Most British scientists: Richard Dawkins' work misrepresents science

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by paddoboy, Nov 7, 2016.

  1. river

    Messages:
    9,791
    Pad read the book for your self .

    Stop being guided by what anyone else thinks pad . you are constantly doing this .

    Are you that insecure you can't read for yourself and develope your own opinion ?

    I question books I read , all the time , many people do . I don't find it a big deal .

    Your able to read , so what's the hang up with reading ?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    river your constant being obtuse and lying fools no one.
    You obviously have the "hang up"with books and read...you also claimed no good [or words to that effect came from the Internet]
    Plenty of nonsense on the net, just as there is plenty of nonsense in some books, particularly the ones you read.
    No, I won't read a book about some fool who indulges in the occult....No, I won't read some book about some fool who claims Aliens have dropped nuclear bombs on Mars....No I wont read a book about some idiot who claims that magnetic fields rule the universe.
    I would rather be "guided" as you put it, by reputable scientists then by certified loonies whose books you read.
     
    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. river

    Messages:
    9,791
    Pad you are over the line here .
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. river

    Messages:
    9,791
    You read nothing pad , what your doing is trying to put your problems onto someone else .
     
  8. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,670
    No we don't.

    Humpty Dumpty has spoken
    I agree Poe

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    Ignoring our troll friend.......
    a nice article.....
    Chemists claim to have solved riddle of how life began on Earth
    March 18, 2015 by Bob Yirka report

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Chemistry in a post-meteoritic-impact scenario. A series of post-impact environmental events are shown along with the chemistry (boxed) proposed to occur as a consequence of these events. a, Dissolution of atmospherically produced hydrogen cyanide results in the conversion of vivianite (the anoxic corrosion product of the meteoritic inclusion schreibersite) into mixed ferrocyanide salts and phosphate salts, with counter cations being provided through neutralization and ion-exchange reactions with bedrock and other meteoritic oxides and salts. b, Partial evaporation results in the deposition of the least-soluble salts over a wide area, and further evaporation deposits the most-soluble salts in smaller, lower-lying areas. c, After complete evaporation, impact or geothermal heating results in thermal metamorphosis of the evaporite layer, and the generation of feedstock precursor salts (in bold). d, Rainfall on higher ground (left) leads to rivulets or streams that flow downhill, sequentially leaching feedstocks from the thermally metamorphosed evaporite layer. Solar irradiation drives photoredox chemistry in the streams. Convergent synthesis can result when streams with different reaction histories merge (right), as illustrated here for the potential synthesis of arabinose aminooxazoline at the confluence of two streams that contained glycolaldehyde, and leached different feedstocks before merging. Credit: (c) Nature Chemistry (2015) doi:10.1038/nchem.2202
    (Phys.org)—A team of chemists working at the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, at Cambridge in the UK believes they have solved the mystery of how it was possible for life to begin on Earth over four billion years ago. In their paper published in the journal Nature Chemistry, the team describes how they were able to map reactions that produced two and three-carbon sugars, amino acids, ribonucleotides and glycerol—the material necessary for metabolism and for creating the building blocks of proteins and ribonucleic acid molecules and also for allowing for the creation of lipids that form cell membranes.



    Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-03-chemists-riddle-life-began-earth.html#jCp


    http://www.nature.com/nchem/journal/v7/n4/full/nchem.2202.html
    Abstract
    A minimal cell can be thought of as comprising informational, compartment-forming and metabolic subsystems. To imagine the abiotic assembly of such an overall system, however, places great demands on hypothetical prebiotic chemistry. The perceived differences and incompatibilities between these subsystems have led to the widely held assumption that one or other subsystem must have preceded the others. Here we experimentally investigate the validity of this assumption by examining the assembly of various biomolecular building blocks from prebiotically plausible intermediates and one-carbon feedstock molecules. We show that precursors of ribonucleotides, amino acids and lipids can all be derived by the reductive homologation of hydrogen cyanide and some of its derivatives, and thus that all the cellular subsystems could have arisen simultaneously through common chemistry. The key reaction steps are driven by ultraviolet light, use hydrogen sulfide as the reductant and can be accelerated by Cu(I)–Cu(II) photoredox cycling.

    Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-03-chemists-riddle-life-began-earth.html#jCp
     
  10. river

    Messages:
    9,791

    Disagree

    Yes we do .

    Without any purpose we Humans are in limbo.

    Humans become then venerable to manipulation of control by any being on Earth and beyond .
     
  11. river

    Messages:
    9,791
    But what gives life intelligence , an intellect .

    Hence organic chemistry .
     
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    Evolution.
     
  13. river

    Messages:
    9,791
    Evolution

    Now why does evolution chemically happen ?
     
  14. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,271
    Hi River, many folk may think you are lying when you say things like that. I don't but can you understand how folk could see it that way.
    Paddoboy obviously reads something so to say he reads nothing is wrong, I would not say you lie but what you say is wrong.
    Alex
     
  15. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,670
    OK

    No we don't NEED.

    While
    we often do, we don't NEED.

    Never been to limbo.

    What's the weather like there?

    Is it close to purgatory?

    Do we?

    The shield of purpose and laser sword of truth protects us?

    Yah.

    Dumpty and Poe

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!






     
  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    You playing your usual games again river?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Evolution is a fact lad that we observe.....Abiogenisis is another fact lad, but we lack the exact know how and methodology.
    The following may explain it to you....hopefully.
    https://www.quora.com/Why-does-evolution-really-occur-Why-do-species-adapt-to-survive

    Evolution happens because it can't not happen. Evolutionary change is a property of life. I've gone into more detail about this here: Madalyn Zimbric's answer to What exactly is evolution?

    When thinking about adaptation, it helps to turn it around. It isn't that a species adapts, it's that the environment selects. Organisms are constantly producing offspring with varying traits, whether through mutation, recombination, or some other mechanism. The environment kills some of these offspring and handicaps others. The force that causes adaptation is that of the environment on the organism, not some creative force within the organism.

    Organisms adapt because their offspring vary in their ability to survive and reproduce in the environment. If the environment were perfect and every child was able to reproduce equally well there would be no adaptation. Since there are no perfect environments, species adapt.

    Evolution isn't this.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!





    Evolution is more like this. (This is a quality control test. If the car part doesn't "survive in its environment" it gets tossed out.)

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!






     
  17. river

    Messages:
    9,791
    We do need .

    Purgatory ? snowing , love it .
     
  18. river

    Messages:
    9,791
    I get evolution pad . no problem .

    It is in the end about intellect , the awareness .

    A snakes venom , why some are more potent than others , and why ? not why but how ?

    The tia-pan in the northern part of Austrialia is the deadlest snake in the world , because it bites several times . but gives little venom .

    The Brown snake bites less but gives more venom . but just as deadly .

    My question is what is the root of the difference , between the two ?

    Understand me ?
     
  19. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    Evolution.

    All too well.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    If you don't like the answers then google the net, or get a reputable book.
     
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647


    Intelligent Design and Young Earth Creationist organisations often misrepresent evolution by stating that it does not explain the origin of life. This is a dishonest tactic. Of course the theory of evolution doesn't explain the origin of life. It is not supposed to. The origin of life or abiogenesis is within the field of chemistry not biology. Evolution explains the diversity of life within the field of biology not chemistry.

    Neil deGrasse Tyson takes us on a journey. A journey towards life of Earth.
     
  22. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,923
    You may say that non-life has the potential to become life, but it's unnecessary to use a being to explain it. It's chemistry. In fact, I would say it's the exact opposite of a being, it has no center, no intelligence, and it's passive in nature.
     
  23. river

    Messages:
    9,791
    Evolution ; yes

    But Evolution how so ?

    Does then the snake think ? oh my venom is not good enough , therefore the snake increases its venom .

    Now my point is these snakes have intelligence .
     

Share This Page