Does God Exist?

[Bruce Daniels]

The short answer: No. We're born, we live, we die. That's it. There is no intelligence controlling the universe.

One simple question to stymie yours, "how do you know this"?

It's what I have concluded from the evidence. For some reason, I'm skeptical about some invisible supernatural force...

So you believe in the Big Bang Theory? If not, what do you believe regarding the creation of the universe and what evidence do you provide to support this?

Yes, I believe in the Big Bang Theory. The evidence for it, to put it simply, is that all parts of the universe are moving away from each other. If you run that movie backwards, at some time (I think it's about 13 billion years ago) everything is in one place.

 

[Newtonian]

Another fatal blow to chemical evolution theories is the problem of isomers/isomerization. Specific molecules required on chemical pathways to life have multiple isomers with the same chemical formula but with different structure. This is different from the problem of selection of L-amino acids (left hand polarization).

From page 52 of the above link:

"For example, results from Miller's spark discharge experiments (table 4-1) show many more non-proteinous than proteinous amino acids. In most cases more than one isomer (molecules with the same number of atoms but different geometry) is found for a given empirical formula. For example, three amino acid isomers are formed with formula C.H9N03, two of which are non-proteinous. All eight isomers of formula C4H9N02 are non-proteinous (fig. 4-3)."

And from page 54:

"Figure4-3.
cr-Amino-n-butyric acid
cr-Aminoisobutyric acid
N-Ethylglycine
P-Amino-n-butyric acid
P-Aminoisobutyric acid
-y-Aminobutyric acid
N-Methylalanine
N-Methyl-p-alanine
Structural isomers of amino acids with empirical formula C.H9NOz found in Miller experiment. None are found in proteins."

Format put a period for 4 and z for 2 - the formula is C4H9NO2

See figure 4-3 for the different structures/isomers for the non-biologic amino acids C4H9NO2.

OK, time for my breakfast! I am a little late on that my tummy is telling me!

Hope you all have a good day!

Shelter in place to be safe for you and others. (unless you have a hazmet (sp?) suit).

 

[Newtonian]

Well we don’t know this is the first occurrence, right?

Do you really believe the organic micro machines of living organisms are happenstance? Have you seen the animations of the assembly line like machinations of these organic machines?

You think intelligence developed on earth before man? Zero evidence for that I'd say.

Yes I do. Simple natural laws can give rise to amazing things. Picture trillions of mindless molecules floating in water, what are the odds that they will form themselves into a regular geometric solid where every one is situated exactly like every other? Happens all the time, they are called crystals. No intelligence required.

The intelligence is in the laws of nature which predestined those things. It’s not an accident that life and intelligence is programmed into the fabric of existence.

You are only partly correct - normal for us humans, btw.

The fine tuned laws and properties of our universe allow for the creation of life and for intelligent life - however these do not evolve by chance.

For example, the precisely fine tuned rate for the expansion of our universe allowed for stars including supernovae to exist - and for supernovae to produce the elements needed for the creation of life.

Also the properties of these elements and complex compounds/molecules of these elements allow them to be arranged as informational rather than simply statistical molecules - for example: informational molecules (which also require translation and messenger molecules (e.g. messenger RNA).

However, information does not occur in molecules by chance - entropy works in the opposite direction - hence the difference between dead molecules and living molecules - at death information decays or leaves so that the functions of life cannot proceed.

For life to come into existence, informational molecules not only need to be created, along with translator molecules - but they need to be in the same place at the same time!

Btw - crystals are repetitive while informational molecules are variant.

The difficulty in creating life (which human creators cannot do) is illustrated in the environments needed to synthesize all of the 20 amino acids required for life:

Some amino acids prefer hot, others prefer cold for synthesis. Some prefer acid, others neutral or alkaline. Some prefer wet, others prefer dry - some even require condensing agents. You cannot have hot & cold, acid and alkaline, wet and dry in the same place at the same time. Unless, of course, an intelligent chemist is involved - of superior intelligence to us humans.

Would you all like me to post details as to the results of synthesis experiments like those of Miller - Urey, etc.? Suffice it to say for now that most are unaware that the primary chemical reaction product is formic acid, not amino acids. And that most amino acids and other molecules produced (the chemical reaction product proportions) are mostly useless (or worse) to life.

And, finally, chance synthesis of polypeptides from these amino acids and then further to proteins are always statistical, not informational. [chance formation of even statistical proteins has an incredibly low probability given favorable primordial soups.]

I should add the need for exact 3-d fit of enzymes and receptors for the life processes to proceed.

Which part did I get wrong?

Perhaps I should rephrase. Indeed the universe is fine tuned for life as we know it - you are correct about that.

I was pointing out more detail. The fine tuning of our universe allowed for the creation of life as we know it. However, life does not spontaneously form from the elements that supernovae produce - see my posts for more detail. Life still needed an intelligent creator so as to produce the needed informational molecules at the same place and time.

An example is HCN (1 atom Hydrogen, 1 atom carbon, 1 atom Nitrogen). Hydrogen was produced without stars, supernovae produced carbon, nitrogen and oxygen (the O in H2O). But the reactions of HCN with H2O do not lead to molecules required for life in significant proportions. An intelligent chemist is needed to isolate/select each step towards simple and complex amino acids and to biologically important dipeptides to polypeptide to proteins.

You presume something you call "fine-tuning" of the universe but you neglect to demonstrate this "fine-tuning" in the midst of a violent universe, much of which is hostile to life. Have you seen the result of cometary bombardment of the moon, or that little dalliance that occurred on this planet leaving the Chicxulub crater?

Thank you for confirming my point that while the universe is fine tuned to allow for the existence of stars some of which go to supernova and produce elements like carbon, oxygen and nitrogen the universe is largely hostile to life as we know it. Do you also realize that stars would not exist if the expansion rate of the universe was not precisely fine tuned? Not to mention other factors that allow stars to function.

The expansion rate is very close to Omaga/1 also known as the density parameter. If faster, the universe would have expanded to fast to allow stars to form, if slower the universe would have collapsed by now - long before now. I will post more on this later.

 

[Hollie]

Another fatal blow to chemical evolution theories is the problem of isomers/isomerization. Specific molecules required on chemical pathways to life have multiple isomers with the same chemical formula but with different structure. This is different from the problem of selection of L-amino acids (left hand polarization).

From page 52 of the above link:

"For example, results from Miller's spark discharge experiments (table 4-1) show many more non-proteinous than proteinous amino acids. In most cases more than one isomer (molecules with the same number of atoms but different geometry) is found for a given empirical formula. For example, three amino acid isomers are formed with formula C.H9N03, two of which are non-proteinous. All eight isomers of formula C4H9N02 are non-proteinous (fig. 4-3)."

And from page 54:

"Figure4-3.
cr-Amino-n-butyric acid
cr-Aminoisobutyric acid
N-Ethylglycine
P-Amino-n-butyric acid
P-Aminoisobutyric acid
-y-Aminobutyric acid
N-Methylalanine
N-Methyl-p-alanine
Structural isomers of amino acids with empirical formula C.H9NOz found in Miller experiment. None are found in proteins."

Format put a period for 4 and z for 2 - the formula is C4H9NO2

See figure 4-3 for the different structures/isomers for the non-biologic amino acids C4H9NO2.

OK, time for my breakfast! I am a little late on that my tummy is telling me!

Hope you all have a good day!

Shelter in place to be safe for you and others. (unless you have a hazmet (sp?) suit).

CB025: Abiogenetic amino acid generation

www.talkorigins.org

Claim CB025:
Stanley Miller's original abiogenesis experiment produced only four of the twenty amino acids from which proteins are built, and later experiments still have not produced all twenty amino acids under plausible conditions.

Source:
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, pg. 40.

Response:

1. Miller's experiments produced thirteen of the twenty amino acids used in life (Henahan 1996). Others may have formed via other mechanisms. For example, they may have formed in space and been carried to earth on meteors (Pizzarello and Weber 2004).
   
   
2. It is not known which amino acids are needed for the most primitive life. It could be that the amino acids that form easily were sufficient and that life later evolved to produce and rely on others.

References:

1. Henahan, Sean. 1996. From primordial soup to the prebiotic beach: An interview with exobiology pioneer, Dr. Stanley L. Miller. http://www.accessexcellence.org/WN/NM/miller.html
2. Pizzarello, S. and A. L. Weber. 2004. Prebiotic amino acids as asymmetric catalysts. Science 303: 1151.

 

[Newtonian]

Here is a link to Discover magazine concerning 6 numbers which are precisely fine tuned to allow for stars and life as we know it on earth to exist in our universe:

Why is There Life?

Because, says Britain's Astronomer Royal, you happen to be in the right universe

www.discovermagazine.com

The omega=1 is one of these - it is the precise density parameter involved with the expansion rate of our universe. From the link:

"

, which measures the density of material in the universe— including galaxies, diffuse gas, and dark matter. The number reveals the relative importance of gravity in an expanding universe. If gravity were too strong, the universe would have collapsed long before life could have evolved. Had it been too weak, no galaxies or stars could have formed."

= omega (the Greek letter) is used to refer to the density parameter of our universe and it is extremely close to 1 - otherwise stars could not exist. Simply:

=1.5u

See the link for the other 5 numbers involved in the math (physics) of our universe.

 

[ding]

I’m sure you believe you did, JB.

So, do you believe Miller-Urey? I guess God created the primordial Earth gases. Anyway, you can't explain it either.

What gases did you have during early Earth?

I’m not the droid you are looking for.

You are a droid, but I wouldn't buy you. Brain and intellect malfunction. Off to the dung heap with you. Maybe that would be a better handle for you.

This ain’t a good look for you, brother.

 

[ding]

But really, you should ask yourself this: why would any God torture people because of their sincere beliefs?

Because that is the one commandment God wants us to obey -- that his Son Jesus died for our sins. Today, it's a positive test.

