Posted on 12/10/2009 8:12:50 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
David Queller and Joan Strassmann, evolutionary biologists at Rice University, recently proposed a new way to describe what makes an organism a unified whole. They defined an organism as an entity made up of parts that cooperate well for an overall purpose, and do so with minimal conflict. But how do parts like these get together, and where does purposeful behavior come from?...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
They read A Purpose Driven Life?
Kill the messenger, Eh?
I have Cott-Shopitis -need to proofread.
taked teh =takes the
Science to =Scientists took
I have Cott-Shopitis -need to proofread.
taked teh =takes the
Science to =Scientists took
You having a bunny/pancake moment or something?
The temperature of a lightning bolt is about 30,000K or 50,000F.
Just enough to assemble some chemicals necessary for life to begin, eh?
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1999/DavidFriedman.shtml
It has more to do with how quickly the lightning charge would dissipate in water (or chemical soup), or even wet ground. There would nearly always be a “zone” in the dissipation field that provided the correct voltage/power level to do the job.
'Nuff said.
You said spelling couldn't be done with four letters. I'm saying you're spelling with TWO letters - 1 and 0.
My, my. Aren't you just the Drama Camel.
I never said anything about killing the messenger, I just think it's beyond the pale for someone to jump into the middle of a conversation and act as if they are God's gift to the world and everyone else is dumber than a box of rocks.
I posed simple questions that YOU failed to even attempt to address.
One one think that if you were the possessor of such massive knowledge on the subject that you believe yourself to be, you would try to get others interested as well, but NO.
YOU'RE too busy deriding others for their posts in order to inflate your own myopic sense of self-importance.
Your a user...and I have no inclination to waste my time in such nonproductive pursuits as inflating your already OVER inflated ego.
Have a nice day.
If you would take a second and study, instead of just reading the cover, you would see how mistaken your conclusion is.
See #175. At the stage I described above with Miller-Urey, this is just the point where the building blocks are made, very simple chemical reactions. Once the amino acids are formed from this point, natural chemical reactions occur which don't require this massive of an external trigger. Simple chemicals combining by way of electrons being shifted around.
Exactly, especially when you figure the earth is a gigantic petri-dish full of chemicals- one massive lab.
Typical creationist.. give them facts, they insult you and storm away mad.
Computers are not super sophisticated, unless you don't have the basic education to understand them. It's only 0's and 1's. Pretty basic to me.
Who were the scientists then?
No one mentioned any scientists. A petri-dish doesn’t have a scientist living in it making the little critters grow (that is, unless you are into the whole new-age, quasi-quantum physics stuff about nothing existing without an observer), it is just chemicals reacting. The entire world’s environment through out its millions of years of history has far more chemicals and variables than can ever be imagined in a ‘lab’.
From my view, just like an architect, God had all this in mind before the first spark of the big bang. No need to come along and fix it and push it along. From the first atom striking another atom, the process was in place. An architect doesn’t figure out how to build something as he goes along, it is all a concept before the first nail is hammered.
Yet there is still a large leap from simple chemicals to actual life.
Plus, there must be, by definition, a large amount of extra material to compensate for 'mistakes' should an improper combination be made.
-------
Please understand I'm not trying to tell you you're incorrect, it just seems that mathmatically, the right combinations occuring at the right time under exactly the right circumstances receiving the exact amount of electricity required to even begin life would be, well, astronomical.
Just MHO, of course.
1. Absolutely, what I posted was just the first part, albeit the most important. The formation of amino acids. Those form into proteins. Once you have these basic items, the best analogy I can think of is a magnet, it starts the process of gathering chemicals like a magnet attracts metals. Those chemicals it combines with combine, etc. 2. You are correct, which is why all of the oxygen, water, hydrogen, etc, all around you haven't turned into amino acids. It is a very unique occurrence with specific conditions.
..it just seems that mathmatically, the right combinations occuring at the right time under exactly the right circumstances receiving the exact amount of electricity required to even begin life would be, well, astronomical.
Absolutely, the probability is low, but not impossible. However, if we can figure these things out and reproduce it in the 1950s, less than 60 years after we were riding around on horses and going to the bathroom in outhouses, that perspective kind of makes you look at the 'astronomical' nature of the circumstances a little differently.
The Theory of Evolution does not cover the origin of life.
I don’t remember writing to you. Just so you know, I do not care what anyone else believes and have no interest in convincing anyone else. Just stating what I know to be true.
As for me, if life evolves, there must be life. Evolution flatly rejects the creations of life (as do I), but does believe that everything came from a single origin. For that notion there is no evidence at all, just a “story” which I also do not buy.
And by the way, “Big Bang Theory, Abiogenesis and Evolution” are not theories, they are all hypotheses, so far all without verifying evidence.
Hank
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.