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!
Some process in chemical evolution must account for the origin of homochirality, i.e. all building blocks in living organisms having the same "handedness" (amino acids being left-handed, nucleic acid sugars (ribose and deoxyribose) being right-handed, and chiral phosphoglycerides). Chiral molecules can be synthesized, but in the absence of a chiral source or a chiral catalyst, they are formed in a 50/50 mixture of both enantiomers. This is called a racemic mixture. Clark has suggested that homochirality may have started in space, as the studies of the amino acids on the Murchison meteorite showed L-alanine to be more than twice as frequent as its D form, and L-glutamic acid was more than 3 times prevalent than its D counterpart. It is suggested that polarised light has the power to destroy one enantiomer within the proto-planetary disk. Noyes[64] showed that beta decay caused the breakdown of D-leucine, in a racemic mixture, and that the presence of 14C, present in larger amounts in organic chemicals in the early Earth environment, could have been the cause. Robert M. Hazen reports upon experiments conducted in which various chiral crystal surfaces act as sites for possible concentration and assembly of chiral monomer units into macromolecules.[65] Once established, chirality would be selected for.[66] Work with organic compounds found on meteorites tends to suggest that chirality is a characteristic of abiogenic synthesis, as amino acids show a left-handed bias, whereas sugars show a predominantly right-handed bias.[67]
Furthermore, your claim that Fox's experiments used temperature conditions not found on Earth is, to put it rather bluntly, bullshit. Fox heated his apparatus to around 180 C. There are thermophiles deep within the Earth (about 3 km down) and in the vicinity of black smokers and other hydrothermal vents that can survive these temperatures.
You also said "Never said the amino acids were not found in nature, I said their pure forms were not, the impure forms would not form peptides."
Using this logic, we should not even exist. If impure forms cannot form peptides, then that means that only pure forms can exist in the human body. Now, unless you are arguing that human beings don't exist in nature...
"I didn’t see your historical source saying servants in Bible times were treated the same as American slaves."
No, according to historic documents from the time, slaves were treated much worse. Yet Jesus knew about it and did nothing to discourage it, and in fact, left instructions on how they should be treated.
There is no hiostorical evidence that anything in the Book of Exodus ever happened.
And Statler, that you apparently believe that there is no basis for the moral conviction that slavery is wrong is all I need to know about you. So we have here a right wing evangelical Christian who believes in magic old men creating a universe POOF 10,000 years ago who also believes that slavery is morally justified. Wonders never cease to amaze.
************************
"We Jews understand that the world wasn't created in 7 days, and that's because we know what we are good at. And what we are really good at is bullshit".
-Lewis Black
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and seal. It could not be expressed better.'
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
May 25, 2011 at 12:49 am (This post was last modified: May 25, 2011 at 12:50 am by Anomalocaris.)
(May 25, 2011 at 12:13 am)orogenicman Wrote: And Statler, that you apparently believe that there is no basis for the moral conviction that slavery is wrong is all I need to know about you. So we have here a right wing evangelical Christian who believes in magic old men creating a universe POOF 10,000 years ago who also believes that slavery is morally justified. Wonders never cease to amaze.
No need to make him look 60% more sensible then he is. He believes universe was created 6,000 years ago, as befuddled denizens of Sidon, Damascus, Jericho, Athens, Argos, Petna, and other neolithic settlements look on. He would no doubt try his own hand and playing god and move their existence to a different time.
Quote: Some process in chemical evolution must account for the origin of homochirality, i.e. all building blocks in living organisms having the same "handedness" (amino acids being left-handed, nucleic acid sugars (ribose and deoxyribose) being right-handed, and chiral phosphoglycerides). Chiral molecules can be synthesized, but in the absence of a chiral source or a chiral catalyst, they are formed in a 50/50 mixture of both enantiomers. This is called a racemic mixture. Clark has suggested that homochirality may have started in space, as the studies of the amino acids on the Murchison meteorite showed L-alanine to be more than twice as frequent as its D form, and L-glutamic acid was more than 3 times prevalent than its D counterpart. It is suggested that polarised light has the power to destroy one enantiomer within the proto-planetary disk. Noyes[64] showed that beta decay caused the breakdown of D-leucine, in a racemic mixture, and that the presence of 14C, present in larger amounts in organic chemicals in the early Earth environment, could have been the cause. Robert M. Hazen reports upon experiments conducted in which various chiral crystal surfaces act as sites for possible concentration and assembly of chiral monomer units into macromolecules.[65] Once established, chirality would be selected for.[66] Work with organic compounds found on meteorites tends to suggest that chirality is a characteristic of abiogenic synthesis, as amino acids show a left-handed bias, whereas sugars show a predominantly right-handed bias.[67]
So are you conceding that abiogenesis could not have occurred on earth and you are just moving the story telling to outer space?
Quote: Furthermore, your claim that Fox's experiments used temperature conditions not found on Earth is, to put it rather bluntly, bullshit. Fox heated his apparatus to around 180 C. There are thermophiles deep within the Earth (about 3 km down) and in the vicinity of black smokers and other hydrothermal vents that can survive these temperatures.
Again, this is not what I argued. Do these vents all of the sudden cool in order to preserve the lifespan of the peptides like Fox did? I doubt it.
Quote: You also said "Never said the amino acids were not found in nature, I said their pure forms were not, the impure forms would not form peptides."
Using this logic, we should not even exist. If impure forms cannot form peptides, then that means that only pure forms can exist in the human body. Now, unless you are arguing that human beings don't exist in nature...
They exist inside living cells where they have a DNA/RNA system to help them form. So are you suggesting the first life on earth arose inside an already living cell? Let’s stick to the topic at hand, abiogenesis. Impure amino acids could never spontaneously form peptides outside of the cell which is what you seem to believe happened 3.5 billion years ago.
Quote: No, according to historic documents from the time, slaves were treated much worse. Yet Jesus knew about it and did nothing to discourage it, and in fact, left instructions on how they should be treated.
What historical documents? I get the impression you are being purposefully vague here.
Quote: There is no hiostorical evidence that anything in the Book of Exodus ever happened.
National Geographic had a series a couple years ago that showed plenty of historical evidence confirming the exodus. I think you are cherry picking your evidence.
Quote: And Statler, that you apparently believe that there is no basis for the moral conviction that slavery is wrong is all I need to know about you. So we have here a right wing evangelical Christian who believes in magic old men creating a universe POOF 10,000 years ago who also believes that slavery is morally justified. Wonders never cease to amaze.
I never said I don’t have a moral conviction against slavery now did I? I asked for yours, which is a request that has been ignored now twice. So I will just assume you have no logical basis to say slavery is wrong. Fair enough? If this is not fair, please give me one.
May 27, 2011 at 12:48 am (This post was last modified: May 27, 2011 at 12:58 am by orogenicman.)
Response to post #163
1) No. Try again.
2) Some might. Others probably not. But whether or not they do is irrelevant to the fact that even the ones that don't cool in the same way that Fox's experiment did have life thriving on and IN them. Until you can get past this singlular fact, your arguments against peptide forming under such conditions simply does not wash.
3) Are you suggesting that amino acids cannot form in the absence of DNA/RNA? Erm, using your logic, then, we've already discovered life elsewhere in the universe by feat, since amino acids have been found in meteorites. What work are you citing when you claim that impure amino acids can never spontaneously form peptides outside of a cell.
4) You are aware, of course, that many cultures in the Middle East 2,000 years ago allowed slavery, right? You didnt know this? Huh.
5) Yeah, the National Geographic often gets things wrong. There is no evidence in Egypt that Jews were ever held as slaves, certainly not at the time suggested by the bible. None whatsoever. There is no evidence in Egypt for the exodus. None. And this would have been a huge event in Egypt, and would have left a historical mark. But it didn't. There isn't even evidence outside of the book of Exodus that Moses existed.
