Chemistry plus Biology = Abiogenesis:

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by paddoboy, Jul 1, 2019.

  1. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    No.
    Its DNA does not deal in functions. It does what it does empirically, without abstraction.
    In the standard creationist arguments, everything after the word "if" is bs.
    The detail of the missing transcript is enough for one post. No one can go into detailed argument with the contents of a damn video without putting hours and pages into it - that's why frauds use video: it puts the work on others.
    The detail of you declaring the obvious and common sense to be "laughable" is telling. So is the evocation of the old canard about chance-built peptide strings, apparently from the video. But digging that bs out of a video and refuting it from its assumptions would take an evening, not even counting watching the damn thing in the first place.
    Video without written and accountable argument is a charlatan's medium.
    And since style is all you've got, misrepresenting mine seems important to you. Certainly more comfortable for you than argument of your own.
    Meanwhile, your attempt to frame my requirement of a transcript as a demand for a spoon fed summary is noted - the recourse to personal attack is automatic with creationists, and never without misrepresentation. That's how creationists roll.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    My apologies wegs! We did have another obviously female member here who was forever forthcoming with reputable professional science data from renowned science figures, when some contentious point was being discussed. Her name was tashja! Sorry for the mix up!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Gee, my old mate /s are going to have some fun with that boo boo

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I have also been absent for a while, after finding another forum, but decided to return after a request from exchemist.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Q-reeus Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,695
    wegs, check out my p1 #2, and p3 #53. I was a sort of fundamentalist Christian for quite some years, going from one Zionist Christian outfit to another. Neither one accepted e.g. Trinity, eternal torment in some Hell, and similar stupid mainstream Christian dogmas I would never have swallowed. Eventually though the weight of evidence, internal contradictions in the bible, and external evidence esp. archeological, left me no honest choice but to abandon it totally. No other religion offered any real handle on reality either. I became agnostic, heading towards atheism. But decided to review ID arguments in depth, while also looking at accounts of claimed supernatural events of all sorts (I put UFO's under that label). The outcome was a conviction there has to be some other realm of existence transcending our physical one.
     
    wegs likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    Spontaneous generation isn't exactly something that science can prove...yet so sounds to me, like it can only be considered speculation.

    But, there's the matter of maggots forming out of what seems to be ''nowhere,'' in a pile of rotting meat. Hmm.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    But, that might have a verifiable explanation that I'm too lazy to seek. lol

    In other words, are you suggesting that a "determined "universe is the only idea whereby abiogenesis makes sense?
     
  8. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    Okay.

    I went through this.

    I'm not agnostic, but I lean in agreement with you, on that I'm fairly ''convicted'' in that there is a higher power, who for me, is in the form of a personal God. (unlike Deism, I mean)

    Don't mean to derail the topic, but now I see where you stand, and your posts (and the ad homs slung at you lol) will make sense.
     
    Q-reeus likes this.
  9. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Got that. No disagreement

    No no no its physics

    No no no - lowest point, no satisfaction involved

    OK, so why bring it up?

    No no no, it's physics

    No no no, unconsciously implies the happening is running loose from a entity which has a ability to be conscious

    True but but but better expressed, I think, changes POTENTIAL energy in KINETIC energy which we can harness, via various processes, into STORED energy (batteries) and DIRECTLY USEABLE energy

    No no no, already covered

    No no no, not looks like, don't call a spade a shovel, give it its name PHYSICS

    No no no, no behaviour, try happenings

    No no no, NOT the Universe (the Universe is just stuff). Lay it at the feet of the operating system my ol' friend PHYSICS

    Did I use to many no's?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2019
  10. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    lmao!!!

    Looks like I missed some good discussions.
     
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    She was amazing!!
     
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Taking into account the positive nature of Abiogenesis, including the as yet unknown pathways, and the very informative videos here showing the true science, and the advances, its painfully obvious [well painful for our ID supporters] that the "god of the gaps" keeps getting smaller and smaller and smaller, with absolutely nothing supporting their ideas and misinformation lies.
     
  13. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Inevitably? Wonder why? Wonder no more

    Ingredients available and suitable conditions became available

    How about that?

    How did the Sun appear?
    How did planets form?
    How did galaxies form?
    Etc etc......

    Ingredients available and suitable conditions became available

    PHYSICS - opportunistic system

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    I haven't really heard it explained like this ...''opportunistic.''
     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    from the OP.....
    My contention based on mainstream science is that Abiogenesis is the only scientific answer to how life first started in the universe. It certainly to the best of our knowledge was not created from or at the BB. The BB was the evolution of space and time [as we know them] at a time of t+10-43 seconds. From there and though a process that was a result of decreasing temperatures and pressures, and expansion, our first atomic nuclei was created at around 3 minutes. 380,000 years later, temps and pressures were such that the first light elements of hydrogen and helium were constructed. Still no life!!!

