Log in

View Full Version : What's More Important?


Zero Beat
November 16th, 2009, 03:09 AM
What's More Important?

As we know, humans and the world need a lot of things. But what is more important? Water? Sunlight? Air? Gravity? or something else?.

What do you think is the most important to human life?


If you have any others, other then what i gave as an example please do post.

My view is, without sunlight, we couldn't have plants, without plants with would have oxygen. Without water we wouldn't have plants, without sun, we wouldn't have the cycle for water... see where Im going with this?

mrmcdonaldduck
November 16th, 2009, 03:32 AM
i have to agree with you jack, the cycle is an important thing, without one, the others fail.

but, the most important thing is for a large enough anount of people to avoid inbreeding to allow for a continuing and growing population

Sage
November 16th, 2009, 04:42 AM
Particles. Sorry, debate is over now.

Zero Beat
November 16th, 2009, 04:45 AM
Ahhh, Once again you save the day...

Sugaree
November 16th, 2009, 02:28 PM
If there were no sunlight, you could expect the destruction of the world in just a few minutes. If there was no water, plants and animals (including us) would have no source of growth. Without air, everything would die (simple logic here). If there was no gravity, we would all fly out of the atmosphere, into space, and eventually die due to a lack of oxygen. The Earth relies upon all the sources, including air, water, sunlight, and gravity. If it had none of these, then this planet would not be able to sustain life.

/debate

Camazotz
November 16th, 2009, 06:06 PM
The atmosphere.

IowaBoy
November 16th, 2009, 07:56 PM
survival

enzenzz
November 16th, 2009, 08:33 PM
reproduction :)

ShatteredWings
November 16th, 2009, 08:51 PM
Chicken
Or
Egg


I don't see this debate having an end

Sage
November 16th, 2009, 10:04 PM
;692196']Chicken
Or
Egg


I don't see this debate having an end

It does, and it's nothing like that. The answer is particles. Also, the egg came first.

2D
November 16th, 2009, 10:07 PM
It does, and it's nothing like that. The answer is particles. Also, the egg came first.

He wins. Again.

*long sigh*

Grinchilla
November 17th, 2009, 02:16 AM
For life as we now it, we can't be without any of these things! :p

But particles as people answered... Are they saying that their could be life that's non-carbon based? Nothing like we know life now? something that takes different elements in as food, not like are combinations of C, H, and Oxygen? I have no idea :p what if quarks didn't form atoms? could life still exist?

I like haunches.

Death
November 17th, 2009, 03:15 PM
There are a lot of things you'd need, but admittedly, the lowest-level thing I can think of is what Deschain said - particles.

Zero Beat
November 17th, 2009, 05:18 PM
He wins. Again.

*long sigh*

He only wins if we let him. :rolleyes:

2D
November 17th, 2009, 06:22 PM
The Force. I can't believe you monkeys didn't think of that. Pssh.

Sage
November 17th, 2009, 06:33 PM
The Force. I can't believe you monkeys didn't think of that. Pssh.

Jeff speaks the truth. I find everyone's lack of faith... disturbing.

enzenzz
November 17th, 2009, 06:38 PM
What good does particles do without energy to keep them intact?

Death
November 21st, 2009, 01:21 PM
And what's the good of energy without particles?

mosaic.
November 22nd, 2009, 02:51 PM
Mesons and Quarks.