With Adam and Eve, God gave them a negative test of not eating fruit from a specific tree in heaven.

So why would God put today's non-believers and sinners to the Lake of Fire over it. Because God the Father hates sin and cannot be with sin. The non-believers reap what they sow by being separated from God. Jesus cleanses our sins and thus the only way to heaven.

As for the pain of burning in hell forever, we do not know what the Lake of Fire is really all about. It is a prophecy and propecies are allegory. For example, the entrance to heaven is not the pearly gate or wide gate, but the narrow gate and door. The door refers to Jesus and we go through the door and go on the narrow path. The others take the easy path and think their path is the way to heaven or salvation.

But didn't God create EVERYTHING? Why would He create a world in which sin is even possible? So, didn't He create sin, too?

Why would he?

Why would God create sin? How should I know? But if He created the universe exactly the way he wanted it, why didn't he create a universe where there is no sin?

Who said he did?

sin is anything which distances us from God. He hasn’t moved an inch. We did.

now to drill down further, everything God created is good. Evil isn’t extant, it is the absence of good. Just like cold and darkness aren’t extant. They only exist as the absence of the thing that is extant; the thing that does exist. So God didn’t create evil or sin.

yes, he created the material world. Yes man can behave without goodness but everything works for good. You just can’t see it because it goes against your bias.

look at it this way, lots of things are going on all at once; you are being pruned, you are being tested, you play a role in others being pruned, you play a role in others being tested, etc.

At any point in your life you are the sum of your choices. You will either learn from the consequences of your choices and progress or the lesson will be repeated. It’s your call.

 

[ding]

why didn't he create a universe where there is no sin?

Because he is seeking certain outcomes under certain conditions.

there is no virtue if you are forced to be virtuous.

 

[Hollie]

Well we don’t know this is the first occurrence, right?

Do you really believe the organic micro machines of living organisms are happenstance? Have you seen the animations of the assembly line like machinations of these organic machines?

You think intelligence developed on earth before man? Zero evidence for that I'd say.

Yes I do. Simple natural laws can give rise to amazing things. Picture trillions of mindless molecules floating in water, what are the odds that they will form themselves into a regular geometric solid where every one is situated exactly like every other? Happens all the time, they are called crystals. No intelligence required.

The intelligence is in the laws of nature which predestined those things. It’s not an accident that life and intelligence is programmed into the fabric of existence.

You are only partly correct - normal for us humans, btw.

The fine tuned laws and properties of our universe allow for the creation of life and for intelligent life - however these do not evolve by chance.

For example, the precisely fine tuned rate for the expansion of our universe allowed for stars including supernovae to exist - and for supernovae to produce the elements needed for the creation of life.

Also the properties of these elements and complex compounds/molecules of these elements allow them to be arranged as informational rather than simply statistical molecules - for example: informational molecules (which also require translation and messenger molecules (e.g. messenger RNA).

However, information does not occur in molecules by chance - entropy works in the opposite direction - hence the difference between dead molecules and living molecules - at death information decays or leaves so that the functions of life cannot proceed.

For life to come into existence, informational molecules not only need to be created, along with translator molecules - but they need to be in the same place at the same time!

Btw - crystals are repetitive while informational molecules are variant.

The difficulty in creating life (which human creators cannot do) is illustrated in the environments needed to synthesize all of the 20 amino acids required for life:

Some amino acids prefer hot, others prefer cold for synthesis. Some prefer acid, others neutral or alkaline. Some prefer wet, others prefer dry - some even require condensing agents. You cannot have hot & cold, acid and alkaline, wet and dry in the same place at the same time. Unless, of course, an intelligent chemist is involved - of superior intelligence to us humans.

Would you all like me to post details as to the results of synthesis experiments like those of Miller - Urey, etc.? Suffice it to say for now that most are unaware that the primary chemical reaction product is formic acid, not amino acids. And that most amino acids and other molecules produced (the chemical reaction product proportions) are mostly useless (or worse) to life.

And, finally, chance synthesis of polypeptides from these amino acids and then further to proteins are always statistical, not informational. [chance formation of even statistical proteins has an incredibly low probability given favorable primordial soups.]

I should add the need for exact 3-d fit of enzymes and receptors for the life processes to proceed.

Which part did I get wrong?

Perhaps I should rephrase. Indeed the universe is fine tuned for life as we know it - you are correct about that.

I was pointing out more detail. The fine tuning of our universe allowed for the creation of life as we know it. However, life does not spontaneously form from the elements that supernovae produce - see my posts for more detail. Life still needed an intelligent creator so as to produce the needed informational molecules at the same place and time.

An example is HCN (1 atom Hydrogen, 1 atom carbon, 1 atom Nitrogen). Hydrogen was produced without stars, supernovae produced carbon, nitrogen and oxygen (the O in H2O). But the reactions of HCN with H2O do not lead to molecules required for life in significant proportions. An intelligent chemist is needed to isolate/select each step towards simple and complex amino acids and to biologically important dipeptides to polypeptide to proteins.

