sos writes:
Chirality is still, to my knowledge, a BIG problem for abiogenesis as all modern living cells use exclusively L-form amino acids. Since one of the shortest protein chains known, insulin, is about 150 peptides in length, it would seem reasonable to look for a naturalistic process that can produce polypeptide chains of at least 150 all L-form amino acids... I don't think they have found it yet but there isn't much sense in discusssing the next level of problems unless a significant answer for naturally producing pure chirality is found first.
You describe chirality as a problem for abiogenesis, but your example has to do with protein size. I must be missing your point, because I don't see what one has to do with the other in relation to abiogenesis.
Is the faith of naturalists any better than the faith of creationists?
This question is better addressed in either the
Is It Science? or
Faith and Belief forum, but the short answer is that the positions of science are supported by evidence. When this isn't the case then it isn't science. Science believes that the physical laws in place today and for which we have much evidence were the same ones operating when life first formed. Creationism believes that a being for which there is no evidence using mechanisms for which there is no evidence created the first life.
You can get free access to Science Online, but it doesn't provide access to most content, including the mentioned article.
--Percy
™ Version 4.2