Oh, for God's sake. Both Miller and Urey were almost certainly theists. What possible interest would they have in trying to disprove the god of both their religions?
Almost certainly theists? How have you deduced that from that their studies? What purpose does it serve to figure out how life could have originated at random and also believe in a Creator. A Creator needs 'create' in order to be a Creator. I think you're bright enough to realize that.
You need to get over these juvenile atheist conspiracy theories. Christians and other theists are overwhelmingly involved in research in evolutionary biology and biochemistry. The idea that all this science is just an atheist plot to disprove God is idiotic.
Crash, what other premise did it serve? What medicinal value is there in their study? What philanthropy could possibly have derived from the experiment? You claim that I'm spewing some conspiratorial rant but the premsie is quite clear. You tell me what purpose it served and we'll go from there.
Absolutely 100% false, as you've been repeatedly told. The purpose of the experiment was to establish whether or not amino acids could form under specific inorganic conditions.
LOL! Yeah, to show that life could have originated at random. Everyone knows this except you. Here's an interview with Miller. As you'll clearly see, he is defending the position that the inquiry is in support of abiogenesis. Closing your eyes won't make the monster disappear.
Just a moment...
When you rebut a claim that your opponent didn't make, that you just made up yourself, that's called "arguing a stawman." That's exactly what you've done here. The purpose of the experiment was absolutely not what you describe, which is abundantly obvious if you actually look up the experiment you're talking about.
Then tell me what purpose it served and why? Even in light of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
It takes 20 specific amino acids, placed in sequential order just to produce one protein.
Almost entirely incorrect. It's entirely possible to construct functional proteins from as few as 8 different aminos, and possibly even less. Certainly 20 aminos are employed by today's complex life, but there's no reason that all 20 are required right from the beginning.
8 aminos? Then why do we see across the board with all organisms containing 20 amino's per protein, per molecule? Show me functional proteins with as little as 8 amino's , which amino's are they, and how have you come to such a radical conclusion?
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner