Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Statement of Chemistry on the Origin of Life
American Thinker.com ^ | September 26, 2017 | James Clinton

Posted on 11/26/2017 6:49:57 AM PST by Kaslin

In his August 1954, Scientific American article, "The Origin of Life," Nobel Prize winning Harvard Biologist George Wald stated,

"One only has to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible. Yet here we are as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation."

What is "the magnitude of this task" that reasonably renders a natural origin of life "impossible?" Dr. Wald states,

"In the vast majority of processes in which we are interested the point of equilibrium lies far over toward the side of dissolution. That is to say, spontaneous dissolution is much more probable, and hence proceeds much more rapidly, than spontaneous synthesis."

The processes of interest include building proteins, DNA, RNA, and lipids. Nature does not engage in the "processes" of building these life-essential molecules (synthesis); Nature, rather, dismantles them (dissolution), if they exist at all.

Why? Nature inexorably proceeds towards "equilibrium" (Chemical Equilibrium), the most stable state. For example, the most stable state for amino acids in Nature is individual amino acids, not proteins.

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: chemistry; creation; origins; science
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-184 next last
To: Kaslin

It’s not just the spontaneous creation of individual complex molecules that is next to impossible, but it’s the simultaneous creation of multiple molecules that work together to create biological systems with specific purposes that make the idea of spontaneous creation totally absurd.


21 posted on 11/26/2017 9:33:32 AM PST by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan

Indeed.

The “post turtle” of abiogenesis defies materialist explanation. Unfortunately, it does NOT “actively” refute the materialist’s fallacious contrivances.


22 posted on 11/26/2017 9:34:13 AM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: papertyger; Kaslin
BJK: "Has there still been no progress in "origin of life" studies?"

papertyger: "None. Zero. Zip.
The Scientific/Cultural mandarins gave up on the question as unknowable and irrelevant."

I think not.
In fact, growth in understandings of biology & chemistry in the past 63 years has been as great as in any other scientific field, for examples:

What is Life?: How Chemistry Becomes Biology Addy Pross, 2012

The Vital Question: Energy, Evolution, and the Origins of Complex Life Nick Lane, 2015

A New History of Life: The Radical New Discoveries about the Origins and Evolution of Life on Earth Ward & Kirschvenk, 2015


23 posted on 11/26/2017 9:38:35 AM PST by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK

I’ll betcha you can’t find even ONE “rival conjecture” in ANY of those three works...


24 posted on 11/26/2017 9:49:13 AM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK

BTW, we are well familiar with the tactic of making a claim, then offering an undifferentiated “phone book” instead of a falsifiable argument.

If you can’t give a falsifiable summary, you are simply engaging in hearsay.


25 posted on 11/26/2017 10:02:55 AM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: VanShuyten
You're an idiot.
26 posted on 11/26/2017 10:05:17 AM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK

Thank you!


27 posted on 11/26/2017 11:07:05 AM PST by PUGACHEV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

.
And with random probability in charge, amino acids would occur equally as right and left isomers, but only the left version are present in living organisms.

Just one of the trillions of barriers to random occurance of life.
.


28 posted on 11/26/2017 11:15:11 AM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanShuyten

.
>> “ Don’t confuse entropy with short-term concentrations of energy and order. When you see that, you can understand how short-term fluctuations over long periods of time can lead to the concentrations of more complex chemicals needed to start life.” <<

Good!

Now you can get to work on your next PhD. Just prepare your dissertation as a proof.

Simple, right? And nobody has done it yet; the whole universe awaits your effort.
.


29 posted on 11/26/2017 11:21:45 AM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK

.
Pathetic pulp fiction, and nothing more.
.


30 posted on 11/26/2017 11:24:13 AM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

FWIW,

The guy that wrote the first book on this subject, Chemical Origins of life, I forgot his name, later came out to say he was wrong and it’s impossible.

Unfortunately, that hasn’t deterred many others to take the cause.


31 posted on 11/26/2017 11:32:05 AM PST by Zeneta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

The intermolecular force equals gravity?
Please explain.


32 posted on 11/26/2017 12:26:50 PM PST by sparklite2 (I hereby designate the ongoing kerfuffle Diddle-Gate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

You’re confusing gravity with molecular bonding.

L


33 posted on 11/26/2017 12:29:53 PM PST by Lurker (President Trump isn't our last chance. President Trump is THEIR last chance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: budj
I always thought the 2nd law of thermodynamics stated that natural processes tended toward greater randomness (entropy).
------------------------------
It's true.  The universe, as a closed system, will eventually die of entropy.
-------------------------
That would preclude the organization required for production of the chemicals of life.
------------------
You believe this because the poltroons who tell you this leave out the crucial predicate, ie, a closed system. The addition of solar energy to the earth makes it 'not closed.'
34 posted on 11/26/2017 12:36:45 PM PST by sparklite2 (I hereby designate the ongoing kerfuffle Diddle-Gate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Lurker; sparklite2; CurlyDave

All I am saying is that both are held together by unknown forces.


35 posted on 11/26/2017 4:11:35 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
You’re confusing gravity with molecular bonding.

Exactly how are they different ?

36 posted on 11/26/2017 4:13:13 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

You should really stop digging.


37 posted on 11/26/2017 4:20:10 PM PST by sparklite2 (I hereby designate the ongoing kerfuffle Diddle-Gate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: sparklite2
You should really stop digging.

Surely then you can explain the force that holds galaxies together and how it is different from the force that holds molecules together.

38 posted on 11/26/2017 4:45:19 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

The intermolecular force is a balance between the repulsive and attractive force of the molecules. When is the last time you heard about repulsive gravity?


39 posted on 11/26/2017 4:48:29 PM PST by sparklite2 (I hereby designate the ongoing kerfuffle Diddle-Gate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
All I am saying is that both are held together by unknown forces.

It is doubtless true that these forces are unknown to you.

Fortunately, their nature is known to some of us, and they are not the same forces. And, no it is not possible to explain the nature of these forces in a few words on an internet forum. But if you spend 4 years at a good university in chemistry and physics, followed by another 3-5 years in graduate school, again in chemistry, physics, and possibly engineering, you may come to have some understanding...

40 posted on 11/26/2017 6:25:42 PM PST by CurlyDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-184 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson