Very well. It is conceivable that I have mixed up my facts. Perhaps you would be so kind as to provide proof of my mix-up, however. Thank you.
It would be helpful that you be ready to back up your claim should anyone ever ask. An answer like "you should do your own research..." or the answer you just gave above will tick many people off, including myself.
By the way, welcome to the boards.
This message has been edited by Lama dama ding dong, 05-14-2004 12:35 PM
No matter what the reason, whether the heat was left on too long or not, amino acids will NEVER polymerise into DNA. If amino acids polymerise they form proteins. The only monomers which could form DNA by polymerisation are dideoxy nucleotides. Chemically these are totally different from amino acids. Consider this - if I string together a whole bunch of paper clips, how likely is it that at the end of the process the paperclips have all transmogrified into daisies to make a daisy chain?
quote:because DNA is not self replicating because it has no enzyme activity, and RNA cannot replicate itself without DNA either. Both must have come into existence at the same time. Therefore, it must have been created.
Why couldn't DNA and RNA come from space aliens looking to terraform a planet for colonization? I see no reason why we should jump to the conclusion of a diety.
quote:What is the simplest organism you can think of? Probably some kind of virus, which still has how many genes? The smallest one I have ever heard of still has a few hundred genes. The 'simplest' organism on Earth is still far to complicated to ever have evolved step-wise.
First of all, viruses are not considered to be "alive". Second of all, you have not shown any evidence that viruses, or even bacteria, are the simplest organisms EVER to live on earth. For you to claim that all life that has ever existed on earth was too complex to come about by natural mechanisms, you must first show us what the simplest, least complex organism to ever live on earth. Up to the challenge?
The topic of whether or not virus's are alive is hotly debated still as far as i am aware. However i think that the main problem with the definition of alive is that we are simply composed of molecules interacting in various ways, this happens in a test tube in a chemistry class. I reckon alive is in the same class of vague definitions such as species etc etc Its all rather fuzzy.
Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life....