Are viruses alive, and if so, why are they such a**holes?

Are viruses alive, and if so, why are they such a**holes?

Other urls found in this thread:

sfu.ca/colloquium/PDC_Top/OoL/whatislife/Vikingmission.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimeric_antigen_receptor#Engineering_CAR_T_cells
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>Are viruses alive
They're a borderline case exhibiting some behavior that gets associated with the concept living but also lacking some behavior that sometimes gets specified as a fundamental component of what gets called living.
>why are they such a**holes?
I think you're conflating "alive" with "having agency." Plants are alive but we generally don't attribute any deliberate agenda to them.

Viruses aren't alive, they're entities that exist in a metastable state until interacting with a cellular receptor.

Well, viruses aren't actually native to this planet, They're actually xenobiota from Proxima Centauri b and possibly created by an intelligent extraterrestrial xenophile trying to corrupt human genetics slowly over generations to match their own.
This is a form of 'biological terraforming', to ease reproduction and assimilation.
This has been covered by the New World Order since the late-1800s and is currently under the custody of the current leading Masonic Order, as lain down by their forefathers, the Illuminati.
Now, I know you're all going to try and redirect me to /x/ and ask for proof, well I have none that I can post (safely).
Just be careful and don't believe what the MSM tells you, nor the MSC for that matter.

Biological viruses are alive in the same way that computer viruses are software -- they're just ways of exploiting vulnerabilities in their respective systems.

Not all biological viruses are assholes -- some bacteriophages can kill pathogenic bacteria and help people (they actually use phage therapy in some places and it's more effective than antibiotics) and there's even a theory that the nucleus in eukaryotes evolved through an endosymbiotic relationship with a mimivirus-like ancestor early on in the history of life.

Isn't there currently human trials being conducted in the US with re-engineered viruses (I forget which) to solely combat cancerous tissue?

That sounds like it could back fire horribly

Oh, you mean: if it mutates and starts causing lysis in healthy human tissue and then escapes laboratory conditions?

Yes!

And the best of it is, that it reprograms the cancer tells it infects to start producing copies of the virus to aid in propagation.

>*tells = cells

cancerous tissue no. But engineered AAV viruses are being used for gene therapy for a variety of conditions, especially retinal

Jesus christ! Sounds like something out of a sci-fi flick

This might be it, I am trying to recall something I heard a year or so ago in passing.

It sure is.

According to NASA yes.
>A self-sustaining chemical system capable of Darwinian evolution.

sfu.ca/colloquium/PDC_Top/OoL/whatislife/Vikingmission.html

The problem is biologist's narrow definition of life doesn't work if you're looking for life off the Earth

Where did this whole "viruses are actually aliens" meme come from? Why is it so hard for you to accept that viruses evolved naturally on Earth?

Here's a secret. Viruses are actually natural biological weapons produced by most organisms to weaken/kill their natural enemies. Your body starts producing viruses when you're under stress.

At no point in time have I ever proposed that viruses didn't evolve on Earth.

It was implied in your post though

I think this might've been what I was reading about that day:
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimeric_antigen_receptor#Engineering_CAR_T_cells

see for the truth.

Nice false flag, Mr. Three Letter.

You posted a picture of a bacteriophage. Those are viruses that kill bacteria. They are definitely not assholes.

>Those are viruses that kill bacteria
Good or bad bacteria, and is that all they do?

Both

So what is the influenza virus (H2N3)

Influenza viruses are assholes.

They sometimes go through something called an "antigenic shift" where several different strains infect the same host cell and swap genetic material. Occasionally this results in an extremely virulent strain, like what happened in the Spanish Flu of WWI that ended up killing millions of people or the "swine flu" pandemic of '09 that luckily evolved to become more transmissible and less deadly.

If, one, of these days, H5N1 bird flu, H1N1, and H2N3 swine flu coinfect some pig on some farm in Mexico or some shit and swap just the right components we might all be fucked.

is that way friendo

>well I have none that I can post (safely).

This year is one of the worst on record. I guess that explains why flu shots only work on 10% of strains

This flu season is bad because it's predominated by a strain of H3N2 that the vaccine doesn't really protect against. The vaccine is usually way more effective.

Why do I feel like a bacterium's activity is more "deliberate" than a plant's? I mean deliverate as in you might call a cat a "dick", but not a flower.

A flower is literally a dick though... or a vagina... or both

But, like, bacteria are able to do this thing called "chemotaxis" where they move towards or away from a chemical gradient. It's cool to watch a white blood cell chase a bacterium -- they almost look intelligent -- but it's all pathfinding