6) You didn't have to. It was obvious to everyone from your questioning that you think there is no moral justification for believing that slavery is wrong.
By the way, you didn't answer my previous question. Were you ignoring it on purpose?
Quote:I believe that we are about 25 years away (or sooner) from showing in the laboratory that abiogenesis (or something similar) is a valid theory. If you are around when that happens, what will be your response?
Well?
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and seal. It could not be expressed better.'
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
So then you are saying that mono-chiral amino acids can be spontaneously generated on earth? No lab tests have ever shown that can even happen in the lab, much less in nature.
Quote: 2) Some might. Others probably not. But whether or not they do is irrelevant to the fact that even the ones that don't cool in the same way that Fox's experiment did have life thriving on and IN them. Until you can get past this singlular fact, your arguments against peptide forming under such conditions simply does not wash.
Actually life living in these conditions is what is irrelevant. That in no way proves that peptides could form naturally outside of the cell 3.5 million years ago. Let’s stay on topic here.
Quote: 3) Are you suggesting that amino acids cannot form in the absence of DNA/RNA? Erm, using your logic, then, we've already discovered life elsewhere in the universe by feat, since amino acids have been found in meteorites. What work are you citing when you claim that impure amino acids can never spontaneously form peptides outside of a cell.
No I said that amino acids don’t align themselves naturally outside of the cell. The burden of proof is on you since you are the one claiming this is how life began 3.5 billion years ago. First prove this can happen in nature and then prove it did happen in nature 3.5 billion years ago.
Quote: 4) You are aware, of course, that many cultures in the Middle East 2,000 years ago allowed slavery, right? You didnt know this? Huh.
You claimed you had historical documents proving that slavery in biblical times was like American slavery. When I challenged you to produce these documents you change the subject to whether or not slavery existed in those times? I am still waiting for these documents.
Quote: 5) Yeah, the National Geographic often gets things wrong. There is no evidence in Egypt that Jews were ever held as slaves, certainly not at the time suggested by the bible. None whatsoever. There is no evidence in Egypt for the exodus. None. And this would have been a huge event in Egypt, and would have left a historical mark. But it didn't. There isn't even evidence outside of the book of Exodus that Moses existed.
Ahh, so first it was “There is no evidence that the exodus ever occurred.” But after I pointed out that Nat-Geo found writings in Egyptian caves produced by Israelites that dated back to the times of Moses you just say, “Well Nat-Geo is wrong!” So let’s be clear here, there is plenty of evidence for the exodus, there is just no evidence you will accept because you are biased on such matters. As the quote below demonstrates, there is loads of evidence supporting the exodus.
Quote: “Before Moses, the Bible records that the Israelites were enslaved by their Egyptian hosts (Exodus 1:8-14). In the Brooklyn Museum (p.276, fig. 310) resides a papyrus scroll numbered Brooklyn 35:1446 which was acquired in the late 19th century by Charles Wilbour. This dates to the reign of Sobekhotep III, the predecessor of Neferhotep I and so the pharaoh who reigned one generation before Moses. This papyrus is a decree by the pharaoh for a transfer of slaves. Of the 95 names of slaves mentioned in the letter, 50% are Semitic in origin. What is more, it lists the names of these slaves in the original Semitic language and then adds the Egyptian name each had been assigned, which is something the Bible records the Egyptians as doing, cf. Joseph’s name given to him by pharaoh (Genesis 41:45). Some of the Semitic names are biblical and include:- Menahem, Issachar, Asher, and Shiprah (cf. Exodus 1:15-21).
That 50% of the names are Israelite means that there must have been a very large group of them in the Egyptian Delta at that time, corroborating the testimony of Exodus 1:7 which alludes to how numerous the Israelites became. The skeptics look for Israel in the Egypt of the Nineteenth Dynasty and remain sceptics, because the proof is in the Egypt of the Thirteenth Dynasty. The site of Avaris has been uncovered by the Austrian archaeologist Manfred Bietak in the land of Goshen underneath that of
the city of Ramesses. It provides plenty of proof, says Fulton, for Israel’s presence and sufferings in Egypt:
The people who lived in Avaris were not Egyptian but Asiatic Palestinian or Syrian. The finds there included numerous pottery fragments of Palestinian origin. Several factors about the graves were particularly fascinating:- 65% of the burials were of children under 18 months of age, the normal for this period being 20-30%. Could this be due to the killing of the male Israelite children by the Egyptians, recorded in Exodus 1:22? A disproportionately high number of adult women as opposed to adult men are buried here, again pointing to the slaughter of male Israelite babies. There are large numbers of long-haired Asiatic sheep buried which indicate these people to be shepherds. Large numbers of weapons found in the male graves indicate the warlike nature of the people.” – The Rohl Findings summarized by Dr. John Fulton
Even the Ipuwer Papyrus gives a detailed account of the Biblical plagues…
Quote: “‘Plague stalks through the land and blood is everywhere … the river is blood. Does a man drink from it? As a human he rejects it. He thirsts for water …. Nay, but gates, columns and walls are consumed with fire …. Nay but men are few. He that lays his brother in the ground is everywhere …. Nay but the son of the high-born man is no longer to be recognized …. The stranger people from outside are come into Egypt …. Nay, but corn has perished everywhere. People are stripped of clothing, perfume and oil. Everyone says “there is no more”. The storehouse is bare …. It has come to this. The king has been taken away by poor men.’
Quote: 6) You didn't have to. It was obvious to everyone from your questioning that you think there is no moral justification for believing that slavery is wrong.
So you dodged my question a third time? I have a moral justification as to why slavery is wrong, I have asked for you to give one three times now and you have not. So is it safe for me to assume you have none? If you can’t justify why slavery is wrong, then why would you object to it being in the Bible?
Quote: I believe that we are about 25 years away (or sooner) from showing in the laboratory that abiogenesis (or something similar) is a valid theory. If you are around when that happens, what will be your response?
I already answered that, it is impossible to provide logical confirmation of abiogenesis in the lab, so I would see no reason to drop my faith and run with something that has no logical basis.
(June 1, 2011 at 11:42 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: So then you are saying that mono-chiral amino acids can be spontaneously generated on earth? No lab tests have ever shown that can even happen in the lab, much less in nature.
It is your claim that mono-chiral amino acids cannot be spontaneously generated on Earth. As such, it is your claim to back up. Simply saying that it is so doesn't make it so. I've seen nothing in the literature that backs up your claim.
Statler Wrote:Actually life living in these conditions is what is irrelevant. That in no way proves that peptides could form naturally outside of the cell 3.5 million years ago. Let’s stay on topic here.
Actually, it is very relevant. We know that life existed on Earth 3.5 billionb years ago, and since it did, it was obviously using peptides to FORM the cell wall. Furthermore,
Statler Wrote:No I said that amino acids don’t align themselves naturally outside of the cell. The burden of proof is on you since you are the one claiming this is how life began 3.5 billion years ago. First prove this can happen in nature and then prove it did happen in nature 3.5 billion years ago.
Erm, no as per the bolded statement, you've once again made a claim that you haven't supported.
Statler Wrote:You claimed you had historical documents proving that slavery in biblical times was like American slavery. When I challenged you to produce these documents you change the subject to whether or not slavery existed in those times? I am still waiting for these documents.
You'll have to point out where I said I had documents proving slavery in historical times was like American slavery. I said it was likely much worse in biblical times than it was 170 years ago. But let me ask you a question. Do you deny that slavery occurred in the Middle East in biblical times? Are you denying that Abraham had slaves?
