|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Converting raw energy into biological energy | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4032 Joined: Member Rating: 9.2 |
We're talking about abiogenesis here... how any of you missed that in the OP is beyond me. Perhpas I should have used the word 'Abiogenesis'. You realize that abiogenesis is not the same as the origin of photosynthesis, right? It's not likely that the first living organism utilized photosynthesis, and neither did the first photosynthesizing organism form from nonliving material. We assume that the precursors to modern photosynthesizing organisms existed becasue, as Crash pointed out long ago, we have fossil evidence of some of their leavings, and other precursors still exist today like the bacteria I mentioned. They dont have to be dead to be precursors, Rob. Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
Chirptera:
I doubt that there is a complete void. But the point still stands: even if science does not yet know the answer to the question, how does "it must have been a designer!" become a reasonable conclusion? It's a good point... But we could just as easily ask why 'there must not have been' is a reasonable conclusion? Why not consider all the options... both design and material?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
Rahvin:
You realize that abiogenesis is not the same as the origin of photosynthesis, right? Yes, if you go back and read the OP you will see: 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. Crash is the one who jumped on the photopynthesis bit.. I think everyone needs to go back and read the OP. Relax, take a breath, and let it sink in...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 393 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Why not consider all the options... both design and material? If anyone ever presents any evidence of design that stands up to examination, then it will be considered. Why not also consider magic and fairy dust? Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2284 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.8 |
considering the immense (in fact incomprehensible) complexity of living organisms.
Just because you can't comprehend it doesn't mean it's incomprehensible.
Quaternary digital codes that instruct the building of chloroplasts don't just pop out of chemical soups when you add light.
No one is saying they do, this is a straw man. Live every week like it's Shark Week! Just a monkey in a long line of kings. If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 393 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
rob writes: But there is no such precursor found in the fossil record or anywhere else that I am aware of. But you have been given links to at least one example of a creature that directly converts water to usable energy from just the natural decay of uranium in rocks. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Why not consider all the options... both design and material? Sure. But there are no plausible candidates for a designer. As far as we know, there is no designer, no evidence that there ever was a designer, and no testable ideas concerning any designer. So, not only does science not have anything to work with, there is no option for me to consider here. Before I can consider a designer as a possible explanation for anything, there has to be some reasonable possibility that such a designer ever existed at the right time and the right place. What designer may have existed on the earth 4 1/2 billion years ago? What evidence is there that such an entity did exist? You're trying to put the cart before the horse here: first present evidence that there was some entity that could have done any designing, then we can consider it as a candidate for having done the designing. As far as "material", we do have historical precedent of phenomena that were once inexplicable (and attributed to the action of gods) but ended up having purely naturalistic explanations, so it is not unreasonable to think that such a thing can occur again. We also have some understanding of the workings of nature (which we call "the laws of nature"), and knowing these "laws" in chemistry and physics allows the construction of possible hypotheses and the means of testing them. Edited by Chiroptera, : typos I've done everything the Bible says, even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff! -- Ned Flanders
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22388 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Hi Rob,
You are correct that science, working within the framework of methodological naturalism, will always assume natural causes. So when you ask about the origin of the ability to transform "raw energy" into "biological energy", the answer is just chemistry. If you ever took chemistry in high school then you'll remember that many experiments included a step where you heated a mixture over a Bunsen burner. The heat from the Bunsen burner is your "raw energy", and it drives the chemical reactions. Energy, whether in the form of heat or light or cosmic rays or particles related to radioactivity, drives chemical reactions. It's a completely natural phenomenon. Life powers itself by taking advantage of the fact that energy drives chemical reactions. In reconstructing the history of life, science will only consider processes for which there is evidence, like chemical reactions driven by heat or light, and change in species over time. We have no evidence of any processes driven by supernatural agents, so science cannot consider such possibilities. The idea of the existence of supernatural agents springs from religion and spirituality and not from evidence from the natural world. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
But there is no such precursor found in the fossil record or anywhere else that I am aware of. Jesus christ, is that what this is about? Fuckin-a, Rob. It's called "chemosynthesis." Bacteria that live near deep-sea ocean vents survive off of raw mineral materials and form the basis of an entire ecosystem that never sees the light of the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
jar:
But you have been given links to at least one example of a creature that directly converts water to usable energy from just the natural decay of uranium in rocks. The energy source is not the issue jar. Do you understand? This organism is still dependant upon ATP. It converts energy of one kind into ATP. How do we account for metabolism to begin with? You're still missing the point! How are energy conversion sytems built when the converted energy needed to build them (ATP) has not yet been converted? How is ATP made? You boys (and girls) are assuming the existence of the very thing your trying to explain. ATP is not someting that exists naturally (ie. chemically). It is converted by biological processes (factories / machines). But in turn, biological processes cannot exist until ATP is present to build them. We've got a problem...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
Crash:
Bacteria that live near deep-sea ocean vents survive off of raw mineral materials and form the basis of an entire ecosystem that never sees the light of the sun. ATP They use ATP.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2641 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
...the answer is just chemistry. I want to elaborate just a smidge for Rob's sake. From TalkOrigins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy: Creationist view of abiogenesis: simple chemicals --> bacteria Real view of abiogenesis: simple chemicals --> polymers --> replicating polymers --> hypercycle --> protobiont --> bacteria Another way of looking at abiogenesis: simple chemicals --> basic building blocks --> catalytic polymers + abiotic metabolism pre-RNA world --> RNA world --> DNA/protein world FYI, Rob, everything to the left of protobiont/RNA world (in yellow) is driven by chemistry (i.e. without photosynthesis/fermentation/respiration). Do you want to discuss the pre biotic chemistry (which does not include photosynthesis/fermentation/respiration) or biotic chemistry (which includes photosynthesis/fermentation/respiration)?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
They use ATP. That's not surprising. Nearly one out of every 1000 randomly-generated proteins binds ATP, which can easily be generated by simple chemical reactions. Its constituent products occur inorganically. Just saying "ATP! ATP!" isn't a coherent response to what we're telling you. And let me remind you again - biochemists aren't fucking morons, so the idea that they've never thought of how early organisms would come to have an energy economy based on phosphating ADP is just ludicrous on its face.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
How do we account for metabolism to begin with? ADP and AMP are naturally occuring; nearly one out of every thousand random polypeptides can bind ADP to a phosphate under energetically-favorable circumstances.
ATP is not someting that exists naturally (ie. chemically). Yes, it is. Is this, perhaps, the source of your confusion? The idea that you can't form ADP or ATP inorganically? Nothing could be further from the truth, I assure you. Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Rob  Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days) Posts: 2297 Joined: |
Crash:
The idea that you can't form ADP or ATP inorganically? Nothing could be further from the truth, I assure you. Don't assure me... Show me... Edited by Rob, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024