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

Skip to comments.

How Life Began: New Research Suggests Simple Approach
livescience ^ | 09 June 2006 | By Michael Schirber

Posted on 06/13/2006 9:42:31 AM PDT by flevit

Somewhere on Earth, close to 4 billion years ago, a set of molecular reactions flipped a switch and became life. Scientists try to imagine this animating event by simplifying the processes that characterize living things. ...... Shapiro, however, thinks this so-called "RNA world" is still too complex to be the origin of life. Information-carrying molecules like RNA are sequences of molecular "bits." The primordial soup would be full of things that would terminate these sequences before they grew long enough to be useful, Shapiro says. ........ The researchers propose in this month's issue of Molecular Biology and Evolution that this stripped-down geochemical cycle was what the first organisms used to power their growth. "This cycle is where all evolution emanated from," Ferry says. "It is the father of all life."

Shapiro is skeptical: Something had to form the two proteins. But he thinks this discovery might point in the right direction. "We have to let nature instruct us," he says.

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


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bewareofluddites; crevolist; evolution; idisfordolts; idisforkids; sillycreationist; yecliars; youngearthcultists; youngearthmullahs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 next last
To: Theo

> How is it that science can speak on the origins of life?

Read the article.


21 posted on 06/13/2006 10:10:53 AM PDT by orionblamblam (I'm interested in science and preventing its corruption, so here I am.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

a set of molecular reactions flipped a switch and became life

This was after molecules evolved fingers but before molecular opposable thumbs.

22 posted on 06/13/2006 10:11:25 AM PDT by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: flevit

Wow!!! All this time I thought it was as simple as a word from God. (sarc off)


23 posted on 06/13/2006 10:21:55 AM PDT by shekkian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flevit
Ah yes, the ever-evolving religion of evolution trying desparately to come up with some forminable hypothesis, educated guess, "Anything", to foward their belief system, and give the cultist followers hope!

I guess it's really dumb, ignorant, and intellectually amiss to dare believe "God" actually created life, like it states in a book over 5000 years old? I mean a book that has made claims which never have been proven false is just a place where it would be too convient to start? Eventhough, with the discoveries of science proving the books claims, It's just too bad elitist scientist can't drop their piotic ways and look toward the claims for the origins of life.

24 posted on 06/13/2006 10:31:48 AM PDT by sirchtruth (Words Mean Things...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flevit
Somewhere on Earth, close to 4 billion years ago, a set of molecular reactions flipped a switch and became life.

And scientists wonder why people do not believe them. This kind of wild, unsubstantiated, random and irrational speculation is one of the main reasons. The evidence for young earth is as valid as this speculation.
25 posted on 06/13/2006 10:50:45 AM PDT by microgood (Truth is not contingent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flevit

The battle between two religions continues.


26 posted on 06/13/2006 10:52:28 AM PDT by DungeonMaster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flevit

Rarely have so many people made so many ignorant criticisms of something so vague. "It's impossible to tell what they're saying, but I know it's gotta be stupid!"

It would help if I had access to this journal, but I don't.


27 posted on 06/13/2006 10:54:01 AM PDT by ahayes ("If intelligent design evolved from creationism, then why are there still creationists?"--Quark2005)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth
trying desparately to come up with some forminable hypothesis

That's the business of research. There is plenty of hard work and sometimes false starts. On the other hand, too often religious faith is intellectual laziness paraded as a virtue.

28 posted on 06/13/2006 10:58:47 AM PDT by Dracian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Dracian
On the other hand, too often religious faith is intellectual laziness paraded as a virtue.

Well, yes it is, and totally intellectually dishonest in some cultish religions...like, evolution.

29 posted on 06/13/2006 11:09:37 AM PDT by sirchtruth (Words Mean Things...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ahayes
Rarely have so many people made so many ignorant criticisms of something so vague.

That is precisely the point. How life got started 4 billion years ago cannot be determined using science with any kind of certainty. It is a waste of time. You could come up with a billion different scenarios. I would rather they just say "we do not know" than come up with these wild speculations about what happened 4 billion years ago.

I guess if you are a theorist at a university it makes sense. From the outside looking in, however, it looks like they are completely disconnected from reality.

It seems that the purpose of efforts like this one is to bolster belief in evolution or naturalism, not to advance science.
30 posted on 06/13/2006 11:51:18 AM PDT by microgood (Truth is not contingent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor

Ping-a-ding!


31 posted on 06/13/2006 12:05:42 PM PDT by pgyanke (Christ has a tolerance for sinners; liberals have a tolerance for sin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flevit
Somewhere on Earth, close to 4 billion years ago, a set of molecular reactions flipped a switch and became life.

I expect that if we could know every step in the sequence from nonlife to life, the transition would be so smooth that nobody would agree on exactly when the threshold was crossed. It would be like pinpointing when when the Romans stopped speaking Latin and switched to Italian.

32 posted on 06/13/2006 12:16:36 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: microgood

No, that's not the point. The point is to reflexively trash any research that has anything to do with natural origins of life. This could be the most complex, detailed theory that successfully explains multiple questions about the makeup of life, for all we know. Yet sight unseen it gets bashed as if it's just wild speculation.

If you think there is no scientific validity to research into the basis of life and that people who are interested in such have a complete disconnect from reality, I'd say you have a complete disconnect from reality.


33 posted on 06/13/2006 1:54:38 PM PDT by ahayes ("If intelligent design evolved from creationism, then why are there still creationists?"--Quark2005)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: atomicpossum
Somewhere on Earth, close to 4 billion years ago, a set of molecular reactions flipped a switch and became life.

This would be on the fifth day, then?

No, day 3. Genesis 1:11 "...Let the earth sprout vegetation..."

The creatures of the air and sea are created on day 5. Land creatures on day 6.

34 posted on 06/13/2006 4:58:20 PM PDT by nonsporting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Zavien Doombringer

It took God six days to create the Earth, but it took Chuck Norris but a snap of his fingers to create God.


35 posted on 06/13/2006 5:33:58 PM PDT by hail to the chief (Use your conservatism liberally)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Theo

Well, I believe it involves forming a hypothesis on the mechanisms involved and then testing to see whether those mechanisms work.


36 posted on 06/13/2006 5:35:09 PM PDT by hail to the chief (Use your conservatism liberally)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: theDentist

Does primordial soup promote tooth decay?


37 posted on 06/13/2006 5:45:35 PM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido
Does primordial soup promote tooth decay?

No, but it does cause stomach ache and rectal spasms.

38 posted on 06/14/2006 4:57:25 AM PDT by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll. 17,401+ snide replies and counting!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: hail to the chief

The most painful thing is reading that and then blowing coffe out your nose....


39 posted on 06/14/2006 5:15:35 AM PDT by Zavien Doombringer (Mr. Franklin, what form of customes did you create in Tiajunna? A beeber, Madam, if you can stune it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: theDentist

Simmered slowly in a crock pot, with some celery and a bay leaf, primordial soup isn't half bad. Good source of essential amino acids, too.


40 posted on 06/14/2006 10:21:50 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-42 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