Statler Wrote:Ahh, so first it was “There is no evidence that the exodus ever occurred.” But after I pointed out that Nat-Geo found writings in Egyptian caves produced by Israelites that dated back to the times of Moses you just say, “Well Nat-Geo is wrong!” So let’s be clear here, there is plenty of evidence for the exodus, there is just no evidence you will accept because you are biased on such matters. As the quote below demonstrates, there is loads of evidence supporting the exodus.
Once again, you've made a claim you haven't substantiated. I did a search for such a national geographic article and didn't find it. So if you've got it handy, perhaps you could use it to back up your claim. Furthermore, perhaps you could explain how, if it exists, evidence for Israelit writings in an Egyptian cave prove that the exodus exists. And finally, it is religionists that claim the exodus exists. As such, it is their claim to prove. It is not my claim to disprove.
Quote: “Before Moses, the Bible records that the Israelites were enslaved by their Egyptian hosts (Exodus 1:8-14). In the Brooklyn Museum (p.276, fig. 310) resides a papyrus scroll numbered Brooklyn 35:1446 which was acquired in the late 19th century by Charles Wilbour. This dates to the reign of Sobekhotep III, the predecessor of Neferhotep I and so the pharaoh who reigned one generation before Moses. This papyrus is a decree by the pharaoh for a transfer of slaves. Of the 95 names of slaves mentioned in the letter, 50% are Semitic in origin. What is more, it lists the names of these slaves in the original Semitic language and then adds the Egyptian name each had been assigned, which is something the Bible records the Egyptians as doing, cf. Joseph’s name given to him by pharaoh (Genesis 41:45). Some of the Semitic names are biblical and include:- Menahem, Issachar, Asher, and Shiprah (cf. Exodus 1:15-21).
It is dated to the reign of Amenemhet III. And according to this, it is not a decreee. It is a list of names of people in a prison or labor camp. Whther of not they were foreigners, it still says nothing about whether the exodus occurred.
Statler Wrote:That 50% of the names are Israelite
According to who? Pat Robertson? It's a list of names of a possible prison or labor group. It proves nothing.
Statler Wrote:Even the Ipuwer Papyrus gives a detailed account of the Biblical plagues…
Even if this were true, so what?
Statler Wrote:So you dodged my question a third time? I have a moral justification as to why slavery is wrong, I have asked for you to give one three times now and you have not. So is it safe for me to assume you have none? If you can’t justify why slavery is wrong, then why would you object to it being in the Bible?
No Statler. You are not going to turn your own lame argument around and use it against me. Any moral person knows slavery is wrong. It is a violation of basic human rights that all people possess. I don't have to justify my position that slavery is wrong. You have to justify why it is NOT, since that is apparently your position. And Statler, I don't object that it is in the bible. You've missed the point entirely. The point is that many of the people of the bible (Abraham, for instance) were slave holders, and as such why would ANY moral person follow the teachings of these people?
Statler Wrote:I already answered that, it is impossible to provide logical confirmation of abiogenesis in the lab, so I would see no reason to drop my faith and run with something that has no logical basis.
I would say that you are going to be very embarrassed when you are proven wrong, but you are in such denial about everything else that I shouldn't expect you to accept any evidence that goes counter to your religious beliefs.
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and seal. It could not be expressed better.'
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
Quote: It is your claim that mono-chiral amino acids cannot be spontaneously generated on Earth. As such, it is your claim to back up. Simply saying that it is so doesn't make it so. I've seen nothing in the literature that backs up your claim.
You keep playing three card Monty with the burden of proof here. We know that mono-chirality is necessary for life. You are asserting that not only can life spontaneously generate on earth, but it did. So the burden of proof is actually on you to demonstrate this. This will be a tough task considering no lab experiment has ever resulted in mono-chiral amino acids and we have never observed them to appear in nature outside the cell. Best of luck.
Quote: Actually, it is very relevant. We know that life existed on Earth 3.5 billionb years ago, and since it did, it was obviously using peptides to FORM the cell wall. Furthermore,
What? Again, if this life is using amino acids to form anything it is using DNA to do so.
Quote: Erm, no as per the bolded statement, you've once again made a claim that you haven't supported.
