Gawd, Let us talk about fraud: Chemists have partly unlocked the recipe by creating a complex compound essential to all life — in a lab

The thing I like about this is that they seem to understand that biological evolution can't begin until life exists.
There was chemical evolution long before there was any biology.

You should study ribozymes, which are little bits of RNA that catalyze other chemical reactions. The shortest one is CUGGC. Ribozymes have names, like hammerhead, hairpin, and so on.

One of the interesting things about ribozymes is most of them require divalent metal ion cofactors. Magnesium is the big player there. When you add MgCl2 to a solution of ribozymes in water you see a huge spike in the kinetic right around 10mM concentration. Magnesium in seawater is about 1300 ppm, it's the third most abundant ion behind sodium and chlorine.

Here:


The first self replicating ribozyme was discovered in 2002, the second author is now the president of the Salk Institute

 
There was chemical evolution long before there was any biology.

You should study ribozymes, which are little bits of RNA that catalyze other chemical reactions. The shortest one is CUGGC. Ribozymes have names, like hammerhead, hairpin, and so on.

One of the interesting things about ribozymes is most of them require divalent metal ion cofactors. Magnesium is the big player there. When you add MgCl2 to a solution of ribozymes in water you see a huge spike in the kinetic right around 10mM concentration. Magnesium in seawater is about 1300 ppm, it's the third most abundant ion behind sodium and chlorine.

Here:


The first self replicating ribozyme was discovered in 2002, the second author is now the president of the Salk Institute

Yes, chemical evolution. Chemical bonding and chance.
 
So post cell.
Maybe. The FUCA was possibly, maybe even likely, precellular. So it would come down to semantics. Arbitrarily chosen definitions.

But it's not out of bounds to define such a FUCA as not life, for certain uses. But we don't know many of its properties.

In which case, the processes between the FUCA and LUCA would be abiogenesis.
 
Last edited:
Maybe. The FUCA was possibly, maybe even likely, precellular. So it would come down to semantics. Arbitrarily chosen definitions.

But it's not out of bounds to define such a FUCA as not life, for certain uses. But we don't know many of its properties.
You say arbitrary. I say self evident. No life. No biological evolution. No natural selection.
 
Obviously I did considering others disagreed with you.
No they didn't. Ding, don't start the chest thumping, you always make silly errors when you do.

Hey, without cars, there is no car driving.

But anyhoo... there is both selection and evolution among chemicals. That's how abiogenesis occurred.
 
Obviously that doesn't mean anything.

Go try out the useless talking point on them, then.

Hey, without cars, there is no car driving.

But anyhoo... there is both selection and evolution among chemicals. That's how abiogenesis occurred.
Again... where were you when others were arguing that natural selection was occuring before life?

You were silent. That's where. So don't tell me I don't need to state the OBVIOUS because OBVIOUSLY I do need to state the OBVIOUS because idiots argue against the OBVIOUS.
 
Again... where were you when others were arguing that natural selection was occuring before life?
I am not interested in your strawman.

Of course selection operates on chemicals.

Is it "natural selection", as defined in evolution? No, because that is defined by selection on life.

So all you have done is say "no water, no wet".

Not insightful.
 

Forum List

Back
Top