Converting raw energy into biological energy

In a previous thread; http://EvC Forum: Miscellaneous Topics in Creation/Evolution / Take 2 -->EvC Forum: Miscellaneous Topics in Creation/Evolution / Take 2 AdminNosey writes: I have some more questions...Have you seen this article?: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070820/ap_on_sc/artificial_lifeThis excerpt from it tells the true tale: I brought it up because of this post: http://EvC Forum: How to make a ribozyme (using abiotic starting compounds) -->EvC Forum: How to make a ribozyme (using abiotic starting compounds)And I want to focus on the last bullet point of the excerpt above. What evidence is there that raw energy is able to catalyze biological processes?Molbiogirl and Doddy were both suggesting (presupposing) that biological function had a precursor to fermentation, photosynthesis and respiration. But there is no such precursor found in the fossil record or anywhere else that I am aware of.They and Matt P, had been referring to self replicating enzymes that rely on these systems of energy conversion and other cell processes for which they exist, and are therefore not self replicating. I made the point to molbiogirl that they are not self anything...I was subsequently kicked out of origins for asking too many hard questions that some find sophomoric. Honestly, I did rant a bit and resort to Bible preaching when frustrated that my questions were obfuscated; I thought is was intentional. I do not believe so now. I think that some of you have simply moved past the evidence and take for granted that it is possible based upon your 'methodological naturalist' bias. Molbiogirl spoke of a theoretical explanation for the problem of energy conversion. And I must confess that it is probably internally coherent, but there is no external evidence to support or test it. I want to discuss the subject.Is there evidence of raw energy being useful for biological systems or not? And... would it take more energy to create a system of conversion than the raw energy to be converted provides? This question is the real problem thermodynamically. ( Thermodynamic Arguments for Creation )Origin of Life please... Reinstatement please...Edited by Rob, : No reason given.Edited by Rob, : No reason given.Edited by Rob, : No reason given.Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

Any CreoAdmin assistance is welcome also...

But that's just it Crash... Plants do not operate on raw energy. They convert it into the biologically useable form (ATP for example) by way of photosynthesis. Certainly light did not spontaneously create that process.I first learned about thermodynamics and the incredibly complex processes of photosynthesis while reading a book on growing marijuana hydroponically; of course I never inhaled... Anyway, it does not solve the problem. The factory (photosynthesis http://www.creationwiki.net/Chloroplast ) that converts raw energy into ATP is itself dependant upon ATP. Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

jar: Read my response to crash...

Crash: You're missing the point Crash...So what if plants convert energy into a biologically usable form. Plants (including their chloroplasts) are made (constructed) from the biologically usable form, not the light form.So if ATP is neccessary to build a chloroplast, and the chloroplast converts light into ATP, then where did the ATP to build the chloroplast come from?Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

So did the radiation and the water create the bacteria?

Rahvin: Yeah... no problem!How many components (ingredients) are their in a simple little chloroplast let alone the plant?

Chiroptera: Actually that is what modern science does as it is currently defined. They do not have an answer, so they definetely conclude that there is a material answer to the dillemma.My intention is only to point that out and learn as much as I can in the process about your methods of obfuscation.

jar: You may want to reread my OP...

Rahvin: Is there any evidence for these imagined organisms in the fossil record, or anywhere else in biology?

Rahvin: Why did and does it plainly? Because life exists?Is that not an argument from incredulity?

( http://www.bookrags.com/Chloroplast )

jar: You missed the fact that this is an 'Origins of Life ' thread?You can't make the connections?What's wrong with you?

Rahvin: Very Good Rahvin!Bravo!So where do you observe these theorized evolutionary ancestors of modern plants and bacteria?

Rahvin: I did...I was referring to the first forms (thier ancestors) that are theorized.Why do you assume they existed?