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
See more
See less

Progress in origin of life research - RNA world

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    NO, your references have not supported your unwarranted cynicism based on a religious agenda.
    Asserted and not demonstrated. You really are fond of that strategy.

    The Chemistry of life is the genetic origins of RNA and DNA. Not more then 6 decades. DNA and RNA were not well defined and described until the 1950's. Don't confuse DNA/RNA research with the abiogenesis research based specifically on the origins of DNA/RNA that followed later.

    The first research on the origins of DNA/RNA directly related to abiogenesis was in the 1970's.
    I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here, and quite frankly I don't care.

    Scientists will always be looking for different environments, mechanisms and processes of origins of DNA/RNA. So what?
    So I do doubt the 'appropriate ideal environment' is 'well known' since scientists are still seriously exploring alternatives.

    The issue of your assertion was the problem (scarcity? which is a bogus unsubstantiated claim) of the environment where these processes and mechanisms of origins can take place. The ocean ridge spreading regions have existed for most of the history of the earth, and considered a suitable environment for abiogenesis. Cyanide is present in the mid-ocean ridge environments suitable for abiogenesis.
    That certain regions are considered the most likely does not imply in any way that they are actually likely.

    your references are selective and incomplete, and reflect a cynicism of science based on a religious agenda. Your Jorge smiley faces only reinforce the hyperbole ridiculousness of your argument.
    You really are quite amusing when you start ranting.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Paprika View Post
      Asserted and not demonstrated. You really are fond of that strategy.


      I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here, and quite frankly I don't care.


      So I do doubt the 'appropriate ideal environment' is 'well known' since scientists are still seriously exploring alternatives.


      That certain regions are considered the most likely does not imply in any way that they are actually likely.


      You really are quite amusing when you start ranting.
      airballs gallor!!!! No references to support your assertions, nor any response to my references. More references to follow . . .

      You have failed to document this supposed scarcity of environments suitable for abiogenesis. I provided references that clearly show the wide spread environments that are suitable.

      References please. Still waiting . . .
      Last edited by shunyadragon; 04-21-2015, 01:54 PM.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
        Source: http://www.geochemicaltransactions.com/content/10/1/9



        Reduction of nitrogen compounds in oceanic basement and its implications for HCN formation and abiotic organic synthesis
        Nils G Holm* and Anna Neubeck
        ...

        © Copyright Original Source

        That weblink doesn't even contain this quotes you attribute to it. What do you think you're trying to pull?

        Source: http://astrobiology.com/2014/04/reconstructed-ancient-ocean-reveals-secrets-about-the-origin-of-life.html

        ...

        © Copyright Original Source


        A popular science article. That's your reference?

        First wikipedia, and now this?

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          No references to support your assertions,
          As hypocritical as ever.

          nor any response to my references.
          Both irrelevant hence not addressed.

          You have failed to document this supposed scarcity of environments suitable for abiogenesis.
          Where did I make such a claim?

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Paprika View Post
            Where did I make such a claim?
            Here for one;

            Originally posted by Paprika View Post


            What I have noted is that these papers do not show much advance in the science much at all; ie that they only demonstrate that a few steps work for highly intelligently designed conditions. In general the historical scenarios proposed are merely guesses; given even very tailored conditions they can't even demonstrate yet the synthesis of a cell from simple starting materials.
            Again

            Originally posted by Paprika View Post

            The amount of different types of scenarios that OOL research throws up (these three papers alone cover cyanide catalysis in a specific environment, meteorite catalysis, DNA ligation) show that the scientists still have little if any definite idea about what actually happened, which is why they are exploring in many many different directions. The pathways suggested here require highly constrained conditions and only cover a small part of the large reaction cycle which would be needed for life to begin.

            unsubstantiated claims.
            Last edited by shunyadragon; 04-21-2015, 03:02 PM.
            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

            go with the flow the river knows . . .

            Frank

            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
              Here for one
              Nowhere in that statement did I write about "scarcity of environments suitable for abiogenesis". My point was that the scientists do not yet know with any degree of certainty, as can be seen from the two papers analysed (meterorite and cyanide).

              unsubstantiated claims.
              Nonsense. I refer to the papers for substantiation.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                That weblink doesn't even contain this quotes you attribute to it. What do you think you're trying to pull?

                Source: http://astrobiology.com/2014/04/reconstructed-ancient-ocean-reveals-secrets-about-the-origin-of-life.html

                ...

                © Copyright Original Source


                A popular science article. That's your reference?

