Skip to comments.
Double, Double, Life’s Little Bubbles
Discover ^
| February 02, 2005
| Sarah Webb
Posted on 02/03/2005 7:01:32 AM PST by Junior
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-118 next last
1
posted on
02/03/2005 7:01:33 AM PST
by
Junior
To: PatrickHenry
2
posted on
02/03/2005 7:01:48 AM PST
by
Junior
(FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
To: VadeRetro; Ichneumon; general_re; RadioAstronomer; js1138
3
posted on
02/03/2005 7:11:48 AM PST
by
Junior
(FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
To: Junior
What we showed was that you can get a Darwinian competition to emerge just from the basic physical properties of the system, says Irene Chen, a graduate student in Szostaks lab. It doesnt require biological machinery. Kind of blows away those ridiculous probability caclulations that assume you need to assemble a completely modern cell in one single shot for things to get moving. Not that this will keep us from having to endure them, though.
4
posted on
02/03/2005 7:17:49 AM PST
by
general_re
(How come so many of the VKs have been here six months or less?)
To: general_re
5
posted on
02/03/2005 7:18:07 AM PST
by
general_re
(How come so many of the VKs have been here six months or less?)
To: VadeRetro; Junior; longshadow; RadioAstronomer; Doctor Stochastic; js1138; Shryke; RightWhale; ...
| EvolutionPing |
| A pro-evolution science list with over 230 names. See list's description at my homepage. FReepmail to be added/dropped. |
|
|
|
6
posted on
02/03/2005 7:18:17 AM PST
by
PatrickHenry
(<-- Click on my name. The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
To: general_re; Junior
7
posted on
02/03/2005 7:21:10 AM PST
by
PatrickHenry
(<-- Click on my name. The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
To: general_re
I can almost guarrantee we won't see a lot of creationists posting on this thread.
8
posted on
02/03/2005 7:23:50 AM PST
by
Junior
(FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
To: PatrickHenry
thanks for the ping.
forgive me if I don't hang around for the IDers to chime in.
9
posted on
02/03/2005 7:24:40 AM PST
by
King Prout
(Remember John Adam!)
To: Junior
I can almost guarrantee we won't see a lot of creationists posting on this thread.
10
posted on
02/03/2005 7:26:20 AM PST
by
PatrickHenry
(<-- Click on my name. The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
To: general_re
This thread is woefully lacking in creationist canards.
"It's being done in a lab, so it just proves intelligent design!"
There, that's better.
11
posted on
02/03/2005 7:26:28 AM PST
by
atlaw
To: Junior
Wow! Great work. Kudos to Jack Szostak and his colleagues.
To: Junior
You are probably right. Most don't even have the chemistry basics to understand this, let alone see how this very basic chemistry has strong biogenisis characteristics. If they do show up, they will likely spout some chemical nonsense that would get them fired if they were employed in a position using the chemical sciences, or at least re-assigned to the back office filing paperwork.
13
posted on
02/03/2005 7:30:12 AM PST
by
doc30
(Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
To: atlaw
yup, that's ID - see scientist in the lab did it, therefore it was designed. They wouldn't even recognize that it's the chemicals by themselved doing their own organizing. No human hand made or designed them. Humans just put them in a flask and let them do what they do naturally.
14
posted on
02/03/2005 7:33:03 AM PST
by
doc30
(Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
To: Junior
I can almost guarantee we won't see a lot of creationists posting on this thread. Bet you a nickel this will be spam city by this evening.
15
posted on
02/03/2005 7:33:26 AM PST
by
js1138
To: atlaw
What, do we have a quota system now or something? ;)
16
posted on
02/03/2005 7:35:25 AM PST
by
general_re
(How come so many of the VKs have been here six months or less?)
To: js1138
Maybe until then, one of us should play the creationist part. Any takers? No one has brought up the 2nd law of thermodynamics yet... doesn't chemistry violate the 2nd law?
17
posted on
02/03/2005 7:35:50 AM PST
by
crail
(Better lives have been lost on the gallows than have ever been enshrined in the halls of palaces.)
To: crail
How about "Genesis doesn't mention lipid chemistry, therefore this is totally invalid"?
18
posted on
02/03/2005 7:37:04 AM PST
by
general_re
(How come so many of the VKs have been here six months or less?)
To: Junior
"Darwinian Competition"
When the bubbles evolve into little sponge-bobs, wake me up.
I notice Miss Chen did not say "darwinian selection", not that that means too much. It's a interesting experiment. And I wonder if the card shark in the park of eternity is teasing the evos with a few good-looking cards "Look how easy it is to win!" --- the response on thread does so indicate.
19
posted on
02/03/2005 7:38:48 AM PST
by
bvw
To: crail
Don't talk to me until you've self-organized a protein from scratch.
20
posted on
02/03/2005 7:38:59 AM PST
by
js1138
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-118 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson