There has to be energy to form these amino acids. Hence the lightning. No new data has been released because no new successful experiment has been conducted. (It’s not the fault of the scientists, they tried hard)
Here’s what I don’t like about the Miller-Urey experiment. It does not use the whole spectra of the UV range. It uses a specific wavelength to produce the amino acids and left out all the rest. (Which would have been harmful to the amino acids. Part of the reason why UV light is used to kill bacteria in hospitals.).
It also had traps to remove the product before it is destroyed by radiation. Not something found in the natural world. (The ocean would not have protected the amino acids in a natural enviroment. UV light can penetrate several meters)
Also, presumed conditions of primordial earth would have driven the amino acids toward lonely isolation. Hence any formation of proteins would have been subverted. There is also a strong tendency for peptide bonds to break down in water.
In addition to this, there is something known as the “chirality problem”. With rare exceptions, all bio-molecules of amino acids are left-handed, and those of sugars are right-handed.
Racemates are mixtures artificially created that have a 50:50 ratio of right and left-handed.
Simple question. What experiment has been conducted that expands successfully (as in the direction towards making life) Miller’s original experiment? Can I provide the references tomorrow? It’s night here.
Percy, They found more amino acids. most all needed for life, I think. Unfortunately, that does not qualify as life. Additionally, it does not qualify as life. Now that leaves the question, What is life?
I need incorporate bacteria ONLY if I believe in evolution, which I do not. This is the standard textbook version of life, which I adhere to. Viruses are non-living because they are unable to metabolise on their own. They need a host. So basically, an organism that is able to metabolise on their own. And, no. I don’t have to incorporate God into this. Since I do not know why you want it to be so.
No, Dr, you misrepresent me. Yes, they have been doing experiments, collecting data, etc. But. No experiment that makes life from non life. Per my definition. And yes, I'm getting about to reading those references, so I'll not be replying in awhile
quote: Uh, no, you need to incorporate bacteria if you think they're alive.
quote: Well, creationists usually claim that God is alive. (And, of course, dead people too.) So it would be nice if one of them just once would provide a definition of life under which this would be true. Is God "an organism that can metabolize on its own"? Not according to conventional ideas of the Godhead. So ...
You see. I don’t claim God is alive. I rather view it as God is beyond death.
I have told phat in a private message that I adhere not to a literal reading of Scripture, but to a literal-historical-grammatical-contextual reading (I think I said that somewhere on the forum too) And yeah, it was a private message......