Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 116 (8776 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-16-2017 7:37 PM
346 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: DOCJ
Post Volume:
Total: 816,089 Year: 20,695/21,208 Month: 1,128/2,326 Week: 464/345 Day: 121/208 Hour: 3/6

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
567Next
Author Topic:   Could RNA start life?
PlanManStan
Member (Idle past 1181 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 12-12-2013


Message 46 of 105 (713627)
12-14-2013 10:41 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by dayalanand roy
12-04-2012 12:50 AM


Good Question
Using terms like "invent" and personifying nature can lead to some pretty serious confusion. Indeed, it is one of the flaws I see in creationist arguments regularly. Anyway, RNA, as well as proteins, etc., through certain chemical processes that would've taken place on early Earth. My understanding is that the information storage was a by-product. RNA would "held the fort down" until more complex DNA and proteins took the stage. Finding a a being with only RNA (such as bacteria) would strongly confirm this.

This is just my idea, and I may be wrong on some of it. Please correct me if so.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by dayalanand roy, posted 12-04-2012 12:50 AM dayalanand roy has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by RAZD, posted 12-14-2013 10:47 PM PlanManStan has not yet responded
 Message 48 by PaulK, posted 12-15-2013 2:57 AM PlanManStan has not yet responded
 Message 54 by Ed67, posted 04-17-2014 3:01 AM PlanManStan has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18855
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 47 of 105 (713629)
12-14-2013 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by PlanManStan
12-14-2013 10:41 PM


Re: Good Question
... Finding a a being with only RNA (such as bacteria) would strongly confirm this.

Viruses.

Google RNA world

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 10:41 PM PlanManStan has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12955
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.4


(1)
Message 48 of 105 (713662)
12-15-2013 2:57 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by PlanManStan
12-14-2013 10:41 PM


Re: Good Question
There has been an interesting new development. The creation of a working protocell which could almost be plausible in a prebiotic environment. The main problem seems to be that it needs citrate, which isn't plausible, but now that we know citrate solves some important problems we can start the search for alternatives.

New Szostak protocell


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 10:41 PM PlanManStan has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by RAZD, posted 12-15-2013 8:38 AM PaulK has not yet responded
 Message 50 by Ed67, posted 04-15-2014 9:14 PM PaulK has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18855
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 49 of 105 (713666)
12-15-2013 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by PaulK
12-15-2013 2:57 AM


Re: Good Question
sweet!

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by PaulK, posted 12-15-2013 2:57 AM PaulK has not yet responded

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 823 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 50 of 105 (724307)
04-15-2014 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by PaulK
12-15-2013 2:57 AM


Re: Good Question
"There has been an interesting new development."

Yes, there always is.

And a few years later they all end up on the garbage heap.

But they fulfill their PR purpose in the meantime...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by PaulK, posted 12-15-2013 2:57 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Pressie, posted 04-16-2014 8:41 AM Ed67 has not yet responded
 Message 52 by ringo, posted 04-16-2014 12:51 PM Ed67 has responded
 Message 60 by RAZD, posted 04-18-2014 9:01 AM Ed67 has responded

    
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1714
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 51 of 105 (724341)
04-16-2014 8:41 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Ed67
04-15-2014 9:14 PM


Re: Good Question
ED67 writes:

And a few years later they all end up on the garbage heap.

I don't really think that genetics have ever ended up on the garbage heap. In fact, lots of people falsely being sentenced to the gallows on 'eyewitness accounts' have been freed because of genetics.

It seems as if eyewitness accounts are a lot less reliable than genetics. The figures speak for themselves.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Ed67, posted 04-15-2014 9:14 PM Ed67 has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13416
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 52 of 105 (724359)
04-16-2014 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Ed67
04-15-2014 9:14 PM


Re: Good Question
Ed67 writes:

But they fulfill their PR purpose in the meantime...


