Disproving atheists in 82 seconds
- Thread starter peilthetraveler
- Start date
So you think God created the first bacterium in his test tube. Thank you for confirming that YOU are an idiot.
This is the part that I find most interesting about the explanations of abiogenesis .......
Waves breaking on the shore create a delicate foam composed of bubbles. Winds sweeping across the ocean have a tendency to drive things to shore, much like driftwood collecting on the beach. It is possible that organic molecules were concentrated on the shorelines in much the same way. Shallow coastal waters also tend to be warmer, further concentrating the molecules through evaporation. While bubbles composed mostly of water burst quickly, water containing amphiphiles forms much more stable bubbles, lending more time to the particular bubble to perform these crucial reactions.
Amphiphiles are oily compounds containing a hydrophilic head on one or both ends of a hydrophobic molecule. Some amphiphiles have the tendency to spontaneously form membranes in water. A spherically closed membrane contains water and is a hypothetical precursor to the modern cell membrane. If a protein would increase the integrity of its parent bubble, that bubble had an advantage, and was placed at the top of the natural selection waiting list. Primitive reproduction can be envisioned when the bubbles burst, releasing the results of the 'experiment' into the surrounding medium. Once enough of the 'right stuff' was released into the medium, the development of the first prokaryotes, eukaryotes, and multicellular organisms could be achieved.[103]
But I wonder what a real unbiased source like Conservapedia says
This is an exceedingly nice summary of the main work. Everyone interested in this topic should try to wade through this review, but those with no science background may, unfortunately, find it rough going. Though Michaelian's contribution is mentioned with regard to the importance of Entropy production, the even more important major contribution of J. H. Vogel in this regard is not. Perhaps I will see if I can add a reference to that important and elegant work. I don't take pleasure in saying this, but it seems Prigogine (the 1977 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, non-equilibrium thermodynamics) may have appropriated Vogel's work without proper credit, and so I think it doubly important for Vogel to be mentioned. I was pleased to see that the very important contributions of Orgel are mentioned prominently. Also, it would be good to have included a mention of M.J.S. Dewar's work which explains why it is very unlikely to find abiogenisis if carbon is not present.
Perhaps I will see if I can add references to these papers by Vogel and Dewar to what is in any case a very nice review of the work so far.