                First wikipedia, and now this?
                http://astrobiology.com/2014/04/meta...n-of-life.html

                Every astrobiology site article references research articles, as this one bhttp://www.geochemicaltransactions.com/content/10/1/9

                Respond with references, don't just rant with Jorge smileys

                Refute Wikipedia if you disagree, do not curse the messenger with a fallacy unless you can refute it
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  http://astrobiology.com/2014/04/meta...n-of-life.html

                  The astrobiology site article references research articles in each of its articles. as this one bhttp://www.geochemicaltransactions.com/content/10/1/9
                  So cite the research articles instead of the popular science articles which tend to exaggerate and distort the findings.

                  Respond with references, don't just rant with Jorge smileys
                  There's nothing wrong with smileys; deal with them.

                  Also, trying to tar me with the Jorge brush? How pathetically desperate.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                    So cite the research articles instead of the popular science articles which tend to exaggerate and distort the findings.
                    I do not spoon feed. The sources are valid and explain themselves. No meaningful response on your part nor sources to back up your assertions. Each article in astrobiology is accompanied by and academic article. I even referenced one of the academic articles for you in the last post, and you did not respond.
                    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                    go with the flow the river knows . . .

                    Frank

                    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                      Nowhere in that statement did I write about "scarcity of environments suitable for abiogenesis". My point was that the scientists do not yet know with any degree of certainty, as can be seen from the two papers analysed (meterorite and cyanide).


                      Nonsense. I refer to the papers for substantiation.
                      Not sufficient, your frog hair nitpicking a couple articles with a narrow scope of research. I provided more and you have not responded.

                      I referenced articles with more specific descriptions of the environments and the fact that they ( the environments) are not a problem in the research of abiogenesis. You have failed to respond with anything
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                        I do not spoon feed. The sources are valid and explain themselves...I even referenced one of the academic articles for you in the last post, and you did not respond.
                        If you're just going to give the url, that's worth no response as no one knows what point you're trying to make.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          Not sufficient, your frog hair nitpicking a couple articles with a narrow scope of research.
                          Narrowness is hardly relevant: that scientists are still exploring varied possibilities for the environment indicates that it is not established that ocean regions were the site of abiogenesis.

                          I referenced articles with more specific descriptions of the environments and the fact that they ( the environments) are not a problem in the research of abiogenesis. You have failed to respond with anything

                          The first article did not even contain the quotes you attributed to it. The second is a popular non-academic news article.

                          What on earth do you think you're trying to pull?

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                            If you're just going to give the url, that's worth no response as no one knows what point you're trying to make.
                            Again, I do not spoon fed the toothless. check them out for yourself through astrobiology.

                            Her is one again, http://www.geochemicaltransactions.com/content/10/1/9

                            I tried it and it works fine.

                            You also stated the following :
                            Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                            So far the probability is still low as to be the equivalent, since the papers cited required highly favourable and unlikely conditions (haven't been able to get access to the latest one but it's likely the same ol' same ol').
                            The articles I cited indicate there is no problem with a suitable environment for abiogenesis. There are other articles I will cite.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                              Again, I do not spoon fed the toothless. check them out for yourself through astrobiology.
                              There is no argument by weblink. Make the appropriate quotations.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                                Your point being? Advance in chemistry in general does not necessarily translate into advance in OOL, though one would think otherwise from how you were trumpeting the synthesis of urea.
                                Well I explained why it was important in my last post. Go back and read it.


                                Originally posted by Paprika

                                The synthesis of urea predated Miller-Urey.
                                I know. Remember, I told you this happened a few hundred years ago? I thought you had replied that you did not know this. I was simply making the easy point that natural OOL experiments can be traced back a few hundred years to the downfall of vitalism. Do you think vitalists behaved back then, as you do now?


                                Originally posted by Paprika
                                As you mention above, the topic is advance in research of the RNA world hypothesis - my own beliefs about how life first started are not pertinent to the topic.
                                But you did say that you might tell me. It looks as if you have no good hypothesis and no experiments. On the other hand, Christians and non Christians who think that natural processes may have given rise to life, do have a solid hypothetical basis which allows them to experiment and test various ideas, even if there is a long way to go to demonstrate plausible routes by which life could have naturally arisen.

                                Originally posted by Paprika
                                I have no desire to entertain any of your elephant-hurling, especially when I have not denied that progress has been made.

                                Read the paper yourself, and make your own summary here, and I might humour you.
                                So you have already written. But given that you think very little progress has been made since Urey-Miller, do you think that U-M offered anything like this understanding in their experiments:-

                                http://www.cell.com/abstract/S0092-8674(12)01438-9
                                Last edited by rwatts; 04-21-2015, 04:09 PM.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                                48 responses
                                136 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                                16 responses
                                74 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X