viruses aren't living things but..
View Single Post
Sep4-05, 09:58 AM
The difficulty with viruses is that biologists just aren't sure if they should be classified as living organisms. For example, they can't reproduce on their own, but instead require host cells for replication, and the retroviruses don't even have DNA but carry only RNA instead. They are distinctly in that gray area between things we can say with certainty are living and things we can say with certainty are non-living.
It's weird isn't it? non-living things don't reproduce, however, some don't even have DNA! maybe they should have their own catagorization....
LIVING || Thred life
|| Viral life || Non-LIVING