Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 11:21 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Chemical Origin of Life
#31
RE: Chemical Origin of Life
(October 15, 2012 at 12:18 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: Life is a symptom of the presence of a soul. You can't get life without the soul.

[Image: demotivational_posters_prenatal_facepalm...54-580.jpg]


starting a thread with the word "chemistry" in the title and then writing about "soul", and then going so far as saying life is somekind of "proof" for that soul.

Your mind, is like the mind of a caveman 3000 b.c who just saw a vulcano errupt.

Fire on mountain! fire god! must worship fire god!


(October 15, 2012 at 12:18 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: If someone could conclusively prove that life is created by chemicals, that would destroy Krishna's claims in the Bhagavad Gita about the soul.

scientists are actualy not eaven out to destroy your religious myths, and i dought that they are out to spread atheism.
They want to understand what the fuck is going on.
the hostility towards science by religious people simply originates from those because the myths on wich they base their power clearly say things like: "a woman was made out of the ribbs of a man" "woman are cursed whilest they have their period" "the earth was created in 7 days" "the earth is 3000 years old"
and if these are refuted so is their power.
Reply
#32
RE: Chemical Origin of Life
(October 15, 2012 at 12:29 pm)Darkstar Wrote:
(October 15, 2012 at 12:19 pm)Chuck Wrote: You make the unwarrented assumption that neither species nor evolution existed until after what might be termed the first life. This is probably not true.

Life on earth can be biochemically separated into two fundamental division - The Archea and everything else. At cellular level they look similar, functions broadly similarly on a high level, but are chemically incompatible biochemically at a basic level. It appears chemically, there is no way for a functioning organism in one division to embark upon the first evolution step to change from one division to another without immediately dying.

This suggest the chemical division in life on earth originated at a part of biochemical speciation process BEFORE the process culmated in life. There were already two species of self-contained pre-organisms that didn't quite fulfil all the requirements of life. These two species then each individually evolved into true life through additional speciation along two different trees.

Thus speciation not only explains why there are so many different form of life, it may in fact be a characteristic of the chemical process that led to the origin of life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaea#Ori..._evolution

I'm not sure how you are saying speciation led to the origin of life. It says [in the link] that it is believed that Archea are one of the three domains, which speciated off from the first cells. It doesn't have anything to do with how the first cells originated, but with what happened immediately afterward.

You can create as many domain to include all life as you want. The key is not whether archea is life, it is how is archea related to other life. Was the last common ancester between archea and other domains of life on earth also a living cell in itself.

Here it get contraversal. There are different theories about relationships of Archea to everything else. The difficulty is biochemistry of how informaton is processed through the cell membrane is sufficiently different between archea any everything else that it seem impossible for any living, functioning cell to have been the intermediate stage between archea and all other forms of living cells. So it seems nothing with functioning cell membrane evolve as a functioning cell from Archea to other cells, or vice versa. Nor could any functioning cell with a membrane be capable of evolving into both Archea and other forms of cells.

So one theory suggest the biochemical different must occurred when ancesters of archea and other cells didn't actually have a cell membrane. In other words, not a discrete life form. This theory suggests the process that led eventually to life first occurred in poreous rocks that lines hot hydro-thermal vents on the ocean floor. The hot temperature of the vent water and the complex chemical present in the water allowed increasingly complex organic chemistry processes to occur.

Somewhere along the way, chemistry become complicated enough to produce RNA, prelude to DNA. This allowed parts of chemistry occurring in some pores to be replicated through coded information in adjacent pores. Mutations in the process allowed some of the pores to acquire slightly different chemical processes than others. Hence incipient speciation. Some of the processes are suitable for additional mutation, and chance for additional gains in complexity, some are not. hence evolution by natural selection. But hitherto the chemistry is not contained in any self sustaining physical package. Hence no life. Somewhere along the way, some pores acquired a coating of complex organic chemicals coded in RNA that could stand alone, if expelled from the pore. Hence tcell mambrane and first proto-cell. No protocell membrane could, as far as we can tell, evolve form Archea chemistry to other cellular chemistry in the environment outside the pores of rocks around hydrothermal vents. So the process to create protocell must have arisen at least twice.
Reply
#33
RE: Chemical Origin of Life
(October 15, 2012 at 10:58 am)Tino Wrote: Also, please answer my earlier question about the origin of god.

Haven't you ever read the Lawrence Krauss stuff on how something comes from nothing? Big Grin

To be slightly more serious, matter and the universe require an origin. Without a great explanation for one, we may want to consider an origin that is outside of the laws and limitations that we're generally able to talk about. In that case, you may not be able to discuss God's origin.

One definition of God is as the "ultimate cause." Science is not able to find an ultimate cause, nor is such a cause rational. Still, how do you get the chain of caused things if such a cause doesn't exist?

God cannot be known by the inductive process. He is unknowable by direct perception. The scientists say there is no God because they are trying to understand Him by direct perception. Scientists are ignorant of God because they are missing the method of knowing Him. In order to understand transcendental science, one must approach a bona fide spiritual master, hear from him submissively and render service to him.

