Is there anything in this world that doesn't serve any purpose to the "circle of life"?

Question

Everything in this world has a purpose that sustains the circle of life, but is there any actual living organism that just takes up space or doesn't actually benefit any other organism? I don't think so....your opinions? SERIOUS ANSWERS ONLY PLEASE!

Answer 1

yeah...........pot.   seriously, its a plant so its alive and its has no pourpose to people who arent going nowhere

Answer 2

The "circle of life" is a manifestation of the universality of biomolecules.  Stable patterns emerge and can be disrupted.  As everything can be eaten by something (if only after death), all life is connected.

Answer 3

Honestly... No organism has a purpose to sustain the "Circle of Life".  That is just what happens.  Everything, EVERY living being on this earth has one goal: Produce more of its self.  The circle of life is just a kid-friendly explanation of why there is death.

Think about it.  A bacteria isn't thinking (saying it thinks), "Oh, I've got to make more of me so we can feed organism x."  Rather it's goal is to eat and reproduce as much as possible, to propagate its genes to the next generation and many more.

As well, plants (lets say grass) doesn't reason, "oh well if I photosynthesize, then I'll be able to feed this deer that is going to come by and eat me, to later just die and feed my brothers."  It is photosynthesizing to make food for itself, then to make seeds to make more of its self, nothing more.  Everything else is just a consequence of surroundings.

(addition: to swimmingroxx) I don't understand your answer at all.

(addition: to Julie and Rob)  Please allow E-mail, I'd love to talk with you!

Answer 4

i don't think so. when you think about it, every biotic creature on the planet depends on something for food, or is consumed as a source of food. even if we were to take away a species of fish from the amazon (the area with the highest biodiversity on the planet) with the smallest population, something would be affected. in this case it would most likely be the oxygen content of the water, which would affect the different species that could live in the river. it is estimated that approximately 99% of all the species on earth already, and we are most certainly facing those consequences now. who knows what the advancement of global warming would be like if they still existed.

Answer 5

Natural selection probably prevents the sustained existence of any organism that won't fit the environment. If something (as a species) isn't "fit to fit," so to speak, it won't propagate its species and thus won't exist for long.

Our continually updated understanding of our environment indicates this to be the case, and that anything we previously or currently see as having "no use" simply has a use we haven't examined or identified yet. By example, the relative importance of parasitic species compared to predatory species is being hotly debated right now, with a paper now suggesting that the parasites that inhabit all the "prey species" in a given ecosystem may harvest more energy from their hosts than the top predators do (see source below). Even the detractors of the paper agree that the role of parasites is hugely important in the maintenance of ecosystems, it's just the extent that we're unsure of in any given situation.

So, short answer: NO. There is no life form on the planet that doesn't have some sort of "purpose" or position in the web of life. Do not confuse this with any kind of Intelligent Design; that is a different kettle of fish and need not be invoked to answer your question.

(slightly less seriously, there are a few politicians who might qualify for a Yes to your question, in my opinion ;)