You presume something you call "fine-tuning" of the universe but you neglect to demonstrate this "fine-tuning" in the midst of a violent universe, much of which is hostile to life. Have you seen the result of cometary bombardment of the moon, or that little dalliance that occurred on this planet leaving the Chicxulub crater?

Thank you for confirming my point that while the universe is fine tuned to allow for the existence of stars some of which go to supernova and produce elements like carbon, oxygen and nitrogen the universe is largely hostile to life as we know it. Do you also realize that stars would not exist if the expansion rate of the universe was not precisely fine tuned? Not to mention other factors that allow stars to function.

The expansion rate is very close to Omaga/1 also known as the density parameter. If faster, the universe would have expanded to fast to allow stars to form, if slower the universe would have collapsed by now - long before now. I will post more on this later.

Your claim to "fine tuning" is obviously false. You made no attempt to refute my examples of a very chaotic universe that includes supernova, Black Holes devouring portions of space, etc.

It's odd that you would claim that carbon, oxygen and nitrogen the universe is largely hostile to life as we know it when those elements are among the basic building blocks of life.

You are apparently unaware that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. Please identify your source that supports your notion that the universe would not exist without the precise rate of expansion that is currently measured. Also, please identify your source that claims "stars would not exist if the expansion rate of the universe was not precisely fine tuned"

"Omaga/1"? You just made that up, right?

 

[ding]

Did you know that the central nervous system of every mammal species got larger over time?

I didn't know that and I'm not sure what it means.

It means that very nature of existence is to create intelligence. It is unavoidable. It is not an accident.

That's ridiculous. The nature of existence is to continue to exist. That's it. If more intelligence facilitates that, then more intelligence will probably develop. But life on Earth existed for about 3 billion years before it even had a brain.

Apparently you haven’t studied the evolution of space and time.

the nature of existence is to evolve. It started with cosmic evolution then stellar evolution then chemical evolution then biological evolution and lastly evolution of consciousness.

So the pinnacle of existence is literally intelligence. It is by far the most complex thing the universe has produced and is literally the culmination of everything before it. It’s really no different than building a house.

I can’t wait to see what the next evolutionary leap will bring.

 

[ding]

Let’s dance, Bruce Daniels

 

[Newtonian]

Another fatal blow to chemical evolution theories is the problem of isomers/isomerization. Specific molecules required on chemical pathways to life have multiple isomers with the same chemical formula but with different structure. This is different from the problem of selection of L-amino acids (left hand polarization).

From page 52 of the above link:

"For example, results from Miller's spark discharge experiments (table 4-1) show many more non-proteinous than proteinous amino acids. In most cases more than one isomer (molecules with the same number of atoms but different geometry) is found for a given empirical formula. For example, three amino acid isomers are formed with formula C.H9N03, two of which are non-proteinous. All eight isomers of formula C4H9N02 are non-proteinous (fig. 4-3)."

And from page 54:

"Figure4-3.
cr-Amino-n-butyric acid
cr-Aminoisobutyric acid
N-Ethylglycine
P-Amino-n-butyric acid
P-Aminoisobutyric acid
-y-Aminobutyric acid
N-Methylalanine
N-Methyl-p-alanine
Structural isomers of amino acids with empirical formula C.H9NOz found in Miller experiment. None are found in proteins."

Format put a period for 4 and z for 2 - the formula is C4H9NO2

See figure 4-3 for the different structures/isomers for the non-biologic amino acids C4H9NO2.

OK, time for my breakfast! I am a little late on that my tummy is telling me!

Hope you all have a good day!

Shelter in place to be safe for you and others. (unless you have a hazmet (sp?) suit).

CB025: Abiogenetic amino acid generation

www.talkorigins.org

Claim CB025:
Stanley Miller's original abiogenesis experiment produced only four of the twenty amino acids from which proteins are built, and later experiments still have not produced all twenty amino acids under plausible conditions.

Source:
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, pg. 40.

Response:

1. Miller's experiments produced thirteen of the twenty amino acids used in life (Henahan 1996). Others may have formed via other mechanisms. For example, they may have formed in space and been carried to earth on meteors (Pizzarello and Weber 2004).
   
   
2. It is not known which amino acids are needed for the most primitive life. It could be that the amino acids that form easily were sufficient and that life later evolved to produce and rely on others.

References:

1. Henahan, Sean. 1996. From primordial soup to the prebiotic beach: An interview with exobiology pioneer, Dr. Stanley L. Miller. http://www.accessexcellence.org/WN/NM/miller.html
2. Pizzarello, S. and A. L. Weber. 2004. Prebiotic amino acids as asymmetric catalysts. Science 303: 1151.

Hollie - thank you for addressing the actual amino acids produced by Miller but you missed Miller's original experiments vs. his later experiments and also have ignored my reference to this link:

https://www.krusch.com/books/evolution/Mystery_of_Lifes_Origin.pdf

This is a science book - our literature does not go into the detail that Thaxton et al do. I already posted the detailed results of Miller's experiments - I see I need to repost since you seem to want to ignore the chemical reaction product proportions of Miller's experiments (plural). For example, I already posted the detailed list of Miller's experiment in 1974 from table 3-2 from page 23 of the above link.

