Posted on 01/09/2009 10:46:53 AM PST by Coyoteman
A new molecule that performs the essential function of life - self-replication - could shed light on the origin of all living things.
If that wasn't enough, the laboratory-born ribonucleic acid (RNA) strand evolves in a test tube to double itself ever more swiftly.
"Obviously what we're trying to do is make a biology," says Gerald Joyce, a biochemist at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, California. He hopes to imbue his team's molecule with all the fundamental properties of life: self-replication, evolution, and function.
Joyce and colleague Tracey Lincoln made their chemical out of RNA because most researchers think early life stored information in this sister molecule to DNA. And unlike the stuff of our genomes, RNA molecules can catalyse chemical reactions.
"We're trying to jump in at the last signpost we have back there in the early history of life," Joyce says.
Continues...
(Excerpt) Read more at newscientist.com ...
[[Microevolution is trivial to demonstrate. It doesn’t affirm or refute species-level evolution.]]
Exactly- just another example of intelligently designed Microevolution- it will take the intelligent designed informaiton insertion to even begin to move this to another realm called macroevolution.
The only hting this experiment has managed is to show how intelligently designed creation really is, and to show the mechanism by which the Creator caused life to show up, which was fully formed and fully functional completed species kinds- showing the wheel lug off a car does not show the car evolved naturalistically, all it does is show the design that went into the creation of a very small part of hte whole I’m afraid
[[On a planet before life existed, the surroundings, by logic, would be biologically sterile.]]
In a time far removed, and far away, after the intitial creation of energy by soem unknown force- Metaphyisical appeals to unknown intellgence and Natural law suspensions
I wonder if Gerald Joyce would be flattered or annoyed when, a billion years hence, some of the progeny of his designed molecule refuse to acknowledge his accomplishment?
[[But really the origin of life on Earth is an historical problem that we’re never going to be able to witness and verify,” he says...
I guess that means that origins are *not science* after all.]]
Exactly, and it’s amusing to see evos accuse us and creation and ID scientists of being ‘apologists’
Frankly, that is the only weakness my atheism/ agnosticism has had, for a long, long time. That, and the related property of our minds not being able to fathom a physical limit for the universe: It’s not just very big, but the space has no limit, in the most technical of definitions.
Admitting that the concept of God is beyond human understanding is not necessarily atheism.
Claiming to know the mind of God and be privy to God’s understanding of the physical world is not necessarily Christian.
Which theological answer is the correct one?
Theology is never any help; it is searching in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn't there. Theologians can persuade themselves of anything.Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1973
Really? Because.....
[[But really the origin of life on Earth is an historical problem that we’re never going to be able to witness and verify,” he says...
I guess that means that origins are *not science* after all.]]
Exactly, and it’s amusing to see evos accuse us and creation and ID scientists of being ‘apologists’
But the true believers buy this crap up in spades.
They look past the extreme manipulation, and see ‘evolution.’
A few months down the road, this will be added to the rest of the ignorant crap at talk.origins as more ‘proof’ of evolution.
Yes, like - some smart engineers created the original stuff. It didn’t just appear in a pond somewhere. Minor issue, I realize, but worth pointing out.
Your article is self-defeating...
“Rather than start with RNA enzymes - ribozymes - present in other organisms, Joyce’s team created its own molecule from scratch, called R3C. It performed a single function: stitching two shorter RNA molecules together to create a clone of itself...”
So a team of people (intelligence) created a molecule...SOMEONE had to create it....and the only reason it performed a function is because it was CODED (with information) to perform it.....
.....some smart engineers .....
Would you go so far as to say Godlike?
“One day a group of scientists got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God. So they picked one scientist to go and tell Him that they were done with Him.
The scientist walked up to God and said, “God, we’ve decided that we no longer need you. We’re to the point that we can clone people and do many miraculous things, so why don’t you just go on and get lost.”
God listened very patiently and kindly to the man and after the scientist was done talking, God said, “Very well, how about this, let’s say we have a man making contest.” To which the scientist replied, “OK, great!”
But God added, “Now, we’re going to do this just like I did back in the old days with Adam.”
The scientist said, “Sure, no problem” and bent down and grabbed himself a handful of dirt.
God just looked at him and said, “No, no, no. You go get your own dirt!””
All of your science put together can’t accomplish what God did 6,000 years ago with one Word. Good Christians won’t be swayed by Satan’s works, trying to get people to turn away from God.
To God be the Glory.
Thanks. I needed a good guffaw.
TCH made this comment to me at one point and it is very applicable to your comment.......
[Used with permission.]
[quote]”Realize that ToE is a religion for these individuals, and they will defend their “faith” with as much tenacity as we use in defense of Creation. For this reason the ToE position is disingenuous, the fundamental flaw being its claim of scientific “evidence” in support of a philosophical system, and one that requires more faith to believe its “proofs” than does the dogmas of Christianity. Yet Christianity never violates observable objective realities, and has in its possession the written and cooperative accounts of numerous credible individuals. Macro evolution opposes the objective reality, where its operations cannot be substantiated by any witness; and, prudentially, it uproots those moral imperatives necessary to maintain responsible human relations and well-functioning healthy societies.”[unquote]
6,000 years ago? That claim is refuted by mountains of scientific evidence and all the believing and wishful thinking, and all the misrepresentations of scientific evidence spread by all the creationist's websites, isn't going to change that.
You believe what you want, but don't call it science.
How long will it take for this doubling molecule to become larger than the state of California?
Your “mountains of evidence” are just valleys of deception spun by the Deceiver to turn people from God. I’ll take the Bible and the Word of God over such tripe any day. You imperil your soul for worldly glory. I’ll pray for you tonight.
You ignore the evidence of the world around you, and claim that black is white and white is black; down is up and up is down.
Perhaps you should take a good look around. There just may be something you have missed.
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.