I don’t really have to support it because the burden of proof is on you (you are the one asserting it did happen). We have never observed it to happen, so to say it happened is just a matter of faith. This is all fine and dandy, but I already have my own faith.
Quote: You'll have to point out where I said I had documents proving slavery in historical times was like American slavery. I said it was likely much worse in biblical times than it was 170 years ago.
Ok, well then where are these documents proving it was much worse than American Slavery? You have still produced nothing.
Quote: But let me ask you a question. Do you deny that slavery occurred in the Middle East in biblical times? Are you denying that Abraham had slaves?
Exodus records the fact that slavery happened in those days. Sure Abraham had servants, where in scripture does it say Abraham was perfect and sinless?
Quote: Once again, you've made a claim you haven't substantiated. I did a search for such a national geographic article and didn't find it. So if you've got it handy, perhaps you could use it to back up your claim. Furthermore, perhaps you could explain how, if it exists, evidence for Israelit writings in an Egyptian cave prove that the exodus exists. And finally, it is religionists that claim the exodus exists. As such, it is their claim to prove. It is not my claim to disprove.
I already gave you plenty of evidence, including the Rohl findings; however I believe the show I was watching was called “the Naked Archeologist”.
It is dated to the reign of Amenemhet III. And according to this, it is not a decreee. It is a list of names of people in a prison or labor camp. Whther of not they were foreigners, it still says nothing about whether the exodus occurred.
Well many archeologists such as Rohl are finding that the Egyptian Chronology was misinterpreted because several of the dynasties that were thought to be successive were actually parallel. So there were people working in labor camps (slaves) who were from Israel? Exodus doesn’t say this?
Quote: According to who? Pat Robertson? It's a list of names of a possible prison or labor group. It proves nothing.
I thought it made it pretty clear that their native names were listed along with their Egyptian names (something Exodus mentions) and these native names were Hebrew which means they were Israelites.
Quote: Even if this were true, so what?
It is true. So we have an Egyptian describing the very events which are also described in Exodus and you say there is no evidence to support the accounts in Exodus? This is eyewitness corroboration, which is a very solid form of evidence.
Quote: No Statler. You are not going to turn your own lame argument around and use it against me. Any moral person knows slavery is wrong. It is a violation of basic human rights that all people possess. I don't have to justify my position that slavery is wrong. You have to justify why it is NOT, since that is apparently your position. And Statler, I don't object that it is in the bible. You've missed the point entirely. The point is that many of the people of the bible (Abraham, for instance) were slave holders, and as such why would ANY moral person follow the teachings of these people?
Slavery violates human rights that all people possess and have always possessed? Where did these rights come from then?
I am not arguing that it is not wrong; I have a completely logical reason for believing why it is wrong. Just because Abraham did it does not mean it was condoned in the Bible. David had someone killed, and that does not mean the Bible condoned that action. These were not perfect men, which I think attests to the validity of these stories. Now if you can find where Jesus, who was perfect, owned slaves then maybe I would see your point.
Quote: I would say that you are going to be very embarrassed when you are proven wrong, but you are in such denial about everything else that I shouldn't expect you to accept any evidence that goes counter to your religious beliefs.
I find It very interesting you used a form of the word “proof” here. How can you prove something happened 3.5 billion years ago?
Statler Wrote:You keep playing three card Monty with the burden of proof here. We know that mono-chirality is necessary for life. You are asserting that not only can life spontaneously generate on earth, but it did. So the burden of proof is actually on you to demonstrate this. This will be a tough task considering no lab experiment has ever resulted in mono-chiral amino acids and we have never observed them to appear in nature outside the cell. Best of luck.
No one here has said that mono-chirality is not necessary for life. You have repeatedly said that mono-chiral amino acids cannot be spontaneously generated on Earth. That is your claim. Not mine. Back up your claim of drop it.
Statler Wrote:What? Again, if this life is using amino acids to form anything it is using DNA to do so.
