|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: God's Day 1 Billion Years? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jimrlong.com Inactive Member |
"Well, that's what it's like now, to be sure. And remember too that the structure of DNA is universal"
If life has DNA now, what is your proof that it can work without DNA.... It might make your case for time developing from RNA, but it is without proof that life can exist without DNA. Jim Edited by jimrlong.com, : Grammar
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jimrlong.com Inactive Member |
"Miller took molecules which were believed to represent the major components of the early Earth's atmosphere and put them into a closed system
The gases they used were methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), hydrogen (H2), and water (H2O). Next, he ran a continuous electric current through the system, to simulate lightning storms believed to be common on the early earth. Analysis of the experiment was done by chromotography. At the end of one week, Miller observed that as much as 10-15% of the carbon was now in the form of organic compounds. Two percent of the carbon had formed some of the amino acids which are used to make proteins. Perhaps most importantly, Miller's experiment showed that organic compounds such as amino acids, which are essential to cellular life, could be made easily under the conditions that scientists believed to be present on the early earth. This enormous finding inspired a multitude of further experiments. In 1961, Juan Oro found that amino acids could be made from hydrogen cyanide (HCN) and ammonia in an aqueous solution. He also found that his experiment produced an amazing amount of the nucleotide base, adenine. Adenine is of tremendous biological significance as an organic compound because it is one of the four bases in RNA and DNA. It is also a component of adenosine triphosphate, or ATP, which is a major energy releasing molecule in cells. Experiments conducted later showed that the other RNA and DNA bases could be obtained through simulated prebiotic chemistry with a reducing atmosphere. These discoveries created a stir within the science community. Scientists became very optimistic that the questions about the origin of life would be solved within a few decades. This has not been the case, however. Instead, the investigation into life's origins seems only to have just begun. There has been a recent wave of skepticism concerning Miller's experiment because it is now believed that the early earth's atmosphere did not contain predominantly reductant molecules. Another objection is that this experiment required a tremendous amount of energy. While it is believed lightning storms were extremely common on the primitive Earth, they were not continuous as the Miller/Urey experiment portrayed. Thus it has been argued that while amino acids and other organic compounds may have been formed, they would not have been formed in the amounts which this experiment produced." http://www.chem.duke.edu/...uise_chem/Exobiology/miller.html
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
So you just ignore the subsequent experiments that produced amino acids in other environments? You cling to one half-century-old experiment as the sole defense of your ignorance of chemistry?
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jimrlong.com Inactive Member |
I gave my cite with listed website give your cite with website. Then maybe you could relieve some of my ignorance of chemistry. I was only addressing the post using the Miller-Urey experiment cited in the post...
Jim :-) The Peace of the lord be with you :-)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jimrlong.com Inactive Member |
Given enough time the proverbial 747 could be built out of spare parts by wind, but will the jet fly or the cell live? I was down at the lake the other day watching the canards. None of them were as old as yours But no less relevent or do you have a non-Creator explination for how the cell came to life.... Oh. and with computer modeling why haven't you found a way these things came together... Forgive my ignorance but what does this mean: "canards" Thanks, Jim :-) The Peace of the lord be with you :-)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
jimrlong.com writes: I gave my cite with listed website give your cite with website. Why don't we start with your own? Your own quote mentions Juan Oro in 1961. And the very next paragraph after your quote begins:
quote: From a quickie Google search:link quote: quote: Now remind me, what does any of this have to do with the topic? Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jimrlong.com Inactive Member |
Hebrew Bible: It a drastic contrast in a view of monotheism in a world filled with cultures all having several gods. It had peaceful creation of animals and plants to the violent creation stories in religions at the time. Creation was described in a detail never before put forth. Most of the laws of Moses are how to serve others and love our God, while other cultures required set procedures for appeasing the gods constantly. Unique you might say, but I prefer inspired.
Without a descent explanation about how life started on earth, I don't have enough faith to be an atheist. You have given no proof how this would come together and start living. I have to believe that without a Creator, there is no life. I was willing to take the word of a scientist to the beginning of life and its date. So that is where I came up with 1 Day in God's life might be a billion years. I was told about the inconsistency of the Biblical account and tried to show you the inconsistencies of your account. Jim The Peace of the lord be with you :-)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Matt P Member (Idle past 4805 days) Posts: 106 From: Tampa FL Joined: |
Hi Jim,
Here's a quick overview of papers in the last year and a half that have produced amino acids through experiments not operating in the CH4/NH3 atmosphere. I've excluded anything older than 2005.
Ehrenfreund P, Rasmussen S, Cleaves J, et al.
Experimentally tracing the key steps in the origin of life: The aromatic world ASTROBIOLOGY 6 (3): 490-520 JUN 2006 Plankensteiner K, Reiner H, Rode BAAmino acids on the rampant primordial Earth: Electric discharges and the hot salty ocean MOLECULAR DIVERSITY 10 (1): 3-7 FEB 2006 Orgel LEGeothermal synthesis and metabolism ASTROBIOLOGY 6 (2): 297-298 APR 2006 Hazen RMGenesis: Rocks, minerals, and the geochemical origin of life ELEMENTS 1 (3): 135-137 JUN 2005 Saladino R, Crestini C, Costanzo G, et al.On the prebiotic synthesis of nucleobases, nucleotides, oligonucleoticles, Pre-RNA and Pre-DNA molecules TOPICS IN CURRENT CHEMISTRY 259: 29-68 2005 Pascal R, Boiteau L, Commeyras AFrom the prebiotic synthesis of alpha-amino acids towards a primitive translation apparatus for the synthesis of peptides TOPICS IN CURRENT CHEMISTRY 259: 69-122 2005 Shapiro RSmall molecule interactions were central to the origin of life QUARTERLY REVIEW OF BIOLOGY 81 (2): 105-125 JUN 2006 Bouchoux G, Guillemin JC, Lemahieu N, et al.Protonation thermochemistry of aminoacetonitrile RAPID COMMUNICATIONS IN MASS SPECTROMETRY 20 (8): 1187-1191 2006 Morita M, Harada Y, Iseki K, et al.Mass spectroscopic approach to amino acids formation processes by UV irradiation to simple organic molecules in aqueous solution ANALYTICAL SCIENCES 21 (9): 1085-1090 SEP 2005 Saladino R, Crestini C, Neri V, et al.Synthesis and degradation of nucleic acid components by formamide and cosmic dust analogues CHEMBIOCHEM 6 (8): 1368-1374 AUG 2005 Nakazawa H, Sekine T, Kakegawa T, et al.High yield shock synthesis of ammonia from iron, water and nitrogen available on the early Earth EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE LETTERS 235 (1-2): 356-360 JUN 30 2005 Plankensteiner K, Reiner H, Rode BMPrebiotic chemistry: The amino acid and peptide world CURRENT ORGANIC CHEMISTRY 9 (12): 1107-1114 AUG 2005 Chen QW, Chen CLThe role of inorganic compounds in the prebiotic synthesis of organic molecules CURRENT ORGANIC CHEMISTRY 9 (10): 989-998 JUL 2005 Chyba CFAtmospheric science - Rethinking Earth's early atmosphere SCIENCE 308 (5724): 962-963 MAY 13 2005 Tian F, Toon OB, Pavlov AA, et al.A hydrogen-rich early Earth atmosphere SCIENCE 308 (5724): 1014-1017 MAY 13 2005
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
jimrlong.com writes: Hebrew Bible.... Unique you might say, but I prefer inspired. No, I wouldn't say "unique" at all - Egyptians had monotheism, Hammurabi had his code book..... We have lots of threads on that stuff.
Without a descent explanation about how life started on earth, I don't have enough faith to be an atheist. Well, atheism is pretty much defined as a lack of faith, so that's no problem. We have lots of threads on that too.
You have given no proof how this would come together and start living. Nothing was ever said about "proof". All I've done is point out a few of your misconceptions about chemistry. If you have no clue how chemistry works, how can anybody show you that life could arise without a "creator"?