(October 15, 2012 at 12:29 pm)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: the hostility towards science by religious people simply originates from those because the myths on wich they base their power clearly say things like: "a woman was made out of the ribbs of a man" "woman are cursed whilest they have their period" "the earth was created in 7 days" "the earth is 3000 years old"
and if these are refuted so is their power.

i have no hostility towards honest science. it's when science steps out of bounds and claims to know things it doesn't, that we should call foul.
Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare
Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare
Reply
#34
RE: Chemical Origin of Life
(October 15, 2012 at 12:42 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: To be slightly more serious, matter and the universe require an origin.

Do they? How do you know?

(October 15, 2012 at 12:42 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: Without a great explanation for one, we may want to consider an origin that is outside of the laws and limitations that we're generally able to talk about. In that case, you may not be able to discuss God's origin.

Why? There are theories that do not require god.

(October 15, 2012 at 12:42 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: One definition of God is as the "ultimate cause." Science is not able to find an ultimate cause, nor is such a cause rational. Still, how do you get the chain of caused things if such a cause doesn't exist?

Need there be a cause? Need the cause be a god? You just admitted that to even consider god a possibility would be irrational, and yet...

(October 15, 2012 at 12:42 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: God cannot be known by the inductive process. He is unknowable by direct perception.

Define 'direct perception'. Does he talk to you [even in your mind]? Then you can hear him. Does he show himself to you? Then you can see him. Is he undetectable via the five senses and all technology humanity posseses? Then how can you say he exists?

(October 15, 2012 at 12:42 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: The scientists say there is no God because they are trying to understand Him by direct perception. Scientists are ignorant of God because they are missing the method of knowing Him. In order to understand transcendental science, one must approach a bona fide spiritual master, hear from him submissively and render service to him.

Well, if that wasn't vaguely worded. And how about those who hear nothing? Are they not deluding themselves listening hard enough?
John Adams Wrote:The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
Reply
#35
RE: Chemical Origin of Life
If I thought for a moment theists would shut up about the origin of life if scientists could make a blade of grass from scratch, I would post again in this thread.
Reply
#36
RE: Chemical Origin of Life
(October 15, 2012 at 12:50 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: If I thought for a moment theists would shut up about the origin of life if scientists could make a blade of grass from scratch, I would post again in this thread.

There will always be more gaps for god to hide in.

(October 15, 2012 at 12:42 pm)Chuck Wrote: So one theory suggest the biochemical different must occurred when ancesters of archea and other cells didn't actually have a cell membrane. In other words, not a discrete life form.

I see. I guess the 'contrversial' part is about if something that is 'not a discrete life form' can speciate, but now that I think about it, it might not be illogical to conclude that it can.
John Adams Wrote:The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
Reply
#37
RE: Chemical Origin of Life
Bona fide spiritual master? ROFLOL

Like what, spoon bending and such? Thanks, I'll pass. I wonder how he's supposed to establish his credentials after you just ruled out any means of establishing his credentials..lol. Did this spiritual master have to consult a spiritual master before him, all the way back ad infinitum? What was that about regress again?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#38
RE: Chemical Origin of Life
(October 15, 2012 at 12:42 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: To be slightly more serious, matter and the universe require an origin. Without a great explanation for one, we may want to consider an origin that is outside of the laws and limitations that we're generally able to talk about. In that case, you may not be able to discuss God's origin.

One definition of God is as the "ultimate cause." Science is not able to find an ultimate cause, nor is such a cause rational. Still, how do you get the chain of caused things if such a cause doesn't exist?

God cannot be known by the inductive process. He is unknowable by direct perception. The scientists say there is no God because they are trying to understand Him by direct perception. Scientists are ignorant of God because they are missing the method of knowing Him. In order to understand transcendental science, one must approach a bona fide spiritual master, hear from him submissively and render service to him.

Yes, in other words, you got nothing.

(October 15, 2012 at 12:42 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: i have no hostility towards honest science. it's when science steps out of bounds and claims to know things it doesn't, that we should call foul.

How do you apply the same treatment to religion? How can you tell when religious teachings step out of bounds and claims to know things that it doesn't? How can you tell?
[Image: generic_sig.jpg]
Reply
#39
RE: Chemical Origin of Life
(October 15, 2012 at 12:18 pm)Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote: Life is a symptom of the presence of a soul. You can't get life without the soul.

Oh great! Salmonella in heaven.

[Image: salmonella.jpg]
Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.
[Image: JUkLw58.gif]
Reply
#40
RE: Chemical Origin of Life
Quote:Akincana Krishna dasa Wrote:

Life is a symptom of the presence of a soul. You can't get life without the soul.

Apparently we are just supposed to take his word for that.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Life comes from life Won2blv 16 2979 April 7, 2016 at 4:34 pm
Last Post: Fireball
  Options for origin of universe Kingpin 31 6295 August 5, 2015 at 10:20 am
Last Post: ErGingerbreadMandude
  The Origin of Life - Abiogenesis - Dr. Jack Szostak little_monkey 1 1848 June 27, 2013 at 6:36 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  Study: the origin of morality Foxaèr 30 7773 May 13, 2013 at 3:50 pm
Last Post: Godscreated
  An interview with Edward O. Wilson "the origin of morals" Something completely different 1 1097 February 26, 2013 at 8:46 pm
Last Post: Nobody
  can we really ever know true origin? mamamia88 12 3918 January 10, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Last Post: Skipper
  Which version of the origin of species? mamamia88 20 5462 December 23, 2010 at 11:43 pm
Last Post: mamamia88



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)