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

To: AndrewC
For the paradigm I believe we are discussing it is necessary.

No, it isn't. The "pre-biotic soup" is only one of many hypotheses for beginning of life.

494 posted on 02/23/2002 6:44:45 AM PST by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 493 | View Replies ]


To: Nebullis
hypotheses for beginning of life.

Okay pick one.

495 posted on 02/23/2002 6:47:58 AM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 494 | View Replies ]

To: Nebullis
"The "pre-biotic soup" is only one of many hypotheses for beginning of life. "

That is correct, and the reason for there being so many hypotheses for the beginning of life is that none of them seem to work.

One of the problems with formulating a non-God created hypothesis for life's beginning is that simple matter of food. Living things cannot eat minerals. They can only eat proteins manufactured by other living things. The only exception to this is plants which either through photosynthesis or chemosynthesis can create their own nourishment from sunlight and chemicals. Both these processes are quite complicated. They require quite complicated genes to function and the very first life would have required such a functioning system in order to survive at all (in addition to genes for reproduction and other essential functions). Of course such a living thing could not have "evolved" since there can be no evolution until there is reproduction and working living beings.

635 posted on 02/24/2002 7:04:14 AM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 494 | View Replies ]

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