I have to believe that without a Creator, there is no life. Silly, silly, silly. Just look out the window and "believe" that life exists. How it came to exist is an entirely different question.
I was told about the inconsistency of the Biblical account and tried to show you the inconsistencies of your account. I haven't given any account. How could there be "inconsistencies"?
I was willing to take the word of a scientist to the beginning of life and its date. So that is where I came up with 1 Day in God's life might be a billion years. Your mistake is in injecting God into the science. Whether or not God exists, whether She created the world in six days or watched life form spontaneously over billions of years has nothing to do with science. Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation. Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1498 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
It might make your case for time developing from RNA, but it is without proof that life can exist without DNA. You've never heard of viruses? Or prions? Now, certainly those things now cannot reproduce except in the context of more complicated life; but certainly they bear similarities to whatever chemical protolife was the ancestors of "truly" living things. Look, Jim. The whole business is much, much more complicated than you seem prepared to deal with. Your grand pronouncements of what is impossible, buoyed by false statements about what Nasa may or may not have said, are meaningless. If you're not prepared to accept abiogenesis, that's fine. It's true that it's a hard field to work in, because time machines don't exist, and molecules don't readily fossilize. But we're making progress, and eventually that progress will roll right over your nonsense objections and your throwback theology. Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1498 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Hebrew Bible: It a drastic contrast in a view of monotheism in a world filled with cultures all having several gods. The Hebrew Bible may be many things, but it is not monotheistic. While it is true that the Bible asserts the dominance of only one God to be worshipped, it certainly makes no claim that the gods of the other religions do not exist at all. In fact, quite the opposite. But that's not on-topic in this thread. This is a science thread, not a theology thread.
I have to believe that without a Creator, there is no life. We've never observed any Creator creating life. Therefore that conclusion is not a scientific one. Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ben! Member (Idle past 1429 days) Posts: 1161 From: Hayward, CA Joined: |
We've never observed any Creator creating life. Therefore that conclusion is not a scientific one. Since we've never observed anything creating life, no affirmitive conclusion about the origin of life is "scientific." You're really being sloppy here; we don't need to observe any creator creating life to come to such a scientific conclusion. We just need "overwhelming" evidence indicating that that happened. Evidence, for example, that supports evolution over timescales of millions of years--something else we haven't "observed" in the sense you're using here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1498 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
You're really being sloppy here; we don't need to observe any creator creating life to come to such a scientific conclusion. We just need "overwhelming" evidence indicating that that happened. Well, there's no such evidence that a creator even exists. And my statement isn't sloppy. No model of abiogenesis will ever be accepted until it produces results under laboratory conditions. There isn't any other kind of evidence avaliable; we won't ever have fossils of the chemical precursors to life. That information is lost forever. Observation of experiment is the only potential evidence that could confirm or dismiss any abiogenic model.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Christian7 Member (Idle past 279 days) Posts: 628 From: n/a Joined: |
An interesting thing happens when you take the approximate number for the Creation of the Earth is 4.7 Billion Years ago and “homo sapiens” at between 130 - 195 Million Years Ago divided by the 5 days given in the Biblical account in Genesis 1, you get approximately 1 Billion Years and the fist life supposedly appeared 1 Billion Years after Earth Creation. So is 1 Billion Years God’s Day? To get a closer number one would need to know how those dates were arrived at and what margin of error they contain. Dates except “homo sapiens” dates taken from Arizona University: http://nitro.biosci.arizona.edu/...gins_of_Life/origins.html
The word for "Day" in genesis chapter 1 in hebrew is yom. Yom means one single day. This was also combined with the terms for "Evening and morning". If when Moses wrote genesis, he wanted to mean an age, he could have used a variety of different words. He could have used Yamim, Qedem, or Olam, all of which would have implied an age, but instead he used the world Yom. (The o has a little thingy on top of it.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Christian7 Member (Idle past 279 days) Posts: 628 From: n/a Joined: |
We've never observed any Creator creating life. Therefore that conclusion is not a scientific one. We've never observed macro-evolution. Therefore that belief is not a scientific one.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024