tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post4385718703927778797..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: How Do the IDiots Explain the Origin of Life?Larry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger148125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-28206740018235881412014-03-05T09:45:31.899-05:002014-03-05T09:45:31.899-05:00sez bob smith:
Its obvious that people who are tru...sez bob smith:<br /><i>Its obvious that people who are trumpeting this as a victory towards explaining how life may have started by self assembly, have failed to look at one tiny problem, namely that they used biomolecules from life forms that are allready existing, but we all know how nonbias the pro evolutionists are here dont we ;)</i><br />Thanks to Muller and Urey, we know that mindless, unguided, prebiotic chemistry can easily generate "biomolecules"—amino acids. This being the case, what's problematic about assuming "biomolecules" (amino acids) are an ingredient in abiogenesis? <br /><br /><i>This is yet another example of how the media sensationalizes darwinian research and makes it to be be more then it is.<br />Showing that a cell membrane (a primitive one at that) can be formed from existing material that is organic doesnt explain anything at all to us about the origin of life.</i><br />Well, given that the original abiogenesis event occurred something like 3 gigayears ago, nothing short of a time machine will let us investigate <i>the</i> One True Way in which abiogenesis occurred on Earth. All we can do today, gigayears after the fact, is investigate various possible scenarios for how abiogenesis <i>could</i> have occurred. And the work you'[re disparaging does a pretty good job of <i>that</i>, not so?<br /><br /><i>This is handwaving and cheerleading at its finest.</i><br />You may be right. Do you have any specific critique to make of this work? Or are you merely content to point at it and say <i>it's Teh Suxxors!</i> ?<br /><br /><i>But then again you guys all probably knew this as we both know that darwinists are the most honesty and scientifically neutral people on earth.</i><br />They're certainly more honest and scientifically neutral than Creationists, inasmuch as Creationists <i>literally</i> <b>swear oaths</b> that they <i>will not</i> arrive at any conclusion which contradicts their religious beliefs…<br /><br /><i>What was I thinking?</i><br />[shrug] Beats me. What <i>were</i> you thinking, assuming you actually did think?Cubisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18112097625072217558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-34918446795275964602014-03-05T05:33:18.319-05:002014-03-05T05:33:18.319-05:00Its obvious that people who are trumpeting this as...Its obvious that people who are trumpeting this as a victory towards explaining how life may have started by self assembly, have failed to look at one tiny problem, namely that they used biomolecules from life forms that are allready existing, but we all know how nonbias the pro evolutionists are here dont we ;)<br /><br />This is yet another example of how the media sensationalizes darwinian research and makes it to be be more then it is.<br />Showing that a cell membrane (a primitive one at that) can be formed from existing material that is organic doesnt explain anything at all to us about the origin of life. This is handwaving and cheerleading at its finest.<br /><br />But then again you guys all probably knew this as we both know that darwinists are the most honesty and scientifically neutral people on earth.<br /><br />What was I thinking?<br /><br />bob smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10037588881657801038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-79240422743326105652013-11-02T03:27:34.316-04:002013-11-02T03:27:34.316-04:00TWT, now you're shifting focus from tracing th...TWT, now you're shifting focus from tracing the roots of the scientific revolution back to "the ancient civilizations" to argue if it's worth while studying them or not. I must say that I'm a little disappoint, I was kind of hoping for the old pyramid mystery. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03503746944125068931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-24685915929258729102013-11-02T01:42:49.103-04:002013-11-02T01:42:49.103-04:00Well then Andy, since scientists have already figu...Well then Andy, since scientists have already figured out everything that all ancient civilizations accomplished, they might as well stop studying ancient civilizations, eh? The whole truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07219999357041824471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-21507616666822613642013-11-01T18:18:19.052-04:002013-11-01T18:18:19.052-04:00Quest: I share your views on the difficulty of th...Quest: I share your views on the difficulty of the 'spontaneous' generation of life, and evolution driven by 'errors'. However I am truly appalled by your language and the tone of your posts. Why do you suppose Prof. Moran doesn't delete your comments? He obviously realizes that you are doing your cause a huge disservice. And in so thinking he is correct. You have utterly destroyed any 'legitimate' point you have been trying to make. If you can't control your nastiness and vituperative language, then do what is next best: Remain completely and totally silent. wsreadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15515711394245434879noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-63712655443531027272013-11-01T17:26:21.022-04:002013-11-01T17:26:21.022-04:00Professor full of shit; You can't stop aging....Professor full of shit; You can't stop aging. I know it and people like C. Venter know it. So, don't bullshit us. We have spent millions on this and it can't be done. Slowing down the aging process is possible in theory but I don't agree it is significant. You can do many really good things by changing your diet an lifestyle but you can't stop aging. So, go your own way professor of shitty shitAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-85794011238233753602013-11-01T16:10:50.135-04:002013-11-01T16:10:50.135-04:00What about the following rationale:
