Originally posted by lee_merrill
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Natural Science 301 Guidelines
This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
New fossils push back the indisputable origin of life
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostBut the Late Heavy Bombardment presents a problem to this scenario! See my response to rogue06...
Blessings,
Lee
Can you present evidence that your speculative Creationist speculations are true.
Still waiting . . .
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThis speculation does not address the facts of abiogenesis origins of life. When continental formation began with crustal spreading zones, oceans forming and sedimentary deposits the conditions were right for abiogenesis to take place. There were millions of years in this time frame for life to begin. The only criteria is the environmental conditions must be present.
Blessings,
Lee
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostI agree that it's unlikely that life could originate near a hydrothermal vent, and yet if life originated in the Hadean era, it's unlikely to have developed on land! Given all the meteorite bombardment that occurred shortly afterward.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostOf course there are competing theories about life first arising from shallow ponds and hot springs, IIRC, largely because such locations would be rich in nitrogen which ancient seas might have been low on.
...
So be careful of doing battle with the very sort of evidence that caused the shift from deep sea vents as if this were something new and unexplained. You can quickly find yourself combatting straw men if you end up battling an idea that is losing support.
Blessings,
Lee
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostWell, they say now that the origin of life probably happened in the Hadean era:
So the origin of life would probably be in the oceans (near smokers?), where the large quantity of water would tend to dilute any reactions.
Also, we may note that reducing the timeframe for the origin of life by 220 million years doesn't leave much time for the origin of life! And having life originate in the Hadean era is going to be more difficult.
Blessings,
Lee
There are no known rock formation dated in the Hasean. The formations described in this research are Archean.
As with other threads there is a problem with your speculation to justify an ID Creationist belief not science.Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-11-2021, 10:06 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Of course there are competing theories about life first arising from shallow ponds and hot springs, IIRC, largely because such locations would be rich in nitrogen which ancient seas might have been low on.
For instance, here's the abstract from a paper on just that subject Nitrogen Oxide Concentrations in Natural Waters on Early Earth (the entire paper is available by clicking on the hyperlink) from 2019.
Abstract
A key challenge in origins-of-life studies is estimating the abundances of species relevant to the chemical pathways proposed to have contributed to the emergence of life on early Earth. Dissolved nitrogen oxide anions ( ), in particular nitrate ( ) and nitrite ( ), have been invoked in diverse origins-of-life chemistry, from the oligomerization of RNA to the emergence of protometabolism. Recent work has calculated the supply of from the prebiotic atmosphere to the ocean and reported steady state [ ] to be high across all plausible parameter space. These findings rest on the assumption that is stable in natural waters unless processed at a hydrothermal vent. Here, we show that is unstable in the reducing environment of early Earth. Sinks due to ultraviolet photolysis and reactions with reduced iron (Fe2+) suppress [ ] by several orders of magnitude relative to past predictions. For pH = 6.5–8 and T = 0–50 °C, we find that it is most probable that [ ] <1μM in the prebiotic ocean. On the other hand, prebiotic ponds with favorable drainage characteristics may have sustained [ ] ≥1μM. As on modern Earth, most on prebiotic Earth should have been present as , due to its much greater stability. These findings inform the kind of prebiotic chemistries that would have been possible on early Earth. We discuss the implications for proposed prebiotic chemistries and highlight the need for further studies of kinetics to reduce the considerable uncertainties in predicting [ ] on early Earth.
And here's a nice piece on both the history and current state OOL research from Nature last year: How the first life on Earth survived its biggest threat -- water: Living things depend on water, but it breaks down DNA and other key molecules. So how did the earliest cells deal with the water paradox? where the researchers posit even shallower water:
The emerging evidence has caused many researchers to abandon the idea that life emerged in the oceans and instead focus on land environments, in places that were alternately wet and dry. The shift is hardly unanimous, but scientists who support the idea of a terrestrial beginning say it offers a solution to a long-recognized paradox: that although water is essential for life, it is also destructive to life’s core components.
So be careful of doing battle with the very sort of evidence that caused the shift from deep sea vents as if this were something new and unexplained. You can quickly find yourself combatting straw men if you end up battling an idea that is losing support.Last edited by rogue06; 07-10-2021, 05:21 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostOK. Good science. This fits the beginning of life with the formation of spreading zones, continental drift, early continents, oceans and sediment deposits. Now what?
So the origin of life would probably be in the oceans (near smokers?), where the large quantity of water would tend to dilute any reactions.
Also, we may note that reducing the timeframe for the origin of life by 220 million years doesn't leave much time for the origin of life! And having life originate in the Hadean era is going to be more difficult.
Blessings,
Lee
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostThe first fossils of life are now at 3.7 billion years ago, about 220 million years earlier than the previous early fossils.
Blessings,
LeeLast edited by shunyadragon; 07-09-2021, 04:25 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
New fossils push back the indisputable origin of life
The first fossils of life are now at 3.7 billion years ago, about 220 million years earlier than the previous early fossils.
Blessings,
LeeTags: None
Leave a comment: