Producing life from non living matter

[FearGod]

DNA is inert inandof itself. It does do anything alone. It functions only as part of a set of cellular machinery.

Yes of course, but still how it's made flexible in a living cell?
what if the DNA is unchangeable? is it a matter of luck that the DNA is flexible?

Humans have evolved and mutated. This is why you see lactose tolerance predominating in some populations, for example.

But we're still humans and will be, why the DNA is stable?

It's not a matter of control, it's a chemical process which operates under particular parameters. God's manifestation at a gross level can be easily described in such terms.

And the chemical process is uncontrollable or controllable?

Yeah, I don't know what you're talking about with the 'connecting randomly' stuff.

The order of nucleotides within a DNA molecule, such sequences is random or designed, do you have other option?

 

[Kirran]

Yes of course, but still how it's made flexible in a living cell?
what if the DNA is unchangeable? is it a matter of luck that the DNA is flexible?

An individual DNA molecule doesn't change. It gets copied, and then mistakes are made in the copying sometimes, so the copy is slightly different.

But we're still humans and will be, why the DNA is stable?

It's no more or less stable than at any other time. Change is gradual.

And the chemical process is uncontrollable or controllable?

Neither, really. It just is what it is.

The order of nucleotides within a DNA molecule, such sequences is random or designed, do you have other option?[/QUOTE]

The sequence is the result of the accumulation of patterns more suited to longevity over billions of years.

 

[Valjean]

I am not a scientist, but I can read what other scientist say.
Sequence Complexity

I don't see your point. This is elementary, high school biology. Everyone knows this.

Other scientist, probably better qualified than you or Christine, say DNA is complex. Why should I b elie you instead of them?

Other scientists may say the genome is complex, inasmuch as it's a long chain that must have certain sections in specific order, but no-one sees the structure as particularly complex.

Nothing in Biology describes how an A became a B.

Certainly it does! These mechanisms are the very foundations of biology. How did you not learn this??

The DNA is similar to computer programming, the sequences and instructions
is made to perform a designed job.

26 letters used for the work of Shakeseare could have no meaning if were written by a child, sdfjr ffddsdk dsddfe rffdfd dcddefjdf dcscdf cncnxx ......, Got it

Yes, but the sequences aren't just a roll of the dice. There are mechanisms that lock in functional sequences and delete dysfunctional ones. Only the genes that get it right get reproduced.
DNA builds itself the same way chemical A added to chemical B will produce compound C -- automatically, according to the laws of chemistry. It doesn't need an invisible hand to guide it. Nor does it need any magical mechanism to replicate, once the sequences are established.

It's all a series of simple, little baby steps. Don't ignore the simple mechanisms involved and argue that the final result is too complex to have happened without magic. That's an argument from incredulity.

 

[FearGod]

An individual DNA molecule doesn't change. It gets copied, and then mistakes are made in the copying sometimes, so the copy is slightly different.

And the DNA has a repairing mechanism, why do you think it has such function?

It's no more or less stable than at any other time. Change is gradual.

Why gradual? what if we assume that the DNA doesn't replicate
itself and it doesn't mutate, will evolution happen?

Neither, really. It just is what it is.

I didn't understand, would you please clarify?

The sequence is the result of the accumulation of patterns more suited to longevity over billions of years.

What made the sequences at first place? how it started?

 

[FearGod]

Yes, but the sequences aren't just a roll of the dice. There are mechanisms that lock in functional sequences and delete dysfunctional ones. Only the genes that get it right get reproduced.
DNA builds itself the same way chemical A added to chemical B will produce compound C -- automatically, according to the laws of chemistry. It doesn't need an invisible hand to guide it. Nor does it need any magical mechanism to replicate, once the sequences are established.

It's all a series of simple, little baby steps. Don't ignore the simple mechanisms involved and argue that the final result is too complex to have happened without magic. That's an argument from incredulity.

How it isn't a roll of the dice? now let monkeys live in the city with humans
and let them reproduce for millions of years, will they evolve to humans or similar to humans?

 

[Valjean]

If it doesn't have such mechanism then how evolution happened,
how evolution happened if the DNA wasn't mutating and flexible?

