A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible

ICR ^ | June 1, 2007 | Duane Gish, PHD

[dartuser]

So again we are back to the assertion that if a PhD has a view that does not conform to the "scientific consensis", then he really doesnt have the credentials that the degree granted him.

This is tiresome ...

[GladesGuru]

“So again we are back to the assertion that if a PhD has a view that does not conform to the “scientific consensis”, then he really doesnt have the credentials that the degree granted him.”

If you are implying that I said any such thing, I did not.

What I did say was that the hypotheses had to stand on its own. Perhaps you are confusing medieval scholasticism with scinece?

[dartuser]

Not only is it a PhD in biochemistry ... its a PhD in biochemistry from Berkeley.

[bioqubit]

There is no such thing as a self-replicating molecule, and no such molecule could ever exist.

---

That statement is factually incorrect.

Scientific American, I believe, and even Science magazine, at various times, have had articles on self-replicating molecules. There are certain small molecules that can cause a molecule with a similar structure to conform to its structure, creating a perfect copy.

The trick is the role of catalysis. The author apparently does not know much about catalysis. It is a hugely complex area. The way any given molecule can work as a catalyst is a function of the environment it is in and there can be a huge number of possible catalytic reactions with some molecules.

I suffer from a different riddle: If the conditions for the initiation of life existed so long ago, given the complexity of our environment, why can’t there be places where life originates over and over again.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

The article has more scientific errors per paragraph than anything I've read recently.

You might like this article better.