Of course, I am not going to simply repost - I will address your point specifically and in more detail:

From page 22:

"Electrical Discharge Experiments
At the University of Chicago in December 1952, Stanley Miller provided the first experimental test of the Oparin-Haldane hypothesis of a biogenesis. 4 As a graduate student working in the laboratory of Nobel Laureate Harold Urey, Miller devised an experimental approach to simulate the formation of biomonomers on the early earth. The simulated atmosphere consisted of methane, ammonia, hydrogen, and water vapor."

Note the environment: methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), Hydrogen (H) and water vapor (H2O). Note that only water contains oxygen and that hydrogen is extremely dominant in this environment. The actual evidence from earth's geology is contrary to this imagined environment - for example, oxygen is the most abundant element in earth's crust - as I also have already posted.

Reference 4 - Stanley L. Miller, 1953. Science 117, 528

Thaxton et al (Bradley & Olson) go on to detail the apparatus Miller used (figure 3-1 on page 21) and the way he determined the chemical reaction products - see the link for that. On page 23 the subsequent experiments (since 1952) by Miller and others is referred to:

"These have included mixtures of two or more of the following gases: methane, ethane, ammonia, nitrogen, water vapor, hydrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen sulfide. By and large these experiments follow the same general technique used by Miller, although a number of modifications have been employed. As long as oxygen has been excluded from the mixture, amino acids and other organic compounds have resulted."

As I have already posted, the chemical reaction product proportions vary in different environments - e.g. hot, cold, wet, dry (even with condensing agents), acid, alkaline (etc.) - these variant environments produce mostly formic acid, and then various other compounds including certain amino acids in variant proportions and context depending on the environment in the synthesis experiment.

The specific results reported by Miller in table 3-2 (from page 23 Ibid.) [from the caption} are:
"From S. Miller, 1974. Origins of Life 5, 139." I already posted table 3-2 but I did not detail the chemical reaction product proportions reported by Miller. I will start that in my next post (it will take many posts because there were many amino acids produced (the table includes only the amino acids produced - not other compounds [e.g. organic compounds] like formic acid which predominated).

Thaxton et al goes on (from pages 23,24):

"In 1974, Miller reported the amino acids he had obtained in electrical discharge experiments.8 These are listed in table 3-2. In addition, asparagine,9 lysine,10 and phenylalanine11 have been reported by others but disputed by Miller.t2 In all, ten of the twenty proteinous amino acids have been positively identified among the products of electrical discharge experiments, as well as about thirty non-proteinous amino acids. Both tert-leucine and N-ethylalanine have been reported but not definitely confirmed. When more than trace amounts of ammonia have been used, iminodiacetic acid and iminoaceticpropionic acid have resulted. When hydrogen sulfide is added to the gaseous mixture methionine is formed."

Reference 8 (from which table 3-2 is derived):

Miller and Orgel, The Origins of Life on the Earth, p. 84. See also: D. Ring, Y. Wolman, N. Friedmann, and S. Miller, 1972. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 69, 765; Y. Wolman, W.J. Haverland, and S.L. Miller, 1972. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 69, 809; S. Miller, 1955. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 77,2351.

Feel free to check these sources Hollie - a number are peer reviewed which you prefer.

Notice that 10 of the 20 amino acids in life (=biologic; specifically proteinous) are positively identified resulting from Miller type synthesis experiments - why your quote refers to only 4 rather than 10 I will research concurrent with researching table 3-2. But I suspect only 4 biologic/proteinous amino acids were produced in significant chemical reaction product proportions.

I will post in detail in concerning Miller's synthesis experiment results in my next posts - but for starters the most prevalent amino acids produced were Glycine (440), Alanine(790), and a-Amino-n-butyric acid (270). The numbers are the relative math proportion. All the others were less than 100 - the next most prevalent was 8(alpha)-Amino-n(gamma)-butyric acid with a proportion of 74. In my next post I will go into detail on just those 4 amino acids:

 

[alang1216]

Atheism is a dangerous path.
If you don't believe in God, God doesn't believe in you.

I have trouble believing that something that can create a universe of galaxies cares about what I think and do. I created a nice aquarium for my fish but I don't expect him to worship me and I certainly don't care what he does with the other fish. He is a fish, he does what fish do.

 

[alang1216]

An example is HCN (1 atom Hydrogen, 1 atom carbon, 1 atom Nitrogen). Hydrogen was produced without stars, supernovae produced carbon, nitrogen and oxygen (the O in H2O). But the reactions of HCN with H2O do not lead to molecules required for life in significant proportions. An intelligent chemist is needed to isolate/select each step towards simple and complex amino acids and to biologically important dipeptides to polypeptide to proteins.

