[/img] Notice how they all start in the same place. Stuff is sorted not based on traits, adaptations, appearance, or anything of the sort. It is sorted, where possible, by the lineage of evolved organisms.[/QUOTE] Then it'd still be it's own domain, or something bigger, because this organism originated [i]off of this planet[/i]. [editline]6th August 2013[/editline] It wouldn't even have a line on that chart you posted. Also it's debated where all three of those branches broke off, so that chart is still wrong.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;41731263]Then it'd still be it's own domain, or something bigger, because this organism originated [i]off of this planet[/i]. [editline]6th August 2013[/editline] It wouldn't even have a line on that chart you posted. Also it's debated where all three of those branches broke off, so that chart is still wrong.[/QUOTE] am i being trolled because as far as i've been informed this thread wasn't about aliens

[QUOTE=Mattk50;41731308]am i being trolled because as far as i've been informed this thread wasn't about aliens[/QUOTE] Then you didn't even read the article, gj. [editline]1[/editline] Here's another article about the same virus from like a month ago: [url]http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/07/18/203298244/worlds-biggest-virus-may-have-ancient-roots[/url]

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;41731323]Then you didn't even read the article, gj. [editline]1[/editline] Here's another article about the same virus from like a month ago: [url]http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/07/18/203298244/worlds-biggest-virus-may-have-ancient-roots[/url][/QUOTE] I've read both articles now and there's nothing about any origins on another planet. Is it possible you are confusing this with the panspermia hypothesis?

[QUOTE=Mattk50;41731406]I've read both articles now and there's nothing about any origins on another planet. Is it possible you are confusing this with the panspermia hypothesis?[/QUOTE] [quote]"We believe that those new Pandoraviruses have emerged from a new ancestral cellular type that no longer exists," he says. That life could have come from another planet, like Mars. [/quote] Clearly you can't read. [editline]6th August 2013[/editline] That's just one of the quotes btw. I should have expected nothing less of Facepunch when it comes to not reading the articles.

All life could have originated on another planet, like mars. This has been hypothesized for a long time: see panspermia hypothesis. You were writing as if there was something more. Sorry to assume you weren't being dumb. Here, let me quote your dumb: [QUOTE]Then it'd still be it's own domain, or something bigger, because this organism originated off of this planet.[/QUOTE] There has been no conclusion or evidence to support any claim that these viruses (still not organisms according to the official classifications you are arguing about) has originated anywhere else. It is simply possible. Welcome to science, where we don't reach conclusions without proof.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;41731263]Then it'd still be it's own domain, or something bigger, because this organism originated [i]off of this planet[/i]. [/QUOTE] How do you miss important keywords such as "[B][U] hints[/U][/B] at 'fourth domain' of life." "World's Biggest Virus [B][U]May[/U][/B] Have Ancient Roots". No, we [B]don't[/B] know if it's off this planet or not. Stop making assumptions. [editline]6th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=ForgottenKane;41731416] I should have expected nothing less of Facepunch when it comes to not reading the articles.[/QUOTE] ironic

[QUOTE=Mattk50;41731052]Viruses aren't even considered life. You can't "find" a domain of life, you create it because it's a classification system and if we created such a domain, we'd likely be splitting some current organisms out of current domains. How about a title equally sensationalist but more accurate like "massive virus is taking over the gulf" or "Mega viruses growing in size 20 times faster than a human child"[/QUOTE] Actually, there is a lot of debate over whether or not we should classify viruses as life - as the MRFEEGS (or whatever variant you got taught at school) definition is being considered too narrow by some, especially in cases like this. But, that aside, the article is talking about the fact that only 7% of their genome appears to be recognisable, leaving an astonishing 93% as uncharacterised. That's insane, because genomic material gets around, so where is the 93% coming from? That's why it hints at a 4th domain of life - because that 93% has to come from somewhere (especially due to the way that viruses reproduce)

[QUOTE=Mattk50;41731445]All life could have originated on another planet, like mars. This has been hypothesized for a long time: see panspermia hypothesis. You were writing as if there was something more. [b]Sorry to assume you weren't being dumb.[/b] Here, let me quote your [b]dumb[/b]: There has been no conclusion or evidence to support any claim that these viruses (still not organisms according to the official classifications you are arguing about) has originated anywhere else. It is simply possible. Welcome to science, where we don't reach conclusions without proof.[/QUOTE] Why are you guys being so rude? It's not like this is personal.

[QUOTE=CrumbleShake;41731704]Why are you guys being so rude? It's not like this is personal.[/QUOTE] hi welcome to facepunch

[QUOTE=Craigewan;41731649]Actually, there is a lot of debate over whether or not we should classify viruses as life - as the MRFEEGS (or whatever variant you got taught at school) definition is being considered too narrow by some, especially in cases like this. But, that aside, the article is talking about the fact that only 7% of their genome appears to be recognisable, leaving an astonishing 93% as uncharacterised. That's insane, because genomic material gets around, so where is the 93% coming from? That's why it hints at a 4th domain of life - because that 93% has to come from somewhere (especially due to the way that viruses reproduce)[/QUOTE] I was aware of debate, i'm on the side that viruses should be classified as life, but because the officially recognized definition (and therefore the exclusion of viruses from the tree of life) is what the semantics and classifications we currently have are based off of, thats what has to be used, for the time being. Yeah, that much of the genome being characterized is really quite insane. Genetic information can come from a lot of places, especially as a virus you can pick it up from literally anywhere... and it was found in the ocean, meaning it has a long range of things it could have found, including isolated underground bastions of life possibly shaken free by an earthquake in the past few hundred years(which would probably be classified under a current domain, specifically archaea). However, the article references the viruses in the context of having evolved from one of the "failed" "domains". There are likely millions of domains if we go by the definition that every branch on the tree of life that died out very early on is it's own domain. But, it hasn't died out, apparently theres still these viruses... which aren't classified as life, so they can't be the only things left in a domain. its quite the pickle. [QUOTE=CrumbleShake;41731704]Why are you guys being so rude? It's not like this is personal.[/QUOTE] This isn't personal. It's science. [sp]And he successfully trolled me into calling him dumb but whatever i've done worse[/sp]

[QUOTE=supersnail11;41731757]hi welcome to facepunch[/QUOTE] Just because it's the norm here doesn't mean it should be fine.