1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Abiogenesis ─ and another biochemical angle

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by blü 2, Jan 5, 2021.

  1. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    9,472
    Ratings:
    +5,986
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    Science Today reports:

    In a study published in the chemistry journal Angewandte Chemie, [chemists at Scripps Research] demonstrated that a simple compound called diamidophosphate (DAP), which was plausibly present on Earth before life arose, could have chemically knitted together tiny DNA building blocks called deoxynucleosides into strands of primordial DNA.​

    Why does that matter? >More here<.
     
    • Informative Informative x 7
    • Like Like x 1
  2. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    9,092
    Ratings:
    +2,290
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    I don't know, because that is a subjective question. What matters, is what matters to somebody based on their individual interpretation.

    Now it matters if you choose to use science, but that requires you to choose to do so. Now how it matters otherwise could depend on how you understand science and the world as such. Further it could matter in practice if it could lead to a practical application in regards to your everyday life.

    To me it matters as: Meh, that is somewhat interesting, but not that big of a deal.
     
  3. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    9,472
    Ratings:
    +5,986
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    Completely a matter for you.
     
  4. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    47,981
    Ratings:
    +29,462
    Religion:
    Atheist
    That is quite the paper. I doubt if creationists appreciate what it means.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    9,472
    Ratings:
    +5,986
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    In my days on Beliefnet, from time to time I used to ask the YECs whether, if science created life from non-life in the lab, they'd give up being YECs. And not once did I get a straight answer. It is a problem for them if life doesn't have miraculous beginnings.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Guitar's Cry

    Guitar's Cry Verisimilitudinous

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2006
    Messages:
    13,862
    Ratings:
    +3,548
    Religion:
    Panreligious mystical paganism
    At least, God-inspired miraculous beginnings. There's something of a miracle in scientific discovery.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,755
    Ratings:
    +9,644
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I asked this question as well. I did get an answer.

    That answer was "it would prove that life is created".
    The person I was talking to, really did not understand what it means to conduct an experiment under controlled conditions. I tried explaining it, by pointing out how the response was similar to saying that ice at the north pole had to be "created" because "freezers".

    But alas................
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    9,472
    Ratings:
    +5,986
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    NOT freezers, you say? Now you've got me thinking ...
     
  9. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    9,092
    Ratings:
    +2,290
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    Based on you choice to agree or disagree.

    Why did you place the OP in Religious Debates?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    21,896
    Ratings:
    +26,628
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    I've seen some argue that if life was created in a lab, it would just prove that intelligence was required for life to get going.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    21,896
    Ratings:
    +26,628
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Two big takeaways:

    1. This suggests that a mixture of RNA and DNA may have been involved in the first living things, as opposed to a purely RNA world.

    2. This may be a way to eliminate some of the enzymes used in PCR, thereby making it easier to use.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  12. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    21,896
    Ratings:
    +26,628
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Beat me to it. :)
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    40,755
    Ratings:
    +15,019
    Religion:
    Judaism
    I came across the same story at EurekAlert! about a week ago.

    I particularly like;

    The finding also nudges the field of origin-of-life chemistry away from the hypothesis that has dominated it in recent decades: The "RNA World" hypothesis posits that the first replicators were RNA-based, and that DNA arose only later as a product of RNA life forms.​

    It is hardly the final Gotcha in the polemic with creationism, but every nudge helps and it's interesting nonetheless.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  14. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    8,555
    Ratings:
    +7,564
    Religion:
    none
    Which in turn proves that that person doesn't know what "falsifiable" means as s/he just made the hypothesis of created life "not even wrong".
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. A Vestigial Mote

    A Vestigial Mote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Messages:
    6,916
    Ratings:
    +4,798
    Religion:
    ?
    Hmmm... if it truly wasn't a big deal to you... then why comment to that effect at all?
     
  16. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    9,092
    Ratings:
    +2,290
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    Because it was placed in religious debates. It wasn't placed in the sub-forum of science, so we are in effect not doing just science in this thread. We are fighting over for lack of better words: Reason, logic and evidence. As always. :D
     
  17. A Vestigial Mote

    A Vestigial Mote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Messages:
    6,916
    Ratings:
    +4,798
    Religion:
    ?
    So it is a big deal to you from a religious perspective?
     
  18. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    9,092
    Ratings:
    +2,290
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    No, because I don't know what religion is. There are 2 camps within science and I am both religious and not according to science.
    In another sense it is not a big deal, because it won't change how people believe as for their world views.
     
  19. A Vestigial Mote

    A Vestigial Mote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Messages:
    6,916
    Ratings:
    +4,798
    Religion:
    ?
    But I feel you understand that, like some of the revelations surrounding evolution, it has the potential to change people's minds. And I believe that scares you. So I believe the reason you replied to the effect that it "isn't a big deal" is in order to try and get others to think as you do, so that the results are downplayed, and the impact of any possible revelations coming along this line of scientific inquiry are minimized. In the end, I feel that your little "meh, no big deal" will have even less effect in the effort to "change how people believe as for their world views." It's you trying to confirm the biases of anyone anti-science so you can all high-five each other about the maintenance of your ignorance.

    This is all just information being shared. To purposefully go to the lengths to reply "meh, no big deal" with some amount of "this is what I believe" fanfare - that smacks of someone with an agenda. Just peruse the information and move on if it is not of any importance to you. Any time I comment, I completely understand and admit that it was because I felt the topic important enough to do so. When I don't comment? That's when I truly felt a thing was not important.
     
  20. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    9,092
    Ratings:
    +2,290
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    I am an atheist and my God is nature in a naturalistic sense
     
Loading...