This is atheist science. At least, you can explain it better than others here such as ding who does not know what he is talking about. While it's may be good exercise for the intellect, it did not happen. An intelligent chemist will not be able "isolate/select each step towards simple and complex amino acids from dipeptides to polypeptide to proteins." Life does not happen like that or else we would have seen it already. I even tried to point alang1216 to the Miller-Urey experiment but he couldn't even manage flash player to do it let alone understand it.

I understand it, it shows complex organic molecules can be created by natural forces. As I've said before, I believe the first life was a molecule, maybe a clay, maybe an organic, doesn't matter, it only mattered that the molecule could take material from its environment to grow and then split to reproduce. It may have been as simple as a long chain clay molecule that grows longer and longer until it breaks in two. The more efficient the process becomes the more common it becomes. Natural selection and evolution. The first cell was likely a billion or two years down the road.

 

[alang1216]

We can only speculate on what the conditions of the early earth were and what the first life was made of. Here is some on the carbon cycle. I do know that there was plenty of oxygen around, I'm pretty sure it was not free, atmospheric oxygen, at least not for long.

The only evidence for an intelligent chemist is a gap in our knowledge. Such gaps have been getting smaller and smaller as we learn more.

Go ahead and add the early gases which you claim. What happens to the Miller-Urey experiment?

Miller-Urey Experiment

www.millerureyexperiment.com

I give up, what happens to the Miller-Urey experiment? More to the point, why should we care?

I wanted you to try adding oxygen to the experiment online. The figure would show you what happens. Better online that in real life.

Anyway, today we know it was the volcanic or methane gases that was around during primordial Earth. Would God cause you harm then? Nope.

I'm not an organic chemist so the issues people have with Miller-Urey are of little interest to me. I just consider them to be a God-of-the-gaps issue. We can't explain it so it must have been God.

 

[alang1216]

Did you know that the central nervous system of every mammal species got larger over time?

I didn't know that and I'm not sure what it means.

It means that very nature of existence is to create intelligence. It is unavoidable. It is not an accident.

That's ridiculous. The nature of existence is to continue to exist. That's it. If more intelligence facilitates that, then more intelligence will probably develop. But life on Earth existed for about 3 billion years before it even had a brain.

It is not our existence that is important, it is the survival of our genes. Nature will sacrifice an individual if that enhances the survival chances of it's DNA. A praying mantis will eat her mate because his sacrifice will better ensure his offspring and his genes will survive.

 

[alang1216]

look at it this way, lots of things are going on all at once; you are being pruned, you are being tested, you play a role in others being pruned, you play a role in others being tested, etc.

At any point in your life you are the sum of your choices. You will either learn from the consequences of your choices and progress or the lesson will be repeated. It’s your call.

Here's a question I've never gotten a good answer to, what part do you think God had in MY creation? Did he create ME or did he create mankind and then stepped back and watched us generation after generation?

 

[james bond]

I'm not an organic chemist so the issues people have with Miller-Urey are of little interest to me. I just consider them to be a God-of-the-gaps issue. We can't explain it so it must have been God.

Sorry, you lost me as someone credible with your much false discussion on a paper you presented to me and which I read. You admit now that it isn't anything which you can discuss and furthermore I do not think you understand. That makes me very disappointed in you because you are a faker. I did the work to look at Miller-Urey and understand it and found the link where one can actually do their experiment.

The Miller-Urey links allows one to replicate their experiment in an easy and safe environment online. All one has to do is click on the gas they want to add. The sparker and boiling water for water vapor is all set up for you. You would've discovered any oxygen presence would cause an explosion. Moreover, I used the gases you presented in your paper and it caused an explosion. It means they produced oxygen.

It means to me that you have no clue in what you are talking about haha.

 

[Hollie]

Another fatal blow to chemical evolution theories is the problem of isomers/isomerization. Specific molecules required on chemical pathways to life have multiple isomers with the same chemical formula but with different structure. This is different from the problem of selection of L-amino acids (left hand polarization).

From page 52 of the above link:

"For example, results from Miller's spark discharge experiments (table 4-1) show many more non-proteinous than proteinous amino acids. In most cases more than one isomer (molecules with the same number of atoms but different geometry) is found for a given empirical formula. For example, three amino acid isomers are formed with formula C.H9N03, two of which are non-proteinous. All eight isomers of formula C4H9N02 are non-proteinous (fig. 4-3)."

And from page 54:

"Figure4-3.
cr-Amino-n-butyric acid
cr-Aminoisobutyric acid
N-Ethylglycine
P-Amino-n-butyric acid
P-Aminoisobutyric acid
-y-Aminobutyric acid
N-Methylalanine
N-Methyl-p-alanine
Structural isomers of amino acids with empirical formula C.H9NOz found in Miller experiment. None are found in proteins."

Format put a period for 4 and z for 2 - the formula is C4H9NO2

See figure 4-3 for the different structures/isomers for the non-biologic amino acids C4H9NO2.

OK, time for my breakfast! I am a little late on that my tummy is telling me!

Hope you all have a good day!

Shelter in place to be safe for you and others. (unless you have a hazmet (sp?) suit).

