Quote from jem:
Its odd you would quote szostak again considering he told you, you are dead ass wrong... When he said in 2009 there is no complete known pathway from non life to life.
your delusional
the first page of you post says this.
From fossil evidence, it appears that life may have existed on Earth as early as 3.5 billion years ago. This suggests that life must have evolved sometime during Earth's tumultuous first billion years. How did life evolve? And what did early forms of life look like? Some scientists believe that the answers may be hiding in our cells, in molecules known as RNA.
and from the third page...
From fossil evidence, it appears that life may have existed on Earth as early as 3.5 billion years ago. This suggests that life must have evolved sometime during Earth's tumultuous first billion years. How did life evolve? And what did early forms of life look like? Some scientists believe that the answers may be hiding in our cells, in molecules known as RNA.
Next: What's so special about RNA?
There is know known pathway. you are the moron or troll.
"There is know known pathway. " insults omitted
Because it is already proven how amino acids, the essential building blocks for all life on earth, form from non organic material by natural chemical reaction unrelated to life itself, a pathway for 'non life to life' is obviously already established.
If you read the information without your God Goggles on, no known pathways refer to replication and synthesis of those amino acids, not that there are no pathways for life to form from inorganic matter in the first place which is, as I say, already proven.