Without exce...What about the following rationale:<br /> <br />Without exception, all parasitic and endosymbiotic cellular organisms have evolved toward smaller genomes and lower complexity: why would viral lineages evolve any other way?<br />(<a href="http://precedings.nature.com/documents/3886/version/1" rel="nofollow">http://precedings.nature.com/documents/3886/version/1</a>)<br />Claudiu Bandeahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04987489537796352657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-60704456455766891212013-10-31T09:05:48.564-04:002013-10-31T09:05:48.564-04:00Looks like the problem of the origins of life has ...Looks like the problem of the origins of life has been solved by paleontology proffesor at The Museum of Texas Tech University. <br /><br />Thank goodness! Deep sigh of relieve. Phew!!!<br /><br />http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131029133124.htm<br /><br />Last part of this scientific article resolves it all: <br /><br />"The problem with theories on the origins of life is that they don’t propose any experiments that lead to the emergence of cells, Chatterjee said. However, he suggested an experiment to recreate the ancient prebiotic world and support or refute his theory."<br /><br />Why write a 3 page article if 1 sentence resolves it all? <br /><br />Maybe he gets paid per letter? Could be. lol<br />Newbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12112647387206975751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-9921914411489742502013-10-31T04:50:00.633-04:002013-10-31T04:50:00.633-04:00Interesting, though the most resonant part was For...Interesting, though the most resonant part was Forterre's own heading "You see what you want to see". Concentrating on giant viruses such as Mimivirus can lead to its own skew. Their possession of large numbers of genes gives a richer dataset (though still with considerable latitide in interpretation), but importantly, there remains the possibility that Mimivirus's history is not representative of the generality of viruses. There is still no clear way to distinguish between a reductive rationale and an escape of fortuitious gene combinations on genetic grounds alone. My own prejudices are rooted in the lesser likelihood of a pre-LUCA 'free' lineage with vertical inheritance persisting by getting another organism to replicate its genome. A more logical path is provided by a genetic element that has <i>always</i> relied upon replication by a 'host'. Such logic can be defeated by data, but the definitive test is elusive. AllanMillerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05955231828424156641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-36492454048010381072013-10-31T03:07:35.310-04:002013-10-31T03:07:35.310-04:00Every one his his own theory of looking for the or...Every one his his own theory of looking for the origin of life there are only assumptions that this must have happened.So if you disagree you must have a reason.<br /><br />Thanks <br />Sanola Jerry <br /><br /><a href="http://www.plosconstructions.com.au" rel="nofollow">Plos Constructions</a> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08005580090831546640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-61959305278005424022013-10-30T16:07:52.030-04:002013-10-30T16:07:52.030-04:00David@SandWalk: Any OOL model where 1 of the steps...David@SandWalk: Any OOL model where 1 of the steps is "and thn the molecls travl thru space 2 anothr planet" will hv some plausibilty issues<br /><br />[The above tweeted from DiogenesLamp0 -- a feed limited only to jokes & snark about science & pseuodscience.]Diogeneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15551943619872944637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-66845838909118015162013-10-30T10:26:05.224-04:002013-10-30T10:26:05.224-04:00Contrary to what christians delude themselves abou...Contrary to what christians delude themselves about the "foundations of western society", here's the real basis: <br />http://www.infidels.org/kiosk/article2.htmlMikkel Rumraket Rasmussenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07670550711237457368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-21709068432461557822013-10-30T01:48:56.197-04:002013-10-30T01:48:56.197-04:00TWT writes alot of unsubstantiated gibberish, and ...TWT writes alot of unsubstantiated gibberish, and seem to get most of his/her "information" from TV shows. It would be nice if TWT could substantiate some of the unfounded claims, maybe starting with: "To this day, with all of the current knowledge and technology available to "Western civilization", scientists (including the christian ones) still haven't figured out many of the things that ancient, non-christian civilizations accomplished."Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03503746944125068931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-6814448985713753932013-10-29T18:42:57.901-04:002013-10-29T18:42:57.901-04:00I meant to put a comma between poor and elderly. I meant to put a comma between poor and elderly. The whole truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07219999357041824471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-10114290787475402342013-10-29T18:37:26.275-04:002013-10-29T18:37:26.275-04:00The assertion by christian creationists that a han...The assertion by christian creationists that a handful of long-dead people were devout christians and that without them being christians there would be no science and "Western civilization" is incredibly lame. And what the hell is "Western civilization" anyway? Is it just carefully selected parts of European history and current ways of living in certain parts of the world that make for a self-righteous soundbite?