What do you mean by "flexible?" As Kirran pointed out, mutations are the result of copying errors. Genes also get shuffled when genomes are mixed together in sexual reproduction. These create the variability evolution works with.

Humans are still humans for thousands of years and still, so when do you think
the DNA will mutate, and if it won't then what makes it stable till now?
what if the DNA alter and change all the times than just replicating itself? will we survive or life will end?
How that is controllable? is it a matter of good luck or a planned one?

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Why do you say DNA is stable? Our genome is always changing. Changes that threaten our survival are weeded out.
How is it controllable? Your question indicates you don't understand evolution, yet you keep criticizing it.

Millions of years connecting randomly the electronic components compared to the DNA sequences.

Natural selection is not random.

 

[Valjean]

And the DNA has a repairing mechanism, why do you think it has such function?

Because of Natural Selection. Organisms that couldn't repair their DNA died out.

Why gradual? what if we assume that the DNA doesn't replicate
itself and it doesn't mutate, will evolution happen?

How could it happen with no variation to work with?
You don't understand how evolution works.

What made the sequences at first place? how it started?

You mean how did it all get started? That's a whole different area of science. Google "abiogenesis."

How it isn't a roll of the dice? now let monkeys live in the city with humans
and let them reproduce for millions of years, will they evolve to humans or similar to humans?

They will evolve to fit into whatever niches are available, just like everything else.
Why would they evolve to resemble humans?
You don't understand evolution, FG.

 

[FearGod]

What do you mean by "flexible?" As Kirran pointed out, mutations are the result of copying errors. Genes also get shuffled when genomes are mixed together in sexual reproduction. These create the variability evolution works with.

Why the errors are so limited that not affecting the species? what if the errors
made the eyes close to the anus, or the mouth close to the anus, regardless
if that will cause the failure of the species but still what control the process,
IOW why copying mistakes are so tiny and even repairable?

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Why do you say DNA is stable? Our genome is always changing. Changes that threaten our survival are weeded out.
How is it controllable? Your question indicates you don't understand evolution, yet you keep criticizing it.

I am not criticizing evolution, but my point that evolution is guided by an intelligent designer and not just a matter of the unconscious stones.

Natural selection is not random.

I didn't mention the process of evolution but the DNA sequences.

 

[FearGod]

Because of Natural Selection. Organisms that couldn't repair their DNA died out.

So it's a matter of luck, it happened that the DNA worked to repair itself and hence
the organism survived, but how, we don't know.

How could it happen with no variation to work with?
You don't understand how evolution works.

So again, a matter of luck, if no variation then how evolution will happen,
but it just happened to be so, luck

You mean how did it all get started? That's a whole different area of science. Google "abiogenesis."

LOL, good answer

They will evolve to fit into whatever niches are available, just like everything else.
Why would they evolve to resemble humans?
You don't understand evolution, FG.

I understand evolution based on logic but not luck and randomness regardless
that natural selection isn't and I know it isn't.

 

[sayak83]

Tell me what "orgainic" means.

Organic Chemistry is any chemistry that has carbon and hydrogen covalent bonds. In the 19th century it was mistakenly thought such chemistry can only come from life, but by early 20th century this misconception was corrected when non living chemical processes were discovered that could do those same things. But the name, now a misnomer, stuck. Just like atom which means indivisible, but now can be divided into many parts.

Organic chemistry - Wikipedia
Organic chemistry is a chemistry subdiscipline involving the scientific study of the structure, properties, and reactions of organic compounds and organic materials, i.e., matter in its various forms that contain carbon atoms.[1] Study of structure includes many physical and chemical methods to determine the chemical composition and the chemical constitution of organic compounds and materials. Study of properties includes both physical properties and chemical properties, and uses similar methods as well as methods to evaluate chemical reactivity, with the aim to understand the behavior of the organic matter in its pure form (when possible), but also in solutions, mixtures, and fabricated forms. The study of organic reactions includes probing their scope through use in preparation of target compounds (e.g., natural products, drugs, polymers, etc.) by chemical synthesis, as well as the focused study of the reactivities of individual organic molecules, both in the laboratory and via theoretical (in silico) study.


I have PhD in organic chemistry FYI.