Did you read the paper? Of course you didn't. We were discussing peptides. Did you miss something?
Statler Wrote:I don’t really have to support it because the burden of proof is on you (you are the one asserting it did happen). We have never observed it to happen, so to say it happened is just a matter of faith. This is all fine and dandy, but I already have my own faith.
Indeed you do. Apparently you have faith that you can make a reasonable argument without supporting your claims. You said:
Statler Wrote:No I said that amino acids don’t align themselves naturally outside of the cell.
Again, this is YOUR claim. You also claim "we have never observed it". Again, YOUR claim.
Statler Wrote:Ok, well then where are these documents proving it was much worse than American Slavery? You have still produced nothing.
You really know nothing about the history of slavery, do you? I would wager that it is easier to list who didn't own slaves during the bronze age, except I can't think of a single culture that didn't. Can you?
Statler Wrote:Exodus records the fact that slavery happened in those days. Sure Abraham had servants, where in scripture does it say Abraham was perfect and sinless?
Servants? You mean like Benson on "soap"? I don't think so. Erm, Abraham had a famous child with one of his slaves, according to the Bible. Can you think of any historical accounts other than the Bible that described slavery in the region during Biblical times?
Rohl findings? He wrote an entire book trying to pinpoint the "legendary" garden of Eden. Do you really think very many archaeologists actually take his work seriously?
The past 20 years has seen a huge amount of effort going into excavating and studying ancient Egypt's labor force, and the fact of the matter is that most of it consisted of Egyptian laborers. The fact of the matter is that if the Israelites had ever been held in bondage for hundreds of years, as described in the book of Exodus, there would be a rather sizable cemetary holding the bodies of all these Israelites. The fact of the matter is that no cemetaries containing the graves of such Israelites have ever been discovered. In fact, the Egyptians, who probably we better at chronicling their history never once discuss the exodus, or having Israelite slaves.
Statler Wrote:I thought it made it pretty clear that their native names were listed along with their Egyptian names (something Exodus mentions) and these native names were Hebrew which means they were Israelites.
Then perhaps you can provide us with a list of these names so we can see if theiy are Israelite names, so we don't have to just take your word for it.
Statler Wrote:It is true. So we have an Egyptian...
Crash, boom, bang. Erm, you have one parchment containing the names of either laborers or prisoners from some3where in Asia. Sorry, this doesn't prove anything.
Statler Wrote:Just because Abraham did it does not mean it was condoned in the Bible.
Wow, that's a pretty miopic viewpoint. Odd how you will support "biblical' archaeological findings when they support your rather narrow creationist viewpoint and ignore the rest.
And Statler, the "proof" to which I referred had to do with the validity of some version of the theory of abiogenesis, the idea that life can evolve out of primordeal organic compounds uner the right conditions.
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and seal. It could not be expressed better.'
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
No one here has said that mono-chirality is not necessary for life. You have repeatedly said that mono-chiral amino acids cannot be spontaneously generated on Earth. That is your claim. Not mine. Back up your claim of drop it.
Well I guess it is easy enough for me to do so. There has never been a natural or intelligently guided process outside of the living cell observed in nature nor in the laboratory that can produce only the mono-chiral amino acids that are necessary for life. There that did it. Now if you believe this is incorrect, the burden is on you to demonstrate otherwise.
(June 2, 2011 at 2:28 am)orogenicman Wrote:
Did you read the paper? Of course you didn't. We were discussing peptides. Did you miss something?
On the contrary, did you read your own article? If you did, then you would have known that they intelligently designed the peptides to go against their natural tendencies and to self align in a manner that is not biologically normal. So this in no way proves that this could even happen naturally.
Quote: Self-assembly occurs through hydrogen bonding between the peptides, but in a manner contrary to their natural tendency because of the presence of the dendrons. Instead of hydrogen bonding in an antiparallel arrangement as peptides do, the peptidic dendrons arrange in a parallel manner. "The mechanism of organization is different from those known in biology," Percec says.
