In fact, if we disolved in water (using the formal chemical names) ribose-5-phosphate, glutamine, asparic acid, glycine, N10-formylTHF, carbon dioxide, and energy packets of ATP and GTP- all the small molecules that are used by the cell to build AMP- and let them sit for a long time (say, a thousand or a million years) we would not get any AMP.
You don't read anything I post, do you? C'mon. Admit it.
Prebiotic Formation of ADP and ATP from AMP, Calcium Phosphates and Cyanate in Aqueous Solution Origins of Life and Evolution of Biospheres Vol. 29, No. 5
Because we do not know what the conditions were. We only theorize based upon limited data.
The data is hardly limited, Rob. Grow a pair and dip into pubmed sometime.
And lab techs manufacturing evidence is hardly objective...
I don't mind doing additional research on pF1. Expect the cites tomorrow.
Or that they do not look anything like life as we know it. In fact, theyre not even alive...
I repeat. Behe said "the molecules of life" are easy to make.
No unwhole parts will do... just as my truck won't self assemble if I put all of the thousands of parts in the garage and wait. I need a mechanic. And my truck is crude and primitive technology compared to these systems
Doddy: This analogy falls over, because macroscopic systems don't compare with microscopic ones. Your truck parts won't be floating around your garage, bumping into one another, but biological molecules will. If the truck parts that are fit together bump into one another, they won't usually stick without a bolt or rivet to stick them, but biological molecules fit together because of their intrinsic properties. No truck part has electrostatics and van der Waal forces to worry about, as those are tiny forces, but very real on the scale of biological molecules. In most ways, the truck is much harder to build than a biological system. In part, this is why I get so fed up with the IDists calling flagella 'outboard motors' and so forth, because an outboard motor is way harder to see self-assemble.
Ok the truck is a bad analogy. I agree as I conceded in my last response. But hold on...
You're assuming the existence of the parts to begin with. That is not what the evidence shows.
The evidence shows that the biological parts are manufactured. Proteins are not formed by chance.
First, they are coded in the DNA, they are then transcribed from an RNA replica of the particular DNA sequence for that protein (so the RNA is itself transcribed). Then the amino acid chain assembled within the Ribosome is shaped into the proper three dimensional structure, and it is then transported to the area it is needed.
And they have to be put together in the proper sequence. Electric motors for example (like the bacterial flagellum) are built in sequence as the genes are expressed. There's a lot more going on here than parts from nowhere floating around in an accidental surfactant bubble and just 'coming together under me'.
Let's take a look at the flagellum for a moment just as an example:
Minnich on the question: ‘What is the most remarkable aspect of the bacterial flagellum?’
“The most amazing aspect of the bacterial flagellum to me is… (actually I can’t limit it to one aspect). You have the motor itself, very sophisticated; Howard Berg at Harvard (I’ve heard him speak several times) has labeled it ‘the most efficient machine in the universe’; the fact that it runs (normally in E. Coli) at 17,000 rmp. Two gears, forward and reverse, water cooled, proton motive force, it’s hardwired to a signal transduction system and has short term memory… That’s fascinating!
But then when you step back and look at the genetics in terms of the program, the blueprint to build this system, you find another layer of complexity. In the genes it’s not enough to have the fifty genes required; we find that they are also fired (or expressed) in a given sequence. And that there are checks and balances, so if there is a problem in assembly; that information feeds back at the genetic level and shuts down expression. There are gate keepers. There is communication molecularly at a distance (and a significant distance). So you build a scaffold on the end of this thing that is protruding from the cell, and it’s feeding back and saying, ‘ok, we have enough of that sub-unit, now send the next sub-unit.’
We don’t understand how this works yet. But it’s fascinating! It’s something that I could spend the rest of my life studying it’s so intriguing in terms of how this system works.”
(Scott A. Minnich Ph.D., Associate Professor of Microbiology at the University of Idaho. He was an assistant professor at Tulane University, and did postdoctoral research with Austin Newton at Princeton University and Arthur Aronson at Purdue University.
Minnich’s research interests are temperature regulation of Y. enterocolita gene expression and coordinate reciprocal expression of flagellar and virulence genes. He is widely published in technical journals, including the ‘Journal of Bacteriology’, ‘Molecular Microbiology’, ‘Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences’, and the ‘Journal of Microbiological Methods’.)
While I will concede that for anything to be called an organism, it must be separated from the environment by a membrane, the actual membrane is pretty simple. Phospholipids, like all surfactants, form layers, even bilayers, at certain concentrations in solution. They self-assemble. Likewise, a protein with many hydrophobic amino acids like glycine or leucine on one end will attach to the membrane. That sort of stuff is easy to stumble upon by accident, and what we see in living things today is just the evolved version of those accidents.
Prebiotic Formation of ADP and ATP from AMP, Calcium Phosphates and Cyanate in Aqueous Solution Origins of Life and Evolution of Biospheres Vol. 29, No. 5 / October, 1999
Hmmm I can't find it anywhere...
I found this little gem by Orgel (a real scientist). And it is from 2004. Did I miss the adenine formula from 1999 you are so exited about on pages 102 through 104? It's a PDF so you'll have to look at it yourself.
He covered a lot of different modes of conceivalbe synthesis, and it looked pretty bleak to me. Seems a confrirmation of Behe until you prove something...
Try harder. Here's the article: http://www.springerlink.com/content/q148256677847857/ All I did was try google scholar. Didn't work, but it told me to try the whole web. And lo and behold, I see the title of the article (minus vol., num., and date). I click on it, and it's from the same volume, number, and date listed by molbio.
I found this little gem by Orgel (a real scientist). And it is from 2004.
From the paper you claim to have read:
Nucleoside 2 or 3 phosphates sometimes give nucleoside 2 or 3 cyclic phosphates in good yield in this way. More recently it has been shown that AMP can be converted to ADP and ATP by cyanate in the presence of insoluble calcium phosphates (Yamagata, 1999).