Pls answer if I can make one of these I can sell them and make robert picktons body disposal look amateurish

>>5063681
It would make more sense to start with echinoderms like crinoids.

>>5063681
no
first problem, venus flytrap only make "mouths" when the soil is really shitty
second, human bodies are fully of nasty shit, they have enough problems with mold
three, humans bodies are relatively gigantic, which means everything has to be even bigger
four, animal meat is shitty to digest since you need specific enzymes, you need to masticate it, and you need to deal the byproducts, like urea and ammonia both of which are toxic to plants
five, plants arent firm AND mobile, they have no method to move

>>5063681
Yeah. Less generations are necessary if you can genetically engineer them too. Your biggest hurdle would be dealing with the cellulose cell walls of plants. At least if you're talking about the more original concept of a triffid.
>>5063896
>first problem, venus flytrap only make "mouths" when the soil is really shitty
How is that a problem for triffids? If you're selectively breeding them then you skew what triggers what. Even more so when you're altering them directly at a genetic level.
>second, human bodies are fully of nasty shit, they have enough problems with mold
Plants grow in literal shit and carnivorous plants adapt their chitinases(enzymes to break down chitin) from a purely immunological function against fungi into a digestive role to break down insects. They will be fine.
>three, humans bodies are relatively gigantic, which means everything has to be even bigger
Triffids are described as being much larger than people.
>four, animal meat is shitty to digest
What..? No it's not, where are you getting this?
>since you need specific enzymes
No, you don't. What materials in muscle tissue do you think are so indigestible? Plants are less digestible than muscles and animals can still get nutrition from them, even from the indigestible parts(cellulose) because of endosymbiotic bacteria and yeasts.
>you need to masticate it,
Tell that to snakes.
>and you need to deal the byproducts, like urea and ammonia
Both are fertilizers. Legumes directly take in ammonia from symbiotic bacteria as their source of nitrogen. The rate of digestion matters in this regard, but urea and ammonia aren't as much of an issue as you might think. If you were genetically engineering them too then you can give them ureases(breaks down urea into ammonia and CO2 for some energy gain potentially) and the ability to nitrify that ammonia to produce less toxic nitrates and to get some energy out of it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrification

>>5064130
>How is that a problem for triffids
youre putting the cart before the horse, genetic engineering isnt magic, you cant just go straight the end, theres a lot of incremental steps you have to take; and theres just some steps you cannot do, or will have unintentional side effects with the effects you do want, and at that point youre just chasing down side effects to solve
>purely immunological function against fungi
that doesnt stop mold, theres too much sugar and water in a human, so you have to drop it somewhere else, which see the above
>Triffids are described as being much larger than people.
cart before the horse
>What materials in muscle tissue do you think are so indigestible?
you literally need enzymes to digest animal tissue, for vegetable matter you need bacteria, the fact you dont know this is really bad
>Tell that to snakes.
they literally crush them or use venom to break them down
>Both are fertilizers.
because the bacteria in the dirt does all the work to convert it into usable products, so youre telling me this plant is going to have bacteria along with digestive enzymes in the same pit, things that dont belong next to each other, because if youre breaking down animal tissue youre breaking down bacteria an thats a whole separate issue that needs to be handle
and none of this addresses mobility and structure problem, which those have their own baggage to deal with

>>5064204
>youre putting the cart before the horse, genetic engineering isnt magic, you cant just go straight the end
The question the OP asked was if it was possible, it has nothing to do with its feasibility. Any R&D is also going to have hiccups in its developments and unforeseen issues.
>that doesnt stop mold
Not always, true, but in healthy plants it's a non-issue.
>theres too much sugar and water in a human, so you have to drop it somewhere else, which see the above
Anon... If you're bathing a food item in a ton of digestive enzymes in an enclosed space, those same enzymes are going to affect whatever could grow in there. This kind of argument you're making is like saying you can't eat meat because stuff could grow in your stomach. Carnivorous plants already digest whole mice in the case of pitcher plants and do so without any issues of mold growth. In their case they're more after the nitrogen, phosphorus and so on instead of energy but if they're not sucking up any of that energy then that's more for the same kind of mold you're so worried about.
>cart before the horse
The point was that the size isn't an issue because the proposed organism is big enough to engulf one.
>you literally need enzymes to digest animal tissue
You literally don't. Muscle tissue will digest itself, that's the basis for a lot of fermented animal products like fish sauces and aged meat. That being said, the very enzymes you would use to digest animal tissue are also many of the enzymes most eukaryotes use to recycle and regulate their own cells.
>for vegetable matter you need bacteria, the fact you dont know this is really bad
Bro, I literally put that animals use endosymbiotic bacteria and yeast to break down cellulose. Can you not read?
>they literally crush them or use venom to break them down
That's not masticating them. You're contradicting yourself. You seem ESL, so I'll make it clear that to 'masticate' something means to chew it.

>>5064214
>The question the OP asked was if it was possible,
yeah, through selective breeding, and even then that still doesnt address the fact that genetic engineering isnt magic, we can barely genetically engineer multicellular animals
>those same enzymes are going to affect whatever could grow in there.
that doesnt address waste products, which is going to affect
>The point was that the size isn't an issue because the proposed organism is big enough to engulf one.
yeah, and thats putting cart before the horse because it doesnt address the reality of getting to that size and all that entails
>Muscle tissue will digest itself,
no, thats bacteria, fermentation only happens because of bacteria breaking it down
>means to chew it.
and do you know what the act of chewing is, its crushing

>>5064230
Anything nature has achieved can be replicated with selective breeding alone, given enough time.
>we can barely genetically engineer multicellular animals
Where are you getting this from? Animals are genetically modified all of the time for various experiments. They'll knock out genes, add genes, etc..
>"that doesnt address waste products, which is going to affect"
>but like, sure the meat in my stomach might not get moldy but how am I going to deal with the waste products???
>yeah, and thats putting cart before the horse because it doesnt address the reality of getting to that size and all that entails
Anon. There are animals that have been larger than commercial airplanes on land and currently redwood trees grow over 100m tall. Something big enough to swallow a person is not an issue.
>but how will it grow big enough
I'unno anon, how do lions grow big enough to eat buffalos?
>no, thats bacteria, fermentation only happens because of bacteria breaking it down
No, it's not. To quote from this wiki on beef aging: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beef_aging
>"The process changes beef by two means. Firstly, moisture is evaporated from the muscle. The resulting process of desiccation creates a greater concentration of beef flavour and taste. Secondly, the beef's natural enzymes break down the connective tissue in the muscle, which leads to more tender beef."
This will shock you, I'm sure, but the cells in your body have enzymes in them that are constantly breaking down parts of them so they can be recycled. When you die those enzymes keep working.
>and do you know what the act of chewing is, its crushing
You know you were implying tearing something apart. Either way you put it, you're retarded. Constrictors don't crush their prey to mush, they suffocate it and may break a few bones in the process. This theoretical plant could do the same, so your point is dumb no matter how you put it. When you chew something you break it into pieces.

if for some reason you needed any evidence at all that paleoschizo is BY FAR the dumbest cunt on this board, here it is
(also is convinced that dinosaurs could choke prey with their dicks)

File: 1761427633.shanefrost_lad(...).png (1.52 MB, 983x4829)

1.52 MB PNG

>>5063681
Maybe

>>5064890
A mentally ill 34 year old pedophile makes these. You can just google his name.
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/56121120/
Look at this shit. This is a thirty four year old man.

>>5064894
He's into fat chicks, not kids. But he does good monster fucker porn so it all evens out.