Hacker fears 'UFO cover-up'

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Seems to be a contentious and fascinating subject. Ultimately is there any proof we evolved from non-organic matter? I can't find any.

If you're looking for a large sign or single experiment - the closest is Stanley Miller-Harold Urey's now-classic experiment showing that amino acids, the building blocks of organic life, can be formed inorganically.

These days there's *a lot* beyond that.

The internet notwithstanding, the contentious debate is over direct abiotic synthesis of RNA or DNA versus biotic derivation of RNA/DNA from TNA or GNA (the latter are forms of RNA/DNA with other sugars).

E.g., work from closer to you (University of Manchester) on the former: pre-biotic synthesis of RNA from Jack Sutherland's lab There are other people & more famous people working in the area, e.g., the late Leslie Orgel from Scripps; Sutherland is just the only Brit I know off the top of my head in the research area.

Some other thoughts on prebiotic synthesis of amino acids. (And this is *way* beyond Stanley Miller-Harold Urey’s classic experiment.)

It gets even more fascinating, im-ever-ho, when you start examining the intersection of organic synthesis and photocatalysis with early Earth geochemistry of reducing atmosphere.

And that’s all terrestrial synthesis, other folks (mostly astrophysicists, like Lew Snyder, UIUC) are pursuing the search for amino acids in the interstellar medium, of which the component molecules have already found.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

Quote

Then it wouldn't be God, would it?

Why not? It seems there are enough mistakes in the bible, so why not in our common perception of God?

Because a god is generally defined as being a supernatural being and is pretty much always always tied to the idea of an afterlife and the soul. I don't see how an alien, no matter how sophisticated, would fulfill those criteria. I also don't think that calling 'god' something which evolved naturally within the universe is a very satisfactory use of the word.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[vortexring 0]

Fair enough, perhaps I'm showing my ignorance of the matter, but wasn't the earth originally non-organic? If orginal lifeforms evolved from this, didn't we then evolve from this original life?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Great links Marg; cheers. Looks like I've got some reading to do.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

I don't disagree with you Jakee, but you're pretty much describing a common perception of God. It could be the case it's these common perceptions, possibly through religion, which are wrong.

He could be beyond our earthly comprehension, hence having 'God' like powers. I'd imagine he doesn't have a physical body for a start.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[billvon 2,400]

>perhaps I'm showing my ignorance of the matter, but wasn't the
>earth originally non-organic?

Well, we're using two different definitions for organic.

The literal definition of organic chemistry is the chemistry of carbon compounds. Carbon is formed in stars, and was abundant on the early earth. So there was a lot of organic chemistry going on here even before life came along.

The more commonly used definition is "derived from a living organism." So by definition, there were no organic materials before the first organism. However, several experiments have shown that basic compounds (carbon dioxide, hydrogen, nitrogen) and a source of energy (lightning, sunlight) can produce the same compounds that, today, living organisms produce. Things like amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins.

[vortexring 0]

Ok, cheers for making it clear.

So if we originate from original lifeforms, which orginate from carbon compounds, which orginate from the stars...man, what a journey to be where we are now. Especially if it is just a case of natural evolution, with no 'Godly' interference.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

So if we originate from original lifeforms, which orginate from carbon compounds, which orginate from the stars...man, what a journey to be where we are now.

To paraphrase the late Carl Sagan: we are made of star-stuff.


/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[vortexring 0]

Hence 'Greetings, Carbon-based Bipeds'? Of course.

It's fascinating how the answers to 3 important questions are quite possibly interlinked:

Is there life elsewhere in the universe?

Exactly how did we evolve?

Is there a God.

It seems if we can properly answer the first two we can quite possibly answer the third. Which would bugger up a lot of peoples arguments on SC...

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[billvon 2,400]

>So if we originate from original lifeforms, which orginate from carbon
>compounds, which orginate from the stars...man, what a journey to be
>where we are now.

You think that's cool?

Stars can form elements up to iron; beyond that fusion doesn't work. The only place heavier elements can form is in the center of supernovas, where pressures and temperatures are sufficient to fuse the heavier elements.

Some, like uranium, are somewhat exotic and deadly. Some, like gold, are rare and valuable. But many of the other heavier-than-iron elements are important when it comes to human life - iodine, zinc, selenium. And all of them came from the heart of a supernova.

[vortexring 0]

Then surely this article is equally cool!

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Quote

>So if we originate from original lifeforms, which orginate from carbon
>compounds, which orginate from the stars...man, what a journey to be
>where we are now.

You think that's cool?

Sure do. What I find difficult to understand is how we could evolve to where we are now without intelligent design? Even Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."

Wouldn't it be more likely we evolved through deliberate intelligent design?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

Even Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."

Answered* in the other thread.

Quote

Wouldn't it be more likely we evolved through deliberate intelligent design?

No. If we evolved through intelligent design then why are our eyes backwards?




* Owned, even.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 2,400]

>Even Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable
>contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting
>different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic
>aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely
>confess, absurd in the highest degree."

