Posted on 06/09/2015 8:54:48 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
How did life on Earth begin? It's been one of modern biology's greatest mysteries: How did the chemical soup that existed on the early Earth lead to the complex molecules needed to create living, breathing organisms? Now, researchers say they've found the missing link.
Between 4.6 billion and 4.0 billion years ago, there was probably no life on Earth. The planet's surface was at first molten and even as it cooled, it was getting pulverized by asteroids and comets. All that existed were simple chemicals. But about 3.8 billion years ago, the bombardment stopped, and life arose. Most scientists think the "last universal common ancestor" the creature from which everything on the planet descends appeared about 3.6 billion years ago.
But exactly how that creature arose has long puzzled scientists. For instance, how did the chemistry of simple carbon-based molecules lead to the information storage of ribonucleic acid, or RNA? The RNA molecule must store information to code for proteins. (Proteins in biology do more than build muscle they also regulate a host of processes in the body.)
The new research which involves two studies, one led by Charles Carter and one led by Richard Wolfenden, both of the University of North Carolina suggests a way for RNA to control the production of proteins by working with simple amino acids that does not require the more complex enzymes that exist today.
This link would bridge this gap in knowledge between the primordial chemical soup and the complex molecules needed to build life.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
It proves nothing.
The next step in the explanation involves all the parts of a working watch being placed in a box for a billion years of agitation. At some point, as they say statistically, it will become a watch on its own.
The early “soup” he is talking about could not assemble life because any proteins would be immediately oxidized form an excess of oxygen according to their own theories.
The odds of a simple cell self assembling itself form say 120 proteins through trial and error exceeds the number of atoms in the universe. These odds do not account for a cell membrane to keep things form drifting off and reproduction is not in the calculations. Then the cell must mutate in ways against the laws of entropy to form “higher” forms of life. Each step is impossible by statistics so the whole theory is impossible many times over.
You just never can tell what us ignorant folks are going to say.
Yea! They found uncle Charley!
GOD SAID .. LET THERE BE LIGHT - AND LIGHT WAS ..!!!!
Sorry .. earth was NEVER - SOME KIND OF SOUP - WHERE MAN COULD BE CREATED.
God created man - because HE wanted a family. Adam and Eve kind of screwed it up for awhile; but GOD is going to get the last word.
Your statement is ridiculous. If entropy always increases, then there would be no planets, no stars, no galaxies, no elements heavier than lithium and beryllium.
Entropy decreases in systems where there are forces at play capable of capturing or converting energy into complexity.
Gravity causes matter to clump, entropy decreases in those localities. Large clumps form stars, smaller clumps around stars form planets, entropy decreases in those localities. Stars fuse light atoms into heavier atoms, decreasing entropy in that locality. Many stars eventually explode distributing heavy elements throughout the universe, which then condense into stars and rocky and gaseous planets, entropy decreases in those localities. Elements on cooling planets react with other chemicals, with energy input from starlight and residual heat energy from the planets’ cores to form complex molecules, entropy decreases in those localities.
The entire Universe refutes your hypothesis. The only thing required for entropy to decrease is capture of energy, and there is plenty of energy and ways to capture energy available. Mars is dead because it is too far from the sun and has cooled to the point where there is insufficient local energy for complex chemicals to react.
I don’t want to say it was God but it was God. :-)
“The suspension of the law of Entropy may be the first evidence of Intelligent Design.”
There is no suspension. Life only appears to us as a temporary reversal of entropy since it is compelled to expend energy on new structures to compete with other life for the greatest share of energy. When you go from single cells to trees, the energy efficiency per area of the planet skyrockets. However, that tree now blocks sun to small organisms so they are forced to grow taller to compete. Animals compete for the plants, predator animals compete for those animals, etc.
It seems anti-entropic since we have so much energy here. However, 100% of energy on the planet is from the sun or latent heat in the core. Eventually all life on this planet will stop when those sources stop releasing energy. The remaining life will adapt and consume all that is left until the last microbe on this planet breaks down the last molecule with any potential energy (originally created with energy from the sun).
You see, life doesn’t suspend entropy. It simply takes us on another, more creative route towards the inevitable “zero-ing” of all potential energy in the Universe...
In earth tremors, stones suspended in soils organize themselves by size with largers stones rising and smaller stones sinking. Order can result from the chaos of seismic events.
Well, (blushing) I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
I see, so it’s statistically impossible for natural selection to accomplish in 3.6 Billion years something that has been done by human intervention in a few hundred years.
Humans have managed to cause the development of hundreds of domesticated plant and animal strains, thousands of strains of chemically resistant microorganisms, and have incorporated the genetic code of countless viruses into our own genetic makeup. All of this applying forces that have been acting in the Earth’s environment since the surface temperature cooled below the boiling point of water.
It helps if you understand statistics and how to apply them before making blanket statements. Here is a good example of how the statistics can be analyzed: http://experimentalmath.info/blog/2012/01/does-probability-refute-evolution/
First three words of Genesis (called Bereshith in Hebrew, which means “In the beginning”), transliterated from the Masoretic text.
After I tell her this she will probably help add raw energy with by using a match and gasoline.
I can't wait to see all the new tools and cars that evolve in my garage due to the increases in order after we add some energy and time.
Other than supposed macro-evolution, show one thing on this earth where the thermodynamic laws do not apply.
Richard Dawkins says life on earth started by aliens hitchhiking on the backs of crystals.
After I tell her this she will probably help add raw energy with by using a match and gasoline.
I can't wait to see all the new tools and cars that evolve in my garage due to the increases in order after we add some energy and time.
Are we still talking about creation or annihilation? Is it one in the same?
A common argument against biological evolution is that the theory contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. The second law says that disorder, or entropy, always increases or stays the same over time. How then can evolution produce more complex life forms over time? The answer is that the second law is only valid in closed systems with no external sources of energy. Since the Earth receives continual energy from the Sun, the second law does not apply.
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.