Organic Chemistry - American Chemical Society


Organic chemistry is the study of the structure, properties, composition, reactions, and preparation of carbon-containing compounds, which include not only hydrocarbons but also compounds with any number of other elements, including hydrogen (most compounds contain at least one carbon–hydrogen bond), nitrogen, oxygen, halogens, phosphorus, silicon, and sulfur. This branch of chemistry was originally limited to compounds produced by living organisms but has been broadened to include human-made substances such as plastics. The range of application of organic compounds is enormous and also includes, but is not limited to, pharmaceuticals, petrochemicals, food, explosives, paints, and cosmetics.



You did not answer my question. Which of the compounds mentioned in the recipe by which the researchers created living cells was alive?

 

[sayak83]

@sayak83 Do you think creating a fly is simple or complex, and do you think making
a fly needs some extensive studies and experiments in order to be achieved or it
can be created by some goofy guys?

A fly is almost as complex as a human. Our Biotechnology is still 50-70 years from achieving such a feat.

 

[Valjean]

Why the errors are so limited that not affecting the species? what if the errors
made the eyes close to the anus, or the mouth close to the anus,

These are birth defects we're talking about. Individuals with serious birth defects don't reproduce, and the defects don't become part of the population. They're 'selected' against., so individuals with harmful errors are less successful. They have fewer, or no, children. The errors don't become established in the population. They're weeded out.

Individuals with errors that help them, in whatever environment they find themselves, are more successful. They have more children -- born with the 'error'. The error becomes more and more common. Soon, almost everyone has it.

IOW why copying mistakes are so tiny and even repairable?

Sometimes the copying mistakes are major, and some don't get repaired.
The repairs occur within an individual. They're not part of reproductive variation.

I am not criticizing evolution, but my point that evolution is guided by an intelligent designer and not just a matter of the unconscious stones.

But why do you think this? There's no evidence for a designer, your just proposing one cause you don't understand the actual mechanisms and can't think of any alternative but magic.

What would you think if I insisted that cars moved because they were pushed by an invisible hand? You'd probably open the hood/bonnet and try to explain how the engine and transmission worked. That's what we're trying to do here, FG. Please don't dismiss the ToE just because the engine driving it appears too complicated to be real.

 

[FearGod]

These are birth defects we're talking about. Individuals with serious birth defects don't reproduce, and the defects don't become part of the population. They're 'selected' against., so individuals with harmful errors are less successful. They have fewer, or no, children. The errors don't become established in the population. They're weeded out.

Individuals with errors that help them, in whatever environment they find themselves, are more successful. They have more children -- born with the 'error'. The error becomes more and more common. Soon, almost everyone has it.

What prevent birth defects from being widespread and then extinction?
Was life then the product of good chances and luck.

Sometimes the copying mistakes are major, and some don't get repaired.
The repairs occur within an individual. They're not part of reproductive variation.
But why do you think this? There's no evidence for a designer, your just proposing one cause you don't understand the actual mechanisms and can't think of any alternative but magic.

The designed work is an evidence for a designer.

What would you think if I insisted that cars moved because they were pushed by an invisible hand? You'd probably open the hood/bonnet and try to explain how the engine and transmission worked. That's what we're trying to do here, FG. Please don't dismiss the ToE just because the engine driving it appears too complicated to be real.

The car is designed and a driver should drive it or programmed to do so,
God designing for evolution to happen doesn't mean magic.

 

[Valjean]

So it's a matter of luck, it happened that the DNA worked to repair itself and hence
the organism survived, but how, we don't know.

The repair doesn't occur in individuals after birth. These repairs happen within a single cell. The repairs don't contribute to the fitness of progeny.

So again, a matter of luck, if no variation then how evolution will happen,
but it just happened to be so, luck

If no variation then evolution will not happen. This is why dogs can evolve but not watches. A litter of puppies has variation. Short haired ones born in a cold environment will be less likely to pass this trait on, while long haired ones will be more successful, have more children and the trait will become more common.
Watches don't give birth to the variable offspring Natural Selection works on.
Some mechanisms, like genetic drift and mutation, are "luck," but then these chance variations are sorted out by Natural Selection -- not luck, not random.

