I find it fascinating that science has still not discovered how non-life turned into life and exactly when. At least I think they haven't yet. Last time I looked it was still a mystery...
Evolution or not?

Rybozyme engineering is a joke Razz. First the early earth atmosphere wasn't a reducing one. The Urey-Miller experiment had all its parameters wrong. They used methane and ammonia which wasn't present on the early earth, so no reducing atmosphere which is necessary for organic reactions. They also used electricity to promote chemical interactions, that wasn't present in an early earth atmosphere. Also, only a smidgen of amino acids formed over a period of years, and it was only 2% of the compound mixture. That presents a major problem because amino acids will form bonds with other molecules and compounds before it will form peptide bonds with themselves. Another major problem is the chirality problem. The experiment formed amino acids of equal chirality while life uses only left handed amino acids save one.
And we haven't even started to try and make a cell yet.

A computer program that converts into machine code and builds airplane parts by robots is a simple process? Are you just guessing Razz? 😕
Compared with a cell, yes. I remember a scientist estimated one single cell to be more complex than an entire city.

Rybozyme engineering is a joke Razz. First the early earth atmosphere wasn't a reducing one. The Urey-Miller experiment had all its parameters wrong. They used methane and ammonia which wasn't present on the early earth, so no reducing atmosphere which is necessary for organic reactions. They also used electricity to promote chemical interactions, that wasn't present in an early earth atmosphere. Also, only a smidgen of amino acids formed over a period of years, and it was only 2% of the compound mixture. That presents a major problem because amino acids will form bonds with other molecules and compounds before it will form peptide bonds with themselves. Another major problem is the chirality problem. The experiment formed amino acids of equal chirality while life uses only left handed amino acids save one.
And we haven't even started to try and make a cell yet.
So what?
I can explain for now third time, science does not yet know many things. Its not a discussion if I explain things to you and you just pretend not to hear them or whatever it is you do.
I dont care if you find many problems in biology, and no scientists care either. You need to understand how science works if you want to discuss it.

A major problem for Rybozyme engineering is that ribose doesn't form in the presence of purine and pyramadine bases. That means that we can't even build an RNA molecule. That's a big deal. Even if they could self arrange we would need nucleic acids. It turns out that Uracil is extremely unstable and lasts only a few minutes at low temperature. Now raise the temperature for chemical reactivity and it degrades even faster. Uracil is necessary to make nucleic acids which are necessary to make RNA molecules. Also hydrogen bonds between nucleic acids are unstable. That means the RNA molecule will fall apart before it is even built.
The next problem is the specified information needed for the molecule. The nucleotides need to be arranged in the correct order for a functioning molecule. How does that happen.
Another huge problem would be a template molecule for a replicase, assuming a replicase was around. One would need a library the weight of the earth to match a replicase for transcription.
Now your problems are just beginning. I'll continue on that after a break.

I am sure also many experiments have been made in lots of labs across the globe since this Urey-Miller experiment that i never heard about. Its from 1952 according to wikipedia, its so long ago that no scientist working today would even have heard about it or would even take it seriously.
Not being a scientist myself, I find it strange they care so little about the history of their discipline, for instance they dont care at all what so ever what Darwin wrote because the newer stuff is better. And yes it is, but still its weird to me they are completely uninterested in him :)
Only people reading Darwin today are historians of science and creationsts, the biologists dont care anymore lol.

The Urey-Miller experiment is still taught in high school biology classes Razz. It was used at the time and for years that life could form in an early earth environment.
Its been completely discredited except by a few people today. Oh well, my last post shows why RNA molecules self arranging is a crock.

Raspberry_Yoghurt wrote:
einstein99 wrote:
A computer program that converts into machine code and builds airplane parts by robots is a simple process? Are you just guessing Razz? 😕
Compared with a cell, yes. I remember a scientist estimated one single cell to be more complex than an entire city.
_____________________
So if a cell is more complex than an entire city, which one would be easier to form by random processes? 😕

Raspberry_Yoghurt wrote:
einstein99 wrote:
A computer program that converts into machine code and builds airplane parts by robots is a simple process? Are you just guessing Razz? 😕
Compared with a cell, yes. I remember a scientist estimated one single cell to be more complex than an entire city.
_____________________
So if a cell is more complex than an entire city, which one would be easier to form by random processes? 😕
The cell, because it can replicate with mutations and that is the only known way such complexity can arise without "designers". Its a result of a very long lineage of individual cellos/organisms. A city cannot replicate and doesnt have "ancestors".

