Problems with the first life

As our prophet says(as God (ALLAH) wants him to say in explaining the holy quran):The truth is what the muslim is seeking for,where ever he found it he took it.So finally ,I am seeking for the truth.So If you got it I would be thankful to take it-after you prove it-.This message has been edited by dandon83, 07-22-2004 05:16 AM

Your story was interesting but I'm sort of baffled what it has to do with science?

If there is anything science teaches us it is that proof by analogy is very, very weak proof indeed.You believe in a god without a maker, how is that any less absurd?

Thank you for this. It is a good succinct outline.Could you suggest some links to a few of the experiments cited?Especially:

quote:

---

Stage 3 Self replicating molecules

​

Laboratory experiments have shown that nucleotide monomers can naturally assemble into RNA molecules without divine intervention. This process happens without the presence of cells or enzymes.

​

Stage 4 Assembly of pre-cells

​

Again, laboratory experiments have shown that lipids can fold and establish a self-contained environment in the center from the environment.

---

Thanks in advance.

quote:

---

how could a mindless molecules know how to divide the cell into two similar cells??!how to know what essential components must exist in both to keep living??!!!!do you want me to continue??

---

Why would they have to? Do sodium and chloride molecules know that they need to get together to make salt? Do iron filings know they are attracted by magnets? Does a sheep know to grow wool to make clothes for humans?

have you looked before at force laws in physics? did you see that coloumb ,magnetic,gravitational forces all have similar laws?
does the gravitational force law on earth differs from that on mars or any other planet or any place in the universe?If you look carefully,you will see a unity in the universe . what can you conclude? I , conclude that it whole is someone's work.I do not know what does ANALOGY mean .but if its meaning is (SIMILARITY) ; then I can say that science it self uses similarity -some times- to explain or prove things that are hard to be done in a direct way.

Sorry gbunty, but I'm afraid you're going to have to do the research yourself. I'm an old fashion college science student who doesn't do much research online. I don't trust most of the sources online, so I tend to go for books. I'll dig out some stuff on the subject later .

---

The Laminator
For goodness's sake, please vote Democrat this November!

If you are talking about the universe as we see it at its most basic level, then many if not most Theistic Evolutionists would certainly agree. In Message 55 I discussed where I personally se the Hand of the Designer.But if you assume that is where GOD operated, that still allows Evolution, and even the initial creation of life to be simple chance events moderated by natural selection.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Gbunty - I'm not having much luck as yet with online references, though
Szostak Lab: Home
seems to get close to several abiogenesis topics like these.
I think that I've also seen papers along these lines at PNAS:
PNAS
If you register, they have free full-text for quite a long time interval. I'll look around there if I don't get too lazy.Edit to add: the Szostak page has a lot of goodies, as pdfs, on their publications page.This message has been edited by Coragyps, 07-25-2004 02:02 PM

It goes side by side with science. science is studying of the universe
so it will lead -surely- to the origion of every thing . which we do not agree with each other in cocnclusions we make from science . So one of us has some wronge understanding of the spirit of science, and i like to know who is that one.This message has been edited by dandon83, 07-26-2004 03:50 AM

I have replied at you in the place you mentioned.This message has been edited by dandon83, 07-26-2004 04:36 AM

Yes, they're all root-squared laws - a fact that follows directly from conservation of energy. I see no reason to conclude that at all. An undesigned universe has to be consistent; a designed one does not. Scientists frequently uses analogy to explain things; science never uses analogy to prove things.

An undesigned universe has to be consistent; a designed one does not.how could it be?
if you ordered your hair, you will give it a certain shape then each single hair will contribute to the whole shape.but if you did not , here, no unity will exist.

Scientists frequently uses analogy to explain things; science never uses analogy to prove things.How?
scientist foud that cupper conducts electricity and cupper is a metal. they examined another metals and found the same property in them . and they conclude that all metals conduct electricity, and they announced this conclusion before testing the all known metals.NOW, can you say they were wrong???

If the universe has originated by natural processes, then those processes must be consistent to produce complexity.If the universe was designed, that designer could do anything they liked. Bad analogy. Styling your hair is imposing order on an existing and unordered object.