Yep, he did that as an introduction to how the eye was designed.

I could write a similar introduction to a whuffo lecture on "how parachutes work:

"To imagine that a 20 pound backpack could be worn by someone jumping out of a plane, and could deploy not one but two parachutes capable of decelerating someone safely from 120 to 5mph, cradle them comfortably 3000 feet in the air, fly them several miles from their point of opening, allow them to perform areobatic manuevers, and then land them as softly as someone stepping off a curb seems, I freely admit, unlikely in the highest degree."

"But here's my rig."

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

Even Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."

Quote

Answered* in the other thread.

Answered* answered in the other thread.

Quote

Wouldn't it be more likely we evolved through deliberate intelligent design?

Quote

No. If we evolved through intelligent design then why are our eyes backwards?

So we don't see everything as upside down?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

• Quote

[vortexring 0]

So what is your opinion? We naturally evolved to what we are today? I don't completely believe God created us, it just seems more likely some form of intelligent designer did!

As it says on the NASA website: "the method for ensuring that all of the right components find each other in the right quantities and under the right circumstances has yet to be identified."

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

So we don't see everything as upside down?

No, not for that reason. Look* into it a bit and get back to me.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

So what is your opinion? We naturally evolved to what we are today? I don't completely believe God created us, it just seems more likely some form of intelligent designer did!

The intelligent designer that is an "'alien' in some form or another?"(sic) What designed the alien? What designed the alien's designer? What designed the alien's designer's designer? Hmm, infinite regress alert...

BTW, the entire Dover trial was based on the world's foremost (hmmm) ID proponents trying to find some way of showing that there were parts of evolutionary theory which could not be explained without using a designer. That was pretty much all they were trying to show - and they failed. Spectacularly. You might want to look at what the conservative, christian judge presiding over the trial had to say about the honesty of their tactics and arguments. He may have stopped short of accusing them of outright lies, but just from memory I couldn't say for sure.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

So we don't see everything as upside down?

No, not for that reason. Look* into it a bit and get back to me.

How's this?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

So what is your opinion? We naturally evolved to what we are today? I don't completely believe God created us, it just seems more likely some form of intelligent designer did!

Quote

The intelligent designer that is an "'alien' in some form or another?"(sic) What designed the alien? What designed the alien's designer? What designed the alien's designer's designer? Hmm, infinite regress alert...

Just as it applies to God. Who created the Universe? Did it just evolve? What was before the Big Bang, and before that?

Quote

BTW, the entire Dover trial was based on the world's foremost (hmmm) ID proponents trying to find some way of showing that there were parts of evolutionary theory which could not be explained without using a designer. That was pretty much all they were trying to show - and they failed. Spectacularly. You might want to look at what the conservative, christian judge presiding over the trial had to say about the honesty of their tactics and arguments. He may have stopped short of accusing them of outright lies, but just from memory I couldn't say for sure.

Sounds interesting. I'll have a look.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

• Quote

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

Just as it applies to God. Who created the Universe? Did it just evolve? What was before the Big Bang, and before that?

Problem you've got there though is the difference in your starting point (just pick an arbitrary point in the cycle and call it the start). At the start of it all, existing for no reason, you can either have stuff, or you can have incredibly sophisticated intelligent and powerfull stuff. Which is more plausible?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So we don't see everything as upside down?

No, not for that reason. Look* into it a bit and get back to me.

How's this?

He's got a twofold problem there. firstly, there are creatures with completely independantly evolved eyes that do function while being the other way round from ours, secondly he's assuming that an intelligent designer would have to have faced the problems which would crop up if we took our imperfect eyes, as they are, and turned them around. That's a very poor assumption for there's no reason why an intelligent designer would have had to make a choice between the two evils, it could have just done the whole thing differently.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[someday 0]

INTELLIGENT DESIGN THROUGH THE PROCESS OF THE BIG BANG AND EVOLUTION..

compromise shall we?

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

Just as it applies to God. Who created the Universe? Did it just evolve? What was before the Big Bang, and before that?

Problem you've got there though is the difference in your starting point (just pick an arbitrary point in the cycle and call it the start). At the start of it all, existing for no reason, you can either have stuff, or you can have incredibly sophisticated intelligent and powerfull[sic] stuff. Which is more plausible?

I see your point. If the start point is prior to the Big Bang, why would it exist without reason? Why would we evolve into what we are today without reason?

We just did? That's unacceptable for me. I don't particularly know why though.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So we don't see everything as upside down?

No, not for that reason. Look* into it a bit and get back to me.

How's this?

He's got a twofold problem there. firstly, there are creatures with completely independantly evolved eyes that do function while being the other way round from ours, secondly he's assuming that an intelligent designer would have to have faced the problems which would crop up if we took our imperfect eyes, as they are, and turned them around. That's a very poor assumption for there's no reason why an intelligent designer would have had to make a choice between the two evils, it could have just done the whole thing differently.

Perhaps he's not so intelligent then? I often wonder why the fuck did he invent midge's.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'