CB025: Abiogenetic amino acid generation

www.talkorigins.org

Claim CB025:
Stanley Miller's original abiogenesis experiment produced only four of the twenty amino acids from which proteins are built, and later experiments still have not produced all twenty amino acids under plausible conditions.

Source:
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, pg. 40.

Response:

1. Miller's experiments produced thirteen of the twenty amino acids used in life (Henahan 1996). Others may have formed via other mechanisms. For example, they may have formed in space and been carried to earth on meteors (Pizzarello and Weber 2004).
   
   
2. It is not known which amino acids are needed for the most primitive life. It could be that the amino acids that form easily were sufficient and that life later evolved to produce and rely on others.

References:

1. Henahan, Sean. 1996. From primordial soup to the prebiotic beach: An interview with exobiology pioneer, Dr. Stanley L. Miller. http://www.accessexcellence.org/WN/NM/miller.html
2. Pizzarello, S. and A. L. Weber. 2004. Prebiotic amino acids as asymmetric catalysts. Science 303: 1151.

Hollie - thank you for addressing the actual amino acids produced by Miller but you missed Miller's original experiments vs. his later experiments and also have ignored my reference to this link:

https://www.krusch.com/books/evolution/Mystery_of_Lifes_Origin.pdf

This is a science book - our literature does not go into the detail that Thaxton et al do. I already posted the detailed results of Miller's experiments - I see I need to repost since you seem to want to ignore the chemical reaction product proportions of Miller's experiments (plural). For example, I already posted the detailed list of Miller's experiment in 1974 from table 3-2 from page 23 of the above link.

Of course, I am not going to simply repost - I will address your point specifically and in more detail:

From page 22:

"Electrical Discharge Experiments
At the University of Chicago in December 1952, Stanley Miller provided the first experimental test of the Oparin-Haldane hypothesis of a biogenesis. 4 As a graduate student working in the laboratory of Nobel Laureate Harold Urey, Miller devised an experimental approach to simulate the formation of biomonomers on the early earth. The simulated atmosphere consisted of methane, ammonia, hydrogen, and water vapor."

Note the environment: methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), Hydrogen (H) and water vapor (H2O). Note that only water contains oxygen and that hydrogen is extremely dominant in this environment. The actual evidence from earth's geology is contrary to this imagined environment - for example, oxygen is the most abundant element in earth's crust - as I also have already posted.

Reference 4 - Stanley L. Miller, 1953. Science 117, 528

Thaxton et al (Bradley & Olson) go on to detail the apparatus Miller used (figure 3-1 on page 21) and the way he determined the chemical reaction products - see the link for that. On page 23 the subsequent experiments (since 1952) by Miller and others is referred to:

"These have included mixtures of two or more of the following gases: methane, ethane, ammonia, nitrogen, water vapor, hydrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen sulfide. By and large these experiments follow the same general technique used by Miller, although a number of modifications have been employed. As long as oxygen has been excluded from the mixture, amino acids and other organic compounds have resulted."

As I have already posted, the chemical reaction product proportions vary in different environments - e.g. hot, cold, wet, dry (even with condensing agents), acid, alkaline (etc.) - these variant environments produce mostly formic acid, and then various other compounds including certain amino acids in variant proportions and context depending on the environment in the synthesis experiment.

The specific results reported by Miller in table 3-2 (from page 23 Ibid.) [from the caption} are:
"From S. Miller, 1974. Origins of Life 5, 139." I already posted table 3-2 but I did not detail the chemical reaction product proportions reported by Miller. I will start that in my next post (it will take many posts because there were many amino acids produced (the table includes only the amino acids produced - not other compounds [e.g. organic compounds] like formic acid which predominated).

Thaxton et al goes on (from pages 23,24):

"In 1974, Miller reported the amino acids he had obtained in electrical discharge experiments.8 These are listed in table 3-2. In addition, asparagine,9 lysine,10 and phenylalanine11 have been reported by others but disputed by Miller.t2 In all, ten of the twenty proteinous amino acids have been positively identified among the products of electrical discharge experiments, as well as about thirty non-proteinous amino acids. Both tert-leucine and N-ethylalanine have been reported but not definitely confirmed. When more than trace amounts of ammonia have been used, iminodiacetic acid and iminoaceticpropionic acid have resulted. When hydrogen sulfide is added to the gaseous mixture methionine is formed."

Reference 8 (from which table 3-2 is derived):

Miller and Orgel, The Origins of Life on the Earth, p. 84. See also: D. Ring, Y. Wolman, N. Friedmann, and S. Miller, 1972. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 69, 765; Y. Wolman, W.J. Haverland, and S.L. Miller, 1972. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 69, 809; S. Miller, 1955. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 77,2351.

Feel free to check these sources Hollie - a number are peer reviewed which you prefer.

Notice that 10 of the 20 amino acids in life (=biologic; specifically proteinous) are positively identified resulting from Miller type synthesis experiments - why your quote refers to only 4 rather than 10 I will research concurrent with researching table 3-2. But I suspect only 4 biologic/proteinous amino acids were produced in significant chemical reaction product proportions.