<br /><br />Long before and during the advent and extension of so-called "Western civilization" (whatever that is) there were lots and lots of scientific discoveries made by many people of different cultures/civilizations around the world. Many of the advancements of "Western civilization" science and technology are based on or directly derived from discoveries made by people who were/are not christians. As more archaeological work is done, more and more is learned about ancient scientific discoveries by people of various cultures/civilizations and some of the things that those people discovered are even useful in modern science, such as helping to direct scientists toward particular medicinal uses of certain plants and animals or their parts. In many cases modern science is just refining what ancient people (including non-christians) discovered. <br /><br />To this day, with all of the current knowledge and technology available to "Western civilization", scientists (including the christian ones) still haven't figured out many of the things that ancient, non-christian civilizations accomplished. <br /><br />If christianity was and is so scientifically mind-opening and beneficial to the advancement of civilization, why didn't yhwh-jesus-holy-ghost do something to get science started a lot sooner, why have so many christians done (and still do) so much to stop beneficial scientific advances, and why do so many christians want the whole world to go back to the dark ages or worse? Oh, and why do so many christians do so many things that are detrimental to <b>civil</b>ization, such as opposing environmental protection, opposing reasonable human population control, opposing vaccinations, opposing the use of condoms for prevention of AIDS and other diseases, opposing scientific education, opposing non-obedience to their stifling religion, opposing many personal choices and rights, opposing sex education, opposing programs and efforts that are helpful to the poor elderly, and disabled, opposing the control and decrease of weapons (both personal and military), and much more? <br />The whole truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07219999357041824471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-35317605242852063922013-10-29T17:16:53.975-04:002013-10-29T17:16:53.975-04:00For an alternative perspective that is more in syn...For an alternative perspective that is more in sync with the current evidence, you might want to see this paper by Patrick Forterre:<br /> <br />P. Forterre, Giant viruses: conflicts in revisiting the virus concept. Intervirology 53, 362, (2010). (<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20551688" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20551688</a><br />Claudiu Bandeahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04987489537796352657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-34345802886699688992013-10-28T19:13:38.251-04:002013-10-28T19:13:38.251-04:00Personally I thing that toilet-paper a sixpack is...Personally I thing that toilet-paper a sixpack is more likely to self assemble than all this garbage your propose. You all must be mentally ill to believe in such an idea. Well somehow I'm not surprised. Newbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12112647387206975751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-11422755090786073572013-10-28T17:11:46.887-04:002013-10-28T17:11:46.887-04:00I'm the first to admit the Jewish contribution...I'm the first to admit the Jewish contribution to Western civilization. Christianity builds on the Jewish tradition and many of the greatest scientist are and have been Jewish.<br />I'm afraid that your view of history is based on very one sided propaganda so I will have to make a quick overview to give you a glimpse of the history and foundations of western civilization and the roots of the scientific revolution. Christendom first took it's roots in Europe in the south eastern Hellenistic parts, the first Roman Emperor to convert to Christendom was Constantine in 300 AD. The Roman Empire eventually succumbed to invading Germanic tribes, but they also eventually adopted Christianity. Charlemagne became king over the Franks in the early phase of this process. He became instrumental in spreading the Christian influence in Western and Central Europe. He went on to become the first emperor of the Christian West Roman Empire in 800 AD. This spurred the Carolingian renaissance on models drawn from the example of the Christian Roman Empire of the 4th century. During this period there was an increase of literature, writing, the arts, architecture, jurisprudence, liturgical reforms, and scriptural studies. Monasteries were important contributors to the surrounding community. They were centres of intellectual progression and education. They welcomed aspiring priests to come study and learn, allowing them to challenge doctrine in dialogue with superiors. In the monasteries eventually scholasticism developed. It was not so much a philosophy or a theology as a method of learning. Scholasticism places a strong emphasis on dialectical reasoning to extend knowledge by inference, and to resolve contradictions. Scholastic thought is also known for rigorous conceptual analysis and the careful drawing of distinctions. This became the stepping stone from which modern science took off around 1500 AD. This coincides with the Protestant reformation.<br />Given this background not surprisingly most notable figures of the scientific revolution—including Nicolaus Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Francis Bacon, René Descartes, Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz— were all devout Christians.