(November 3, 2010 at 7:50 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Actually in all honesty most secular scientists are shying away from abiogenesis because they have realized that it is a statistical impossibility. Even Richard Dawkins has begun to lean towards the necessary pre-assembled first life being "planted" here by other civilizations on other planets.
That's complete crap, Dawkins doesn't think panspermia is true. And per chance one believes that panspermia is likely (be it from aliens or comets) it still necessitates Abiogenesis elsewhere in the universe.
And name me all these secular biochemists who say that abiogenesis didn't happen. The fact that something is uncommon is no evidence that it hasn't happened, the chances of a large asteroid impacting earth at any given moment is likely just as infinitesimally improbably as the primordial conditions being in an appropriate combination, if not much lower, yet there is enormous evidence for this happening in the past, despite the statistical improbability of that event occurring.
And you fail to realize that there are literally hundreds of billions of planets at least on which these primordial conditions could have occurred, taking that into account makes the event of abiogenesis far more likely. The fact that it was this planet is arbitrary.
Quote: Of course this just moves the problem to those planets and does not solve it. At least they realize it could not happen on Earth for numerous reasons. Life cannot form spontaneously with or without the presence of oxygen, so that pretty much solves it.
1. This is a straw man, life did not spontaneously form, it was the end stage of a long biochemical process.
2. We have created self-replicating RNA from simple compound chemicals already, simply by having certain conditions and letting the chemical mechanics work it's self out, and they are amongst some of the most complex structures that are required for life, the precursor to DNA.
3. Oxygen WAS present and life STILL can't spontaneously form.
Your level of understanding is fucking shocking, either that or you're so disingenuous that you have to make shit up to avoid looking like a complete twat standing in the dark with your "holy book".
Quote:As for the Miller-Urey reaserch that was mentioned earlier...most people who still believe in Abiogenesis are more just rooting for what they want to see in this kind of research and not actually paying attention to the findings.
The study conclusively showed that amino acids can spontaneously form from combinations of gases, Water, Ammonia, Methane and Hydrogen, with certain conditions, such as heat and an electric spark (all very prevalent forces on the earth earth, the atmosphere was so charged that the predicted rate of lightning strikes is several orders of magnitude higher than today).
This evidence lends credence to the theory of abiogenesis, the chemical combination chosen was the result of a methodology based on some assumptions and some facts, and they were able to determine relatively early on what conditions would work. Their prediction was correct. Can you bible bashing creationists predict any specific phenomenon with any kind of framework at all? No you fucking can't, yet the theory of Abiogenesis CAN.
Results speak louder than bullshit mate.
Quote: All life with only a couple very small exceptions (a couple structures in bacteria) are built with left-handed amino acids. The problem is, we have no experiment that can synthesize and assemble only left handed amino acids. The miller-urey research synthesized a 50/50 mixure of left and right handed amino acids. So this just will not do.
All this means is that the behavior of the various types of amino acids cause them to form different structures, making them have different attributes and thus cope differently with selection pressure, just add genetic drift and inevitably one of the types will be more common.
Also, there are D (right handed) amino acids in living forms, they just aren't as common (they make less crucial structures). And there are more than 20 different amino acids, L and D are only a fraction of the amino acids in life forms.
Again, you clearly don't know shit. You might want to find a source other than AIG.
Quote: These experiments are always done is extremely controlled environments, ones which are not anything like what the Earth's early environment would have been like.
Again your stupidity amazes me... We control the conditions in such as way that they best mimic the actual conditions, this is to minimize any interference and make the picture more reliable, not less.
Quote: They always have a very convenient way of removing the energy that assembles the amino acids before it also destroys them. It's not particularly good science. This does not even take into account the young faint sun paradox. If the life on Earth really formed 3-3.5 billion years ago the sun would only be intense enough to put the Earth's average temperature around 20 degrees F. Of course this is below freezing and would ensure that no life was being "formed". I already have a Faith, I don't need to adopt the Faith of those who still believe in Abiogenesis.
The entire fucking earth was warmer during that epoch, despite the sun being at 30% of it's output today, not to mention the atmospheric pressure was an order or magnitude higher, greatly increasing the amount of greenhouse gases and subsequently increasing the probability of the photons (radiation mediating force particles) in the earth's system being trapped in the atmosphere.
Quote:"...we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
- Franklin M. Harold in the way of the cell: molecules, organisms and the order of life (2001).
"The origin of life by chance in a primeval soup is impossible in probability in the same way that a perpetual machine is in probability. The extremely small probabilities calculated in this chapter are not discouraging to true believers … [however] A practical person must conclude that life didn’t happen by chance."
- Hubert Yockey in Information Theory and Molecular Biology
You realise that I can quote about 50,000 times as many scientists are you right?
.