You flatter yourself. Very few scientific developments become public knowledge at all.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Ed67, posted 04-15-2014 9:14 PM Ed67 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Ed67, posted 04-17-2014 12:34 AM ringo has responded

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 823 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 53 of 105 (724401)
04-17-2014 12:34 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by ringo
04-16-2014 12:51 PM


Re: Good Question
Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that about scientific discoveries in general, which have greatly benefitted our lives and led to better understandings.

I'm talking about this kind of discovery:
"The creation of a working protocell which could ALMOST be plausible in a prebiotic environment."
TRANSLATION: "Scientists are right on the CUSP of proving abiogenesis true once and for all"

These are the 'discoveries' that end up in magazines and newspapers enough to give the public the impression that scientists 'pretty much know' that life originated by natural causes.

Of course, it's been my impression that these 'discoveries' fall by the wayside and get forgotten, but by then the newest 'discovery' has taken the spotlight...and so on


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by ringo, posted 04-16-2014 12:51 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Omnivorous, posted 04-17-2014 7:20 AM Ed67 has responded
 Message 56 by ringo, posted 04-17-2014 11:39 AM Ed67 has responded

    
Ed67
Member (Idle past 823 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 54 of 105 (724425)
04-17-2014 3:01 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by PlanManStan
12-14-2013 10:41 PM


Re: Good Question
"My understanding is that the information storage was a by-product."

A by-product of what, if you don't mind rephrasing your second sentence?

Sorry, but until I understand what you were saying in the second sentence of your post, I can't really respond to it


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by PlanManStan, posted 12-14-2013 10:41 PM PlanManStan has not yet responded

    
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 461 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


(2)
Message 55 of 105 (724436)
04-17-2014 7:20 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Ed67
04-17-2014 12:34 AM


Re: Good Question
Ed67 writes:

Of course, it's been my impression that these 'discoveries' fall by the wayside and get forgotten, but by then the newest 'discovery' has taken the spotlight...and so on

Most scientific work doesn't result in a shiny new edifice of discovery; and although they don't dazzle like the major breakthroughs they pave the way toward, complete failures and almost-successes are necessary steps.

“I haven't failed, I've found 10,000 ways that don't work”
- Thomas Alva Edison

A present problem in science is that negative results are often not published. Edison worked at physical projects simple enough that he could make and profit from 10,000 failed attempts; scientific challenges have become too complex for that kind of brute force, one scientist approach.

These are the 'discoveries' that end up in magazines and newspapers enough to give the public the impression that scientists 'pretty much know' that life originated by natural causes.

Well, if "pretty much know" is the epistemic bar, I'm content to say I pretty much know that life originated by natural causes.


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Ed67, posted 04-17-2014 12:34 AM Ed67 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Ed67, posted 04-17-2014 9:47 PM Omnivorous has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13416
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.8


(2)
Message 56 of 105 (724459)
04-17-2014 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Ed67
04-17-2014 12:34 AM


Re: Good Question
Ed67 writes:

These are the 'discoveries' that end up in magazines and newspapers enough to give the public the impression that scientists 'pretty much know' that life originated by natural causes.


You referred to a "PR purpose". My point is that the scientists have no "PR purpose". Scientists are notoriously bad at PR. That's why evolution and abiogenesis are so poorly understood.

The ones with a "PR purpose" are the magazines and newspapers and they don't care what they publish as long as it sells magazines and newspapers.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Ed67, posted 04-17-2014 12:34 AM Ed67 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Ed67, posted 04-17-2014 9:48 PM ringo has responded

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 823 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 57 of 105 (724521)
04-17-2014 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Omnivorous
04-17-2014 7:20 AM


Re: Good Question
"Most scientific work doesn't result in a shiny new edifice of discovery"

I agree. And may I remind you, I have the utmost respect for scientists in general.

Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Omnivorous, posted 04-17-2014 7:20 AM Omnivorous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Omnivorous, posted 04-17-2014 10:49 PM Ed67 has not yet responded

    
Ed67
Member (Idle past 823 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 58 of 105 (724522)
04-17-2014 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by ringo
04-17-2014 11:39 AM


Re: Good Question
But where do you think the journalists GET their incessant stories about the 'new discoveries' that all but prove abiogenesis? Do you think the press has moles in the scientific community that steal these 'secrets'?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by ringo, posted 04-17-2014 11:39 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by ringo, posted 04-19-2014 11:53 AM Ed67 has not yet responded

    
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 461 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 59 of 105 (724528)
04-17-2014 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Ed67
04-17-2014 9:47 PM


Re: Good Question
I know you just want to discuss conspiracy media theories with ringo

I'm suggesting your critique fails because it's quite sensible to pretty much believe that life originated from natural causes. So it's not a sly media con that creates that impression: it's reality.

Ed67 writes:

And may I remind you, I have the utmost respect for scientists in general.

Good.

Then you'll certainly understand why I feel that I pretty much know that life originated from natural causes.

Tens (hundreds?) of thousands of those scientists whom we both respect have scrutinized the world from the subatomic scale to 14 billion years away, and they have yet to uncover any unnatural or supernatural causes.

So if you hear, regularly, stories that suggest scientists are hot on the trail of a mechanism by which DNA-life life could have emerged (a better word, I think), that's because they are. The growth rate of our scientific command of the mechanisms of DNA-based life is breathtaking. Even at the threshold of creating synthetic organisms, we have found no need for magic.

So, anyway, why wouldn't anyone feel confident that life originated from natural causes? What other kinds of causes have we discovered?


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Ed67, posted 04-17-2014 9:47 PM Ed67 has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18855
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 60 of 105 (724576)
04-18-2014 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Ed67
04-15-2014 9:14 PM


Progress made in baby steps ...
"There has been an interesting new development."

Yes, there always is.

And a few years later they all end up on the garbage heap.

Curiously, this latest investigation is built on previous investigations and the increasing knowledge of how the basic systems and conditions needed work together to form a protocell.

Things only end up on the garbage heap in science when they are invalidated. That hasn't happened here. What frequently happens is that such discoveries fade from the public consciousness as time passes.

What is learned is a building block for later work.

But they fulfill their PR purpose in the meantime...

There is no PR purpose to science other than to let other scientists know what has been accomplished, usually via peer reviewed articles in scientific journals. so that another facet of science can be done: replication of the work by other scientists to validate the process and discovery.

Message 58: But where do you think the journalists GET their incessant stories about the 'new discoveries' that all but prove abiogenesis? Do you think the press has moles in the scientific community that steal these 'secrets'?

From having "science editors\writers" assigned to review the scientific journals and regurgitate the information in a dumbed-down and often incorrect article purportedly tailored to "average" intellectual comprehension. And then sensationalized in order to boost sales ...

Message 53: I'm talking about this kind of discovery:
"The creation of a working protocell which could ALMOST be plausible in a prebiotic environment."
TRANSLATION: "Scientists are right on the CUSP of proving abiogenesis true once and for all"

These are the 'discoveries' that end up in magazines and newspapers enough to give the public the impression that scientists 'pretty much know' that life originated by natural causes.

Slight correction: " ... that scientists 'pretty much know' that life could have originated by natural causes."

We won't know how life actually developed without finding evidence of how that actually happened.

Of course, it's been my impression that these 'discoveries' fall by the wayside and get forgotten, but by then the newest 'discovery' has taken the spotlight...and so on

And if you read the scientific journals rather than the glossy tabloid type magazines you would likely get a different impression: that the work is ongoing, that it is a slow process, that a lot of work goes into developments leading to the next stage of discovery, and that all the work done to date is building toward resolution of the basic question of whether or not it is possible for life to develop ... and that this appears to be increasingly likely.

Consider this last work: it shows a self-replicating RNA inside a protocell ... rather a major degree of progress from the first spontaneous production of amino acids in the '50's eh?


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Ed67, posted 04-15-2014 9:14 PM Ed67 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Ed67, posted 04-18-2014 9:51 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Prev123
4
567Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017