(June 2, 2011 at 2:28 am)orogenicman Wrote:
Again, this is YOUR claim. You also claim "we have never observed it". Again, YOUR claim.
What you are asking for is ridiculous; you are asking me to prove the negative position here. Am I supposed to provide a paper saying, “We have never observed amino acids to align themselves naturally”? That would be silly. You are the one saying not only can it happen but it did, so it is up to you to prove this. I don’t believe that unicorns are real. Why not? Well we have never directly observed them. So neither do I believe amino acids to be able to self assemble naturally outside of the cell. Why not? Well we have never directly observed this.
(June 2, 2011 at 2:28 am)orogenicman Wrote:
You really know nothing about the history of slavery, do you? I would wager that it is easier to list who didn't own slaves during the bronze age, except I can't think of a single culture that didn't. Can you?
I am still waiting for those historical documents you claimed to have proving slavery in Bible times was worse than American slavery….still wafting…..waiting.
(June 2, 2011 at 2:28 am)orogenicman Wrote:
Servants? You mean like Benson on "soap"? I don't think so. Erm, Abraham had a famous child with one of his slaves, according to the Bible. Can you think of any historical accounts other than the Bible that described slavery in the region during Biblical times?
Huh? Some translations say “servant” yes, probably because they were released after 6 years and given financial support upon their release, hardly synonymous with American slavery if you ask me.
(June 2, 2011 at 2:28 am)orogenicman Wrote:
Rohl findings? He wrote an entire book trying to pinpoint the "legendary" garden of Eden. Do you really think very many archaeologists actually take his work seriously?
Yep, many do. Talk about circularity, you don’t accept the historical claims made in the Bible because you claim there is no evidence to support them but then you turn around and bash an archeologist for investigating and seeing if he can find evidence.
(June 2, 2011 at 2:28 am)orogenicman Wrote:
The past 20 years has seen a huge amount of effort going into excavating and studying ancient Egypt's labor force, and the fact of the matter is that most of it consisted of Egyptian laborers. The fact of the matter is that if the Israelites had ever been held in bondage for hundreds of years, as described in the book of Exodus, there would be a rather sizable cemetary holding the bodies of all these Israelites. The fact of the matter is that no cemetaries containing the graves of such Israelites have ever been discovered. In fact, the Egyptians, who probably we better at chronicling their history never once discuss the exodus, or having Israelite slaves.
Except according to the Rohl findings, large cemeteries were found containing mostly women and babies. These were thought to be Israelites because of the sheep they raised. So stop ignoring evidence and then asserting it does not exist because you ignored it. You could at least just admit you don’t accept it.
(June 2, 2011 at 2:28 am)orogenicman Wrote:
Crash, boom, bang. Erm, you have one parchment containing the names of either laborers or prisoners from some3where in Asia. Sorry, this doesn't prove anything.
I was talking about the piece written by Ipuwer (an Egyptian), not the slave decree which you seem to still be referring to. Crash and boom is right.
(June 2, 2011 at 2:28 am)orogenicman Wrote:
Wow, that's a pretty miopic viewpoint. Odd how you will support "biblical' archaeological findings when they support your rather narrow creationist viewpoint and ignore the rest.
Why do you keep acting like I am saying there were no slaves in Bible times? I have made two assertions you seem to have completely missed. 1. Slaves in those days were not similar to American Slaves since Hebrew makes no distinction between the word “slave” and “servant”. 2. Just because Abraham owned slaves or servants it does not mean the Bible is condoning the act of owning slaves. So stop trying to prove something I am not even arguing against.
Quote:Meanwhile, back on Earth at the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology in Cambridge, UK, have created synthetic molecules that copy genetic material. The enzyme, tC19Z, that has been synthesised could be an artificial version of one of the first enzymes that ever existed on our planet three billion years ago -- and a clue to how life itself got started. Their goal is to create fully self-replicating RNA molecules in the lab.