The Urey-Miller experiment is still taught in high school biology classes Razz. It was used at the time and for years that life could form in an early earth environment.
Its been completely discredited except by a few people today. Oh well, my last post shows why RNA molecules self arranging is a crock.
Guess it is a popular thing in the USA then. Never heard about it before.
Abiogenesis doesnt interest me really. I have a book about it I think i will throw out to make space because it has been gathering dust for five years :) When they crack it, i think it will just be a boring list of which molecule came before which and so on.
It seems to me to be more a "thing" for creationists? Because you use this useless strategy of talking about the many unsolved questions in science like it is something new, and this is an unsolved one.

A more interesting unsolved problem is sleep - the scientists have no idea what it is for, just know it is extremely important biologically. They have a lot of information, but it doesnt make sense really.
Doesnt make sense from a design perspective either. Why would a designer not design us to the stuff he likes us to do all the time instead of just having to lie down a lot? No designer in his right mind would design a machine that was meant to be inactive 1/3 of the time for no reason :)

Raspberry_Yoghurt wrote:
einstein99 wrote:
Raspberry_Yoghurt wrote:
einstein99 wrote:
A computer program that converts into machine code and builds airplane parts by robots is a simple process? Are you just guessing Razz? 😕
Compared with a cell, yes. I remember a scientist estimated one single cell to be more complex than an entire city.
_____________________
So if a cell is more complex than an entire city, which one would be easier to form by random processes? 😕
The cell, because it can replicate with mutations and that is the only known way such complexity can arise without "designers". Its a result of a very long lineage of individual cellos/organisms. A city cannot replicate and doesnt have "ancestors".
_____________________
You're forgetting something Razz. If there's no cell in the first place, then how does it mutate and rreplicate? 😕

Raspberry_Yoghurt wrote:
A more interesting unsolved problem is sleep - the scientists have no idea what it is for, just know it is extremely important biologically. They have a lot of information, but it doesnt make sense really.
Doesnt make sense from a design perspective either. Why would a designer not design us to the stuff he likes us to do all the time instead of just having to lie down a lot? No designer in his right mind would design a machine that was meant to be inactive 1/3 of the time for no reason :)
Also, memories are weird. I have so many. It's hard to believe they are stored in this gelatinous squishy , grayish thing they call the brain. I mean, I have whole WORLDS in my head.

Probably our spirit too. 😉
Why do we forget things then? Does the spirit run out of space?

Raspberry_Yoghurt wrote:
A more interesting unsolved problem is sleep - the scientists have no idea what it is for, just know it is extremely important biologically. They have a lot of information, but it doesnt make sense really.
Doesnt make sense from a design perspective either. Why would a designer not design us to the stuff he likes us to do all the time instead of just having to lie down a lot? No designer in his right mind would design a machine that was meant to be inactive 1/3 of the time for no reason :)
Also, memories are weird. I have so many. It's hard to believe they are stored in this gelatinous squishy , grayish thing they call the brain. I mean, I have whole WORLDS in my head.
Yeah memory is weird also.
Music is strange also, and I always wondered why the creationists didnt use music instead. For me it's really hard to imagine any reason evolution would have made us like music. Evolution should make us kill stuff to eat and make babies and take care of them and such, not sitting around listening to noise for no reason whatsoever. And why would we prefer listening to rhytms than random noise? Cant even imagine why an organism that likes to listen to rhytms is better at surviving than an organism that doesnt care about it, from a biological perspective music looks like an unnecessary distraction.
On the other hand music is universal so it must be hardwired in the brain. As far as I know, the knowledge of why the genes make a brain that likes music is total zero.
So there you go Einsten, some ammo for you :)
A computer program that converts into machine code and builds airplane parts by robots is a simple process? Are you just guessing Razz? 😕