if a tree/plant is considered alive just like you me or the opossum on the side of the road, shouldnt it have at least 1 of the 5 senses? or do you think it has another sense that we dont have? if you completely disagree then prove me wrong by showing me something that is alive that has none.

Your argument is flawed - having senses is not a factor when determining whether or not something is alive.

whered you get this info?
link me please

Defining 'living' is very tricky but can usually be described as some organism that exhibits all the following:

1. Homeostasis
2. Growth
3. Metabolism
4. Complex cell structure (one or more cells)
5. Reproduction
6. Adaptation
7. Response to stimulus

There are some difficulties when using this method. For example mules and other sterile animals cannot reproduce however they are still 'alive'.

of course they have senses. you never learn in biology class where some plants like mimosa react when they were touched? they can even detect EM field.

just google plant + sense to find out more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensor

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sensor

keyword: define

whered you get this info?
link me please

huh! totse have to have new definition on user status. been here for 6 years is not New Arrival.

go log on your computer... geek...
oh wait sorry.

I've always taken 'reproduction' to mean cellular reproduction, as (a)sexual reproduction is entirely irrelevant to whether the organism itself is alive.