    From there, stars, galaxies etc started to form...time frame around 400 million years post BB...still no life. From there the story gets more familiar and far more validated with eventually the formation of life from non life....or Abiogenesis. Again there is no other scientific answer. In other words, at one time there was no life, then there was.

    While we certainly are still rather ignorant as to the exact process of Abiogenesis, we are just as certain that it is the only scientific answer.

    An interesting account at WIKI.....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

    starting with...."Origin of life" redirects here. For non-scientific views on the origins of life, see Creation myth."

    "Abiogenesis, or informally the origin of life, is the natural process by which lifehas arisen from non-living matter, such as simple organic compounds. While the details of this process are still unknown, the prevailing scientific hypothesis is that the transition from non-living to living entities was not a single event, but a gradual process of increasing complexity that involved molecular self-replication, self-assembly, autocatalysis, and the emergence of cell membranes.[9][10][11] Although the occurrence of abiogenesis is uncontroversial among scientists, there is no single, generally accepted model for the origin of life, and this article presents several principles and hypotheses for how abiogenesis could have occurred".

    And an interesting account here......http://www.rationalskepticism.org/chemistry/calilasseia-78-papers-on-abiogenesis-t845.html
    "Blind faith" in chemical evolution? Guess who hasn't read the scientific literature!

    Here's 78 scientific papers from the abiogenesis literature, that demonstrate conclusively that "blind faith" doesn't apply. Instead, what applies is direct experimental confirmation that the postulated chemical reactions WORK, and work under the prebiotic conditions postulated to have been present on the early Earth ...

    List of 78 papers at link......

    LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
    The best that can be said for any non scientific answer or religious/ID myth, is that the BB and our laws of physics including GR, say nothing about the time at t+10-43 seconds. In other words the BB tells us how the universe/spacetime [as we know them] evolved at that t+10-43 second point. But again as indicated, any answer is simply based on unsupported myth.
    Scientifically speaking though, we do have reasonable scientific speculation at that time and it is pretty well summed up here.....https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230969681_The_Universe_The_ultimate_free_lunch
     
  16. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,959
    Of all the woo things Write4U posts, this has got to be the woo-ist. (And that's saying a lot.)

    Yes, that's right. In "Write4U's science 101", Water is motivated by satisfaction.


    Also:
    - there are four humors in the body.
    - the brain's primary purpose is to cool the blood.
    - the sun is a chariot of fire crossing the sky.
     
  17. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,959
    No it isn't.
    For one, Pi is not a function; it is a constant.
    For two: while any constant can be used in any theory you like, saying such a constant is a "function of that theory" is just word salad.
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,959
    You should probably know that there are plenty of belief systems where God is not conscious or sentient. They are often called things like "Force of Nature", or "First Cause".

    What you espouse is the same thing, but you couch it in word salad instead of being honest with yourself about your belief in such a God.
     
  19. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Was the least anthropomorphic word I thought of

    Stuff happens - reason? - because stuff happens - cause - physics - why - because? - just because

    It is totally circular

    MY reasoning WHY it is totally circular?

    BECAUSE PHYSICS AND ENERGY HAVE ALWAYS EXISTED

    We have no way to crack open the ALWAYS. Not even a Planck's length crack. WHY?

    MY reasoning? ALWAYS EXISTED is such totally closed fixed unchangeable system BECAUSE it has reached a point where no further changes are possible

    Was there a period before our current state when possibilities existed? Unknown

    Have we reached a point where no further changes are possible? Unknown

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    ''Stuff'' does happen, but that's a lot of stuff to happen rather abruptly...suddenly. Going from nothing to life? Hmm.

    Until we know more though, to be continued...
     
  21. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,959
    OMG, you finally get it. You are that superstitious caveman - seeing Gods where the rest of us see physics.
     
  22. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    I would contend abruptly in the context of
    1/ the billions of processes occurring
    2/ the period (in truth unknown) over which the processes occured

    Also from nothing to life, well not exactly

    More like Bolt being born and going on to be the fastest runner - gradually

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,959
    Presumably the precursor is lipids forming "bubbles" that contained hydrocarbon chemistry long enough, in close enough proximity (as opposed to freely diffusing in the ocean), for complex organic (though not living) chemistry to occur.

    Eventually, some moderately complex molecules combined in ways that made more of themselves. These spread rapidly (still not life).

    Even more eventually, some molecules got so complex that they could encode blueprints of themselves.
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2019
    Write4U likes this.

Share This Page