Intelegent Life in the Sea

[pymz]

Because of the reality of Intelegent life on the earth (us), i am wondering about the possibility of the development of intelegent life in the sea. All life originated in the sea didnt it? (correct me if im wrong). The sea takes up a very large area of the Earth, and is abundant with life. The seas are also would be far less affected by climatic changes which have brought about the downfall of many species. During an ice age there still would be warm waters deep beneath the layers of ice, in which life can still flourish.

 

Anyone who has ample scientific knowledge of evolution may be able to help me out on this. Bear in mind that if life capable of indipendent thought actually existed at the depths of the oceans, and these beings were somewhere on a par with us as far as intellegence goes, it would be very well in their interests to hide from us thier existance. These hypothetical beings would most likely not be capable of construction as we know it, or even the use of tools. This most likely points to them very likely not even existing, because the use of tools by early man in my mind is the major contributing factor in the development of a highly evolved problem solving brain.

 

But we have no idea of exactly all the life that is in the sea, especially at great depths. So there is a possibility that there could be highly evolved life, and that they never need to come into contact with us.

Would you want to come out of the water to greet a violent, hostile and unpredictable race like us?

 

Post away! any ideas or comments, even telling me im insane will be appreciated.....

[Tormod]

Welcome Pymz - interesting post.

 

There *is* already highly intelligent life in the oceans. They are whales and dolphins. They do not use tools (at least not in a way we do). They do communicate over vast distances using highly developed skills and language. And they do communicate with people.

 

As for the possibility of an intelligent species hiding from us...sounds like science fiction to me. Granted, the ocean depths are the least explored areas on the planet, but this is not likely.

 

If this "alien" ocean race lived on the seafloor - would they even know about us?

[Freethinker]

pymz, Your insane! welcome to our madhouse! :-)

 

Thanks for the topic. I good question. As Tormod has posted, whales and dolphins are intelligent species. Perhaps as intellegent as we are. Thus there already is intelligent life in the Sea. But they live in such a friendly environment, relative to their existence, that they have not had to develop the infrastructure we land based species have had to. They are pretty well at the top of the food chain, not having any serious preditor concerns (outside of from us). Their food sources have been far beyond their needs.

 

HUmans however have had to battle for our daily existence against far more powerful preditors. Our food sources have been highly volitile and inconsistant. We have been forced to utilize out intellect in areas far beyond what either sea creature has had to. But this does not prove that we are intellectually superior. Just more physical infrastructurely advanced and capable.

 

You can see similar situations in human societies. Look at where infrastructure development has historically come from. Not from the more stable, physically friendly areas. Not from "tropical islands" where food sources are plentiful and weather consistantly freindly. But in areas that require such advancements just for simple daily survival. This does not indicate that "Islanders" are less intellectual. Just that their intellect did not require the same direction of utilization, the same motivations. Same with the intellectual species in the sea but to an even greater extent.

 

I wonder however what would happen if these intellects in the sea found their existence threatened for a long enough period that they developed the desire, motivation, to develop infrastruture oriented responses. Or if we coould find some other method of incresed communications and provided intellectual motivation for their participation in developing undersea infrastructure.

 

Unfortunately it seem the only extend efforts on oour part to utilize these intellectual resources is to use them as weapons.

 

Which makes one wonder if the question should be whether there is intellegent life OUT OF the sea!

[lindagarrette]

According to the PBS series on evolution, life forms with brains evolved on land first, then took to the sees. Dolphins and whales are about as intelligent as most sub-ape mamals. Scientists have learned that they do not have a complex system of communication. They communicate with humans in much the same way as cats and dogs and horses do. by association and reward.

[Tormod]

Yes, Linda. I didn't suggest that we have evidence that cretaceans are as intelligent as human beings. The topic title is "Intelligent life in the sea" and I claim that there is.

 

Here is a scientific discussion on thy "myth" of higher intelligence in whales and dolphins, which supports your view:

http://www.highnorth.no/Library/Myths/br-be-an.htm

 

However, I disagree with some of the points in that article. Or rather I should say I'm uncertain. For example, she writes that the cretaceans are "anatomically simpler" and she states:

While all non-human animals have ways of communicating with each other, for example by body language, sounds, touch or chemicals, they have not developed anything of comparable versatility to human language. Although many attempts have been made, no non-human has yet been taught more than the rudiments of human-type language.

 

I question the validity in using human beings as the standard for intelligence. With that viewpoint there would not be any other intelligent species on this planet.

 

Yet I agree with the author that it is very difficult to agree upon what "intelligence" is.

[Tim_Lou]

what i think about y doesnt intelligence form in the ocean is that its too easy to live as said above:

 

"The seas are also would be far less affected by climatic changes which have brought about the downfall of many species. During an ice age there still would be warm waters deep beneath the layers of ice, in which life can still flourish."

 

no point to be intelligent....

 

whales and dolphins are mammals from the land, and they went back to the ocean......so, its not considered as intelligence arose from ocean.

 

 

also, organisms that stay in the deep ocean will probably not as advanced as we are.

considering only little light exist down there and the food supplies are limited. (basees of food chain are things such as sulfur)

thus, those organisms must remain simple in order to survive (food limitations)

 

[also, less radiation reduces the mutation rate, which decreases evolution rate]

 

 

well, these are the things that pop up in my head.......

[TeleMad]

I haven't seen any mention of an octopus. Pretty intelligent.

[Tim_Lou]

well, octopus is the most intelligent groups of invertebrate animals.

 

i found an interesting website about octopus:

http://www.fortunecity.com/emachines/e11/86/cephpod.html

 

but its intelligence is still far from that of mammals.

 

""The brain is anatomically complex," says neuroscientist Ted Bullock of the University of California in San Diego. "It is very highly differentiated. It has a lot of texture, it isn't smooth or monotonous. It looks like a complicated brain, histologically and microscopically." Make no mistake, cephalopod brains cannot compare with the complexity of the brains of mammals or even birds. In brain size to body mass ratios, however, they outrank those of lower vertebrates, like reptiles and most fish."

[TeleMad]

Yeah, but I didn't claim they were more intelligent than mammals. But it seemed that people were talking only about whales and dolphins and then discounting them since they evolved from land mammals (ie, they aren't "real" sea life).

 

Another interesting point:

 

"Laboratoty experiments have shown that members of every animal phylum can learn." (Biology: Fifth Edition, Eldra Pearl Solomon, Linda R. Berg, & Diana W. Martin, Saunders College Publishing, 1999, p860)

[Uncle Martin]

Originally posted by: Tim_Lou

[also, less radiation reduces the mutation rate, which decreases evolution rate].......

Tim, I'm curious,.... is radiation a factor in mutations that lead to evolution? I was under the impression that radiation mutations were mostly of a negative sort. Not the type that would provide an evolutionary advantage.

[TeleMad]

Background radiation - radation produced from the radioactive decay of elements found right here in the Earth's crust - is one factor responsible for spontaneous mutations in organisms. We, and everything else living on the surface, are subjected to this radiation everyday of our lives and it is one factor that helps evolution by mutation/selection occur. It's beneficial (sometimes) because it isn't too extreme. If instead life on Earth were continuously bombarded by intense radiation, far too many mutations would occur to be compatible with life.

[Freethinker]

The problem with asserting radiation as a source of evolutionary mutation is that most radiation mutation is not genetically hereditary. Lamarckian Evolution doesn't work.

 

In fact it would seem that conventional radioactive sources would typically generate non-hereditary mutations.

 

The source of genetic mutation that would be considered due to radioactive decay would be carbon 14 decay within a dna strand being active in reproduction..

[Tormod]

I think (this is just a hunch while I read Telemad's post) that radiation could be a major source of mutation in bacteria and single-cell organisms, thus having an impact on the evolution of life at a very early stage.

[Freethinker]

If the single celled organism passed along it's original DNA, rather than it's after the fact mutation, then any subsequent mutation is non hereditary. Lamarckian Evolution doesn't work.

[Tormod]

I was thinking of what would happen if a single celled organism (or an amoeba, say) was mutated due to radioation before it split into two pieces (through mitosis). Then the mutated DNA would be passed on, no?

 

Forgive my ignorance on this, I'm just curious. But now it's bedtime over here.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: Tormod

I was thinking of what would happen if a single celled organism (or an amoeba, say) was mutated due to radioation before it split into two pieces (through mitosis). Then the mutated DNA would be passed on, no?

 

Forgive my ignorance on this, I'm just curious. But now it's bedtime over here.

Try not to mutate overnight!

 

TTBOMK, a radioactive caused mutation to a cell would not affect it's basic DNA, unless the mutation attacked the DNA itself. This should hold true to a single celled organism. The DNA drives the cell, the cell does not drive the DNA. Lamarckian Evolution doesn't work.

[Tormod]

Sounds reasonable.