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03503746944125068931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-84218531481621989762013-10-28T16:06:30.341-04:002013-10-28T16:06:30.341-04:00Personally, I find it more likely that viruses aro...Personally, I find it more likely that viruses arose out of cellular genomes, as packaged 'selfish elements'. eg, some jumping genes generate a protective coat similar to a virus's, even though they aren't going 'outside', which seems but a short step from a 'true' virus. <br /><br />Koonin's paper here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1594570/ complete with reviewer comments (an appealing eccentricity of Koonin's Biology Direct journal). AllanMillerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05955231828424156641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-8732386297983975882013-10-28T12:44:34.227-04:002013-10-28T12:44:34.227-04:00Thanks. It's on my Kindle, so as soon as I...Thanks. It's on my Kindle, so as soon as I'm done reading Pynchon's latest....judmarchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03111006189037693272noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-48012287238979026692013-10-28T11:15:26.680-04:002013-10-28T11:15:26.680-04:00Eugene Koonin is the most prominent supporter of t...Eugene Koonin is the most prominent supporter of that idea. Read his book: "The Logic of Chance: The Nature and Origin of Biological Evolution." Chapter 10 is "The Virus World and its evolution."Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-73024435272004432692013-10-28T06:57:43.311-04:002013-10-28T06:57:43.311-04:00Something I've wondered about from time to tim...Something I've wondered about from time to time:<br /><br />- The only viruses we're aware of today need living hosts to reproduce.<br /><br />- Might there have been viruses on Earth prior to cellular life, reproducing by utilizing pre-cellular biological molecules, which were then superseded after the advent of cellular life by viruses using the much more conveniently packaged biological molecules in cells in order to reproduce themselves?<br /><br />Just idly speculating that such viruses might have served as a stepping stone to life based on cells.judmarchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03111006189037693272noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-80180258570254744202013-10-28T06:45:48.006-04:002013-10-28T06:45:48.006-04:00Not only is Christianity the starting point of mod...<i>Not only is Christianity the starting point of modern science, it's also the source of western civilization.</i><br /><br />Oh dear. Yes, like the technology built on mathematics such as algebra (from the Arabic "al-jabr," meaning "restoration") and our very numbers themselves (try addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, etc., using Roman numerals some time); medicine, given a kick start by the writings of Avicenna; and there is much, much more.<br /><br />Most of the first 1500 years of Christianity in Europe is popularly known to history as "the Dark Ages." <br /><br />But I am sure this is just coincidence, and that the true Christians were just biding the centuries until they could be responsible for scientific breakthroughs like relativity. Oh, but Einstein, to the extent he could be said to be religious, was Jewish, wasn't he? That's OK, though, I'm sure he was just a front man for those diligent Christian scientists (not to be confused with Christian Scientists) carrying the light of Western civilization and knowledge....judmarchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03111006189037693272noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-58433558225195390062013-10-27T13:41:23.851-04:002013-10-27T13:41:23.851-04:00Andy,
What Steve said, and:
There are lots of ex...Andy,<br /><br />What Steve said, and:<br /><br />There are lots of examples in the bible that clearly show that "the Christian ethic of love" is based on fearful submission to a threatening, murderous, monstrous 'God' and 'Lord' called yhwh-jesus-holy-ghost. The examples that I referred to are just the tip of the iceberg. The bible, which is THE foundation and doctrine/dogma of christianity is much more than your selective interpretation. It is a horror story of threats, dominance, punishment, and submission. It's 'ethic' is not 'love'. Love isn't given or gotten by demands. <br /><br />How about another example of the 'Lord God's love':<br /><br />"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, <b>and create evil</b>: I the LORD do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7) (my bold)<br />The whole truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07219999357041824471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-34193622555577703792013-10-27T08:53:31.263-04:002013-10-27T08:53:31.263-04:00Ah, the old reading out of context soft shuffle.
...Ah, the old reading out of context soft shuffle.<br /><br />So are we to assume that the 33,000* xtian sects have read the bable in context have and come up with vastly different interpretations ?<br /><br />Or that they just can't be bothered to read the thing ? I can certainly sympathize with that possibility, given that it consists of mind numbingly tedious swaths of fictional genealogy and history larded with primitive, goat herder ethics and morality.<br /><br />And somehow your "in context" reading of this nasty book is the correct one ?<br /><br />Oh, the humility of the humble christian.<br /><br />* wikipedia, number used as a rough estimate, I'm sure Andy can rationalize this as well<br />steve oberskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14067724166134333068noreply@blogger.com