I will post in detail in concerning Miller's synthesis experiment results in my next posts - but for starters the most prevalent amino acids produced were Glycine (440), Alanine(790), and a-Amino-n-butyric acid (270). The numbers are the relative math proportion. All the others were less than 100 - the next most prevalent was 8(alpha)-Amino-n(gamma)-butyric acid with a proportion of 74. In my next post I will go into detail on just those 4 amino acids:

You may have forgotten that I addressed the link to the book authored by creationists. I’ll point out that the authors of the book have a bias that will inevitably lead to conclusions of supernaturalism as the cause for existence. The authors of the book you linked, as is typical of proponents of ID’iot creationism, are concerned with getting creationism into schools, writing books (aimed primarily for children), and participating in debates among other creationists. The ID movement is not now, and has never been, about doing science.

Charles B. Thaxton: intelligent design author and Fellow of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture.

Walter L. Bradley: Fellow of the Discovery Institute,

Dean Kenyon: a long time promoter of the modern form of creationism known as Intelligent Design xreationism. Kenyon is, for instance, the author of the infamous Of Pandas and People, the textbook that laid the foundation for the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial (after being quickly turned from a creationist book into an Intelligent Design book, which was predictable since the views are the same).

What is predictable from creationists is their pattern of attacking and rejecting science as well as all natural theories for the origin of life on earth, predictably ending up claiming that the Christian Gods did it.

The Miller/Urey experiment was not, and is not the only basis for abiogenesis research. Thus disputing the results does not invalidate abiogenesis theories.

Of course, what we’re left with is the usual attacks on science by creationists insisting that science is flawed, thus, “The Gods Did it”. However, we have no reason to believe your particular Gods did anything as we have no data to support your Gods.





Claim CB026:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB026.html

Miller-Urey type experiments produce toxic chemicals, such as cyanide and formaldehyde, but not amino acids.

Source:
Discovery Institute. 2003. A preliminary analysis of the treatment of evolution in biology textbooks currently being considered for adoption by the Texas State Board of Education. http://www.discovery.org/articleFiles/PDFs/TexasPrelim.pdf, p. 5.

Response:

1. Cyanide and formaldehyde are necessary building blocks for important biochemical compounds, including amino acids (Abelson 1996). They are not toxins in this context.
2. Miller-Urey experiments produce amino acids among other chemical compounds (Kawamoto and Akaboshi 1982; Schlesinger and Miller 1983).

References:

1. Abelson, P. 1996. Chemical events on the primitive earth. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 55: 1365-1372.
2. Kawamoto, K. and M. Akaboshi. 1982. Study on the chemical evolution of low molecular weight compounds in a highly oxidized atmosphere using electric discharges. Origins of Life 12(2): 133-141.
3. Schlesinger, G. and S. L. Miller. 1983. Prebiotic synthesis in atmospheres containing CH4, CO, and CO2. I. Amino acids. Journal of Molecular Evolution 19(5): 376-382.

Further Reading:

Ellington, Andrew D. and Matthew Levy. 2003. Gas, discharge, and the Discovery Institute. Reports of the National Center for Science Education 23(3-4): 39-40.





Claim CB035.3:

When the Miller-Urey experiment is run with an atmosphere consisting only of carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and water vapor, no amino acids are produced.

CB035.3: Amino acids from simple atmosphere

www.talkorigins.org

Source:

Discovery Institute. 2003. A preliminary analysis of the treatment of evolution in biology textbooks currently being considered for adoption by the Texas State Board of Education. http://www.discovery.org/articleFiles/PDFs/TexasPrelim.pdf, p. 5.

Response:

1. The claim is false. Such an atmosphere does give rise to amino acids (Schlesinger and Miller 1983).

Links:

Gishlick, Alan D. n.d. Icons of evolution? Miller-Urey experiment. http://www.ncseweb.org/icons/icon1millerurey.html

References:

1. Schlesinger, G. and S. L. Miller. 1983. Prebiotic synthesis in atmospheres containing CH4, CO, and CO2. I. Amino acids. Journal of Molecular Evolution 19(5): 376-382.

Further Reading:

Ellington, Andrew D. and Matthew Levy. 2003. Gas, discharge, and the Discovery Institute. Reports of the National Center for Science Education 23(3-4): 39-40.

 

[Indeependent]

Atheism is a dangerous path.
If you don't believe in God, God doesn't believe in you.

I have trouble believing that something that can create a universe of galaxies cares about what I think and do. I created a nice aquarium for my fish but I don't expect him to worship me and I certainly don't care what he does with the other fish. He is a fish, he does what fish do.

I keep forgetting to ask you and other atheists...
Could you do me a favor and post that I can have your connection to God when I pass away at 120?
This is based on the verses that indicate bringing someone to appreciate God increases one's connection with God in the metaphysical portion of our existence.
Since you don't believe in God I would appreciate you, and any other atheist reading this, to give me your connection.
I'm not being sarcastic.

Simply post, "You can add my connection to God to your own connection to God."
Thanks in advance!