Thread: Explain abiogenesis to me.

You wer tarded, then light came out.

oh, ok.

Origins of Life Made Easy by Potholer54:



This might help. More stuff on Abiogenesis here.

Wow that's a great video, I gotta watch some more of that guy's stuff. Great accent too.

Although it is just a hypothesis at the moment. And some of the steps are a bit cloudy in that vid, like why some RNA chains are better suited, or how ribosomes came about. But still, very good stuff.

Originally Posted by Xei

Wow that's a great video, I gotta watch some more of that guy's stuff. Great accent too.

Although it is just a hypothesis at the moment. And some of the steps are a bit cloudy in that vid, like why some RNA chains are better suited, or how ribosomes came about. But still, very good stuff.

That's just the basics though. If you want more specific stuff, you need to look up cdk007 and DonExodus2.

cdk007's The Origins Of Life - Abiogenesis


DonExodus2's How Abiogenesis Works

It is late right now but I'm going to ask the question anyway.

Why does dna replicate?

Originally Posted by Sandform

It is late right now but I'm going to ask the question anyway.

Why does dna replicate?

Because the systems which enable DNA to replicate evolved in concurrence with RNA. DNA is much more stable than RNA as a storage medium, but as a consequence, it is harder to replicate. However, by the time DNA had evolved, RNA replication would have been quite efficient, so DNA replication would have evolved quickly from the existing mechanisms.

The answer to "why" DNA replicates is that all systems that didn't replicate the DNA would have disappeared, as a matter of course. Obviously the system that can replicate would be the one that survives.

You two answered what operations in the grand scheme explain why it exists...I'm asking why or in what way it is happening.

Hmm, how can I put it...what physical process is happening that has the DNA replicate. What is the system in place that allows for DNA to replicate.

A chemical reactions explanation of "why" is the same kind of "why" that I have. I'm not giving a special meaning to the word "why" as in what is its purpose I'm asking what is the action (right now).

We know why Aluminium oxide is formed when the components that are necessary to form it come together...So at the moment of replication what is it that reacts to make it replicate.

Oh, you mean "how". I'm no molecular biologist, but I believe it involves some sort of protein crawling along a DNA strand, producing a second strand as it goes from simpler building blocks in the general vicinity. But I could be wrong.

Originally Posted by Sandform

You two answered what operations in the grand scheme explain why it exists...I'm asking why or in what way it is happening.

Hmm, how can I put it...what physical process is happening that has the DNA replicate. What is the system in place that allows for DNA to replicate.

A chemical reactions explanation of "why" is the same kind of "why" that I have. I'm not giving a special meaning to the word "why" as in what is its purpose I'm asking what is the action (right now).

We know why Aluminium oxide is formed when the components that are necessary to form it come together...So at the moment of replication what is it that reacts to make it replicate.

if you are asking how dna replicates:

dna replication begins with a partial unwinding of the double helix at an area known as the replication fork. this unwinding is accomplished by an enzyme known as dna helicase. this unwound section appears under electron microscopes as a "bubble" and is thus known as a replication bubble.

http://www.ncc.gmu.edu/dna/replicat.htm

Cool vids, nice scientific explanation, but in the end, science and religion agree. Life was created out of no life. The Bible says it was clay, science says it was amino acids forming polypeptides in clay. At 3:45 in the first vid.

Weather this act was done by God or by Nature, is nothing but a difference in terminology.

Except God is sentient, nature is not.

Originally Posted by Marvo

Except God is sentient, nature is not.

How can God be sentient if God doesn't exist? Lol, make sense?

I believe God exists tho, but you most likely believe he doesn't. But at the same time you believe he is sentient. How can something non-existant be sentient? Your logic fails..

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

How can God be sentient if God doesn't exist? Lol, make sense?

I believe God exists tho, but you most likely believe he doesn't. But at the same time you believe he is sentient. How can something non-existant be sentient? Your logic fails..

Nice trolling there.

Yeah whatever, "nice trolling", brilliant argumentation. I guess thats your way of logic.

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

How can God be sentient if God doesn't exist? Lol, make sense?

I believe God exists tho, but you most likely believe he doesn't. But at the same time you believe he is sentient. How can something non-existant be sentient? Your logic fails..

He meant that if the god did exist, it would be sentient. Just like if your eyes were anuses, you would shit to see.

How do you know God would be sentient? Did he tell you? How would he be able to tell you if he is sentient or not, if we don't even know if he exists or not?! God being sentient is obviously something someone made up... that was my point. You can't know, you don't know, you don't even believe in God, but you still claim to know exactly who or what God is.

The concept behind ID is a sentient force that created life. Atleast, I'd say with integelligence comes also sentience. I could be wrong of course.

Evolution IS intelligent design, does that make evolution sentient? That completely depends on your definition of the concept sentient..

Evolution IS Intelligent Design.

By this, I mean that the process of evolution is a thinking intelligent process. Or to state it another way: Evolution is intelligent.

This means that all signs of evolution also will be signs of intelligent design, simply because evolution is a form of intelligence.

So, instead of the intelligence reciding in the metaphysical head of a super
natural being called God, it resides in DNA and their interactions with the
world through life and death.

All this according to the Kolmogorov Complexity definition of intelligence.

Intelligence is the process of rationally building and testing theories about
the world, and then using those theories for useful stuff. DNA is mutated,
recombined, merged through sex, and otherwise changed. These changes are
hypotheses about the world, in the form of new life forms trying to survive
there. Thus life forms which do not reproduce are falsified hypotheses. The
useful stuff is survival.

As for those people preaching intelligent design:

They are all religious, and do not know what theories or evolution are. They
just pretend and believe they know. Remembering this, they are easily exposed,
as long as you yourself really know what theories and evoution are.

They want to think something different. You can't say god is involved because then they don't know what's going on. If you say god isn't 'here' or 'there' then they understand the evolution better than if you say 'god is sitting here'. That would put too much pressure on whoever sat down. You have to be able to beat Zeus before they can say maybe it would be god. By that time they will be a dust particle to them.

Evolution is the name we've assigned to the trend of beneficial mutation in genes. While it indeed "smart", it is by no means intelligent. It's a natural process.

if evolution was intelligent i'd have functional wings and inpenetrable skin and i could become invisible at will and i could use telekinesis and.. and.. and.. more stuff.

Originally Posted by bluefinger

Origins of Life Made Easy by Potholer54:



This might help. More stuff on Abiogenesis here.

Thanks for posting about that guy, he explains almost every general scientifically historical fact you would need to help convince a theist that god wasn't required to set it all in motion, I always hate how they find something that atheists can't explain right away and point to that as evidence for god, that's what makes debating require so much more knowledge on the atheistic side of things, although it should be the other way around.

Sometimes I think theists don't like the complexity and confusion of science and just want a comforting simple answer, and of course I probably wouldn't be far from the truth .