I understand evolution based on logic but not luck and randomness regardless
that natural selection isn't and I know it isn't.

How did you not learn this in school? It's simple: randomness yields variation, then natural selection sorts through the variants, keeps the ones that fit, and discards those that don't -- easy peasy. What's hard to understand?

 

[Valjean]

So it's a matter of luck, it happened that the DNA worked to repair itself and hence
the organism survived, but how, we don't know.

You mean you don't know. DNA repair - Wikipedia
The repairs aren't a direct mechanism of evolution. They happen within single cells, to small sections of single DNA strands.

So again, a matter of luck, if no variation then how evolution will happen,
but it just happened to be so, luck

No variation -- no evolution.

I understand evolution based on logic but not luck and randomness regardless
that natural selection isn't and I know it isn't.

What's not to understand? Randomness produces variation, and selection sorts it out.

 

[FearGod]

The repair doesn't occur in individuals after birth. These repairs happen within a single cell. The repairs don't contribute to the fitness of progeny.

How? if the individual isn't fitness then how progeny would be.
I agree that the repairing mechanism was beneficial but how
such mechanism happened and achieved at first place.

If no variation then evolution will not happen. This is why dogs can evolve but not watches. A litter of puppies has variation. Short haired ones born in a cold environment will be less likely to pass this trait on, while long haired ones will be more successful, have more children and the trait will become more common.
Watches don't give birth to the variable offspring Natural Selection works on.
Some mechanisms, like genetic drift and mutation, are "luck," but then these chance variations are sorted out by Natural Selection -- not luck, not random.

Exactly, why living organisms were made to evolve, not as the watches for example which is fixed.

How did you not learn this in school? It's simple: randomness yields variation, then natural selection sorts through the variants, keeps the ones that fit, and discards those that don't -- easy peasy. What's hard to understand?

Yes it's simple to memorize.

 

[FearGod]

You mean you don't know. DNA repair - Wikipedia
The repairs aren't a direct mechanism of evolution. They happen within single cells, to small sections of single DNA strands.
No variation -- no evolution.
What's not to understand? Randomness produces variation, and selection sorts it out.

You have already answered this post!

 

[Valjean]

Sorry, your replies are coming so thick and fast I can't keep track of them

 

[Valjean]

How? if the individual isn't fitness then how progeny would be.
I agree that the repairing mechanism was beneficial but how
such mechanism happened and achieved at first place.

If the individual isn't fit there are no progeny. How are you not getting this? I keep repeating the same explanation and it seems to go in one ear and out the other.
How did the repair mechanism evolve? Same way any other physiological feature evolved.

Exactly, why living organisms were made to evolve, not as the watches for example which is fixed.

Not intentionally "made to," The mechanisms automatically perpetuate themselves.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

[RESOLUTION]

So do you recommend that scientists investigating abiogenesis all resign and find other work?

Abiogenesis - the scientist have not proved this. Whilst they play with idea that life came from a non-living material it would appear the process of life shows it can only come from living material by duplication. I recommend scientist stop looking for the impossible and admit they do not and cannot find the answer to how human life first became existent on this planet.
There are more non-scientific people arguing theories than scientist themselves.

We have all the things which existed in the beginning except the answer to how they existed from the beginning.
God cursed the soil early on, we see he breathed life into man, so we cannot replicate or make a man ourselves.
The joke about God and the scientist is really very apt.


One day a group of scientists got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God. So they picked one scientist to go and tell Him that they were done with Him.

The scientist walked up to God and said, "God, we've decided that we no longer need You. We're at the point that we can clone people and do many miraculous things, we don't need you here anymore, you can go your way "

God listened very patiently and kindly to the man. After the scientist was done talking, God said, "Very well, how about this? Let's say we have a man-making contest?"

To which the scientist replied, "Okay, great!"

But God added, "Now, we're going to do this just like I did back in the old days with Adam."

The scientist said, "Sure, no problem," and bent down and grabbed himself a handful of dirt.

God looked at him and said, "No, no! You go get your own dirt!"



It remains the truth .... no man can duplicate the creation of life or of man. Living material produces living material.
The living God created man.Life proceeded from Life no other explanation from scientist has been able to suffice.