Amino acid found in deep space

New Scientist ^ | 10:57 18 July 02 | Rachel Nowak

[RightWhale]

That's pretty close to astrobiology. There is also xenobiology. What the differences are, I don't know.

[jumpstartme]

The sounds of Nuda Veritas.

[Nebullis]

...astropaleontology, exobiology, gravitational biology, astropaleobiology... they are probably all interdisciplinary departments.

[f.Christian]

... here(#17)!

[edwin hubble]

Thanks for the notes on the Miller-Urey experiment, (it's in every college astronomy book).

OK...
Amino acids in nebulae, comets, meteorites.
A portion of Earth's water may have come from comets.
Primitive life may be somewhat common.

Intelligent life?...Who knows...

[edwin hubble]

Thanks for the ping, Patrick.

Yep,...Amino acids in nebulae, comets, meteorites.


By the way, that "Astronomers Hope to Find E.T. in Next 25 Years" (SETI, Drake-equation - crop circles) thread the other night 7/17/02 was one of the most entertaining threads I have ever followed.

[PatrickHenry]

Yeah. In nearly three years here, I thought I had run into -- and been attacked by -- every kind of anti-reason idiot imaginable; but until last night I'd never encountered a crop circle freak before. But no form of un-reason is benign, so all are worthy of vigorous scorn.

[gore3000]

Back in 1994, a team led by astronomer Lewis Snyder of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign announced preliminary evidence of the simplest type of amino acid, glycine, but the finding did not stand up to closer examination (New Scientist magazine, 11 June 1994, p 4).

Sounds like the guy had to publish something to justify his pay and just republished the same rejected stuff with some additional information. This is the problem with the press, they publish the announcements, but they do not publish the verification or the rejection of the fantastic findings claimed.

[gore3000]

At the end of week, there were simple multi amino acid peptides.

The Miller-Urey experiment has been thoroughly discredited by now. More important than that it could not have happened in real life though is that it is completely wrong. DNA makes amino acids (or rather the RNA which DNA codes for), not the other way around. These folk were the scientific equivalent of wrong-way Goldfarb.

[gore3000]

Amino acids in nebulae, comets, meteorites.

Not proven. Every few years we hear of proof of biological substances from space, and after a year or two they are disproven quietly. This guy already made a false claim, a reasonable person would wait for it to be examined and verified. However, evolutionists (or should we say atheists in this case) are real desperate, so they latch on to anything reed, no matter how flimsy.

[longshadow]

"No, a circle is not an ellipse...."

"wildly elliptical" planetary orbits

"1⁷²⁰"

placemarker

[RightWingNilla]

The Miller-Urey experiment has been thoroughly discredited by now. More important than that it could not have happened in real life though is that it is completely wrong. DNA makes amino acids (or rather the RNA which DNA codes for), not the other way around. These folk were the scientific equivalent of wrong-way Goldfarb.

The Miller experiment simply showed how you can get more complex molecules out of a simple soup + energy.

[gore3000]

The Miller-Urey experiment has been thoroughly discredited by now. More important than that it could not have happened in real life though is that it is completely wrong. DNA makes amino acids (or rather the RNA which DNA codes for), not the other way around. These folk were the scientific equivalent of wrong-way Goldfarb. -me-

The Miller experiment simply showed how you can get more complex molecules out of a simple soup + energy.

No. The whole purpose of the Miller-Urey experiment was to give some substantiation to the theory of abiogenesis. It is touted as such in textbooks and by materialists everywhere. As I point out above, it was a miserable failure in that respect.

[tm22721]

Scientists cannot discover what God has not created.

Now who's being defensive ?

Everybody knows that science and religion are irreconcilable.

BUMP

[Scully]

Intelligent life?...Who knows...

Doesn't seem to be in great abundance on Earth. We can only hope that "intelligence" has made an appearance on some other planet.

[Scully]

Thanks for the ping :)

[Scully]

Space is full of the gosh-darned stuff!

Hehe! Now my sides are hurting!

[D-fendr]

There are things that can be known that cannot be known using only science. The set of things that can be known only using science is less than the set of knowable reality.

Even scientists know this.

{^_^}

[D-fendr]

"Everybody knows that science and religion are irreconcilable."

Depends on how you define the two. They are not necessarilty irreconcialble, and in a healthy growth of knowledge, a marriage of the two, along with philosophy (logic/reason), should occur. IM, and others, HO of course.

[nuda_veritas]

"There are things that can be known that cannot be known using only science. The set of things that can be known only using science is less than the set of knowable reality."

I referred to "truths". The set of "Knowable reality" encompasses far more than the set of "truths". Most of the universal "truths" do not exist yet in the set of "knowable reality". Science is the job of moving those "truths" into that set

There are things that can be supposed/theorized or be articles of faith. These may be treated as reality but it does not transform them to provable "truths".

We learn to deal and find practical use everyday for things we do not understand.

Science is a process of discovering "truth". It often must synthesize suppositions/guesses before confirming or denying the nature of those guesses. In the meantime, some of the guesses may be dealt with in a practical manner even before the truth of the guess is known.