Why God Exists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xei

It isn't a hole in the viewpoint because atheists acknowledge that it's not within their viewpoint. They say, 'we don't know what the origin was', and leave it at that. What more can you do? The theistic position makes an assertion which does not actually logically explain it anyway, so it's worse, in the sense that it's baseless and plausibly incorrect. It's like you have a box that cannot possibly be opened. The atheist says, 'I don't know what's in it'. The theist says, 'there's a banana/cash prize/ghost' in it. You're saying the latter is more intellectually satisfying because it 'doesn't have holes'?


I don't get what you mean by this. Surely existing indefinitely is consistent with matter not being destroyed? Or do you mean that an indefinite existence is nonsensical for other reasons? Well, science doesn't propose an indefinite existence anyway. All science can do is observe lots of instances and make some general law that encompasses all of them. Matter (or rather, energy; matter can indeed 'disappear') is only observed to be conserved now (and even that is contentious). Before the universe came into being, we have no clue if energy is conserved as a general principle. How could we? We have no clue about any general principles 'above our level of reality'. Anything is possible, including universes spontaneously coming into existence.


In what way is God an explanation? Please define your terms.

On the one hand we have 'natural phenomenon X, which itself is causeless, caused the universe', and on the other we have 'God, who is causeless, caused the universe'. Why do you find the latter to be 'better'? What is it about being a causeless creator that necessitates the qualities of God as you define him?

---

Please read the thread instructions.

Oops, I totally forgot what this thread was about. Then again, so have a few people apparently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

:panic:

Care to elaborate on the part that I bolded?

---

I thought it could be wrong. I was talking about the acceleration of cosmic inflation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xei

It isn't a hole in the viewpoint because atheists acknowledge that it's not within their viewpoint. They say, 'we don't know what the origin was', and leave it at that.

---

I've never seen not one single atheist say this. Every atheist in this forum will argue it up until they're blue in the face that they know EXACTLY what it was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xei

What more can you do? The theistic position makes an assertion which does not actually logically explain it anyway, so it's worse, in the sense that it's baseless and plausibly incorrect. It's like you have a box that cannot possibly be opened. The atheist says, 'I don't know what's in it'.

---

The majority of the Atheist here says abiogenesis is in the box and will make the false claim that they believe this is true because of the track record of 'real science' even while knowing that science and abiogenesis do not go hand and hand. If you assert that the theistic position is incorrect you must equally assert that your views are incorrect as well. The difference between the two is plausibility. It's highly plausible that an intelligent creator has brought life into existence. Science has debunked abiogenesis just by it's own definition making abiogenesis not even in the category of plausibility, but just down right inaccurate and false. So what do you do? I guess what most atheist do, they keep holding on to that false belief hoping and wishing for some kind of Miracle to transpire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xei

It isn't a hole in the viewpoint because atheists acknowledge that it's not within their viewpoint. They say, 'we don't know what the origin was', and leave it at that. What more can you do?

---

What more can you do - you can deny that there is any origin of the universe with the attributes of God (as God). That would be atheistic. What you're describing better suits an agnostic.

Quote:

---

The theistic position makes an assertion which does not actually logically explain it anyway, so it's worse, in the sense that it's baseless and plausibly incorrect. It's like you have a box that cannot possibly be opened. The atheist says, 'I don't know what's in it'. The theist says, 'there's a banana/cash prize/ghost' in it. You're saying the latter is more intellectually satisfying because it 'doesn't have holes'?

---

I think it's a common misconception that God is an "explanation", that is to say, an intellectual conclusion. Obviously it isn't an answer derived from reason and science, but it may not be clear that it is actually derived from faith and revelation. Therefore it is not wholly an explanation; any truth that can be explained becomes something redundant and lesser from that truth. You have described this in your own words already, saying that the truth to which we want explained simply is not comprehensible or explainable on the same level. What atheists often criticize about God is merely a religious symbol or personified concept.

If God could be arrived at by reason, it would be done by proof, and so faith would become unnecessary. But you cannot prove the unknown and unexplainable; faith is the bridge between the explainable and the unexplainable; the known and unknown. Without faith, you simply have no method to go beyond your intellect. Without faith, the intellect is a closed loop, the question "why" persists; an explanation demanded, but never to bear reality itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by really

What more can you do - you can deny that there is any origin of the universe with the attributes of God (as God). That would be atheistic. What you're describing better suits an agnostic.

---

Actually this could be an atheistic viewpoint. It could a weak atheist viewpoint, also sometimes called an implicit atheist viewpoint. This viewpoint lacks a belief in any Gods. If you lack a belief in God, you might be inclined to say that we don't how the universe started. But you could also have your own theory of how the universe started that didn't involve a God. In reality the postition could be assosciated with anyone, even a theist. You could believe in a God who didn't create the universe.

An agnostic viewpoint of this situation would be that we can't know how the universe began, whether or not God created the universe.

Here's a good explanation of the difference between a weak and a strong atheist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

I've never seen not one single atheist say this. Every atheist in this forum will argue it up until they're blue in the face that they know EXACTLY what it was.

---

I've stated on multiple occasions that I don't know, and I'm okay with that.

Quote:

---

The majority of the Atheist here says abiogenesis is in the box and will make the false claim that they believe this is true because of the track record of 'real science' even while knowing that science and abiogenesis do not go hand and hand. If you assert that the theistic position is incorrect you must equally assert that your views are incorrect as well. The difference between the two is plausibility. It's highly plausible that an intelligent creator has brought life into existence. Science has debunked abiogenesis just by it's own definition making abiogenesis not even in the category of plausibility, but just down right inaccurate and false. So what do you do? I guess what most atheist do, they keep holding on to that false belief hoping and wishing for some kind of Miracle to transpire.

---

Here we go again. First, it has already been demonstrated to you that abiogenesis is indeed valid. Every single source you threw out stating the contrary was debunked. Second, your box analogy falls apart. Abiogenesis, regardless of what you say, is a hypothesis drawn on evidence. Like it or not, it wasn't just pulled out of the blue one day and latched onto by people worldwide. You know, unlike religion. Third, who created the creator? And who created him? And so on?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by really

If God could be arrived at by reason, it would be done by proof, and so faith would become unnecessary. But you cannot prove the unknown and unexplainable; faith is the bridge between the explainable and the unexplainable; the known and unknown. Without faith, you simply have no method to go beyond your intellect. Without faith, the intellect is a closed loop, the question "why" persists; an explanation demanded, but never to bear reality itself.

---

What makes faith a sturdy bridge?

Not related to the above quote: In regards to abiogenesis, it is a fully scientific and valid concept. I can back this claim up if anyone wishes, as I have in the past (although it was ignored). However, it is not a concept on the same level as, say, evolution or gravity. That is why scientists and atheists might say they don't know exactly how life started on Earth or in the universe. It's a way of staying consistent. We have a probable explanation, in fact our only explanation of the creation of life, but it cannot be touted as pure fact just yet. That would be premature.

The difference between modern abiogenesis and ancient (aristotelian) abiogenesis has been shown to Ne-yo multiple times; more than I care to count. Why he continues to state that science has "debunked" abiogenesis without clarifying which concept he's talking about, I don't know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

The majority of the Atheist here says abiogenesis is in the box and will make the false claim that they believe this is true because of the track record of 'real science' even while knowing that science and abiogenesis do not go hand and hand.

---

This is not what I said when I talked about the track record of science. In the thread where I brought up this topic, I initially stated that by using science's track record of evidence-based research, we could assume that abiogenesis would end up being the more likely idea regarding how life arose in the universe. I also stated that it is likely they will develop a highly factual theory of the origin of life like they've done in a multitude of other areas.

That is not the same as saying "abiogenesis is true now because it might be proven so in the future." We cannot possibly know that unless we pull a Tardis out of thin air and go for a ride.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

The difference between modern abiogenesis and ancient (aristotelian) abiogenesis has been shown to Ne-yo multiple times; more than I care to count. Why he continues to state that science has "debunked" abiogenesis without clarifying which concept he's talking about, I don't know.

---

Because that's how creationists roll?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhilosopherStoned

Because that's how creationists roll?

---

Well yeah, there's that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xei

I thought it could be wrong. I was talking about the acceleration of cosmic inflation.

---

Okay. I always forget about that vis-a-vis conservation of energy. Thanks for reminding me. The total energy of the universe is honestly so poorly defined (as is the universe itself) that it's very difficult to think about.

Energy is the "conserved charge" associated with time translation invariance by Noether's Theorem. Consider the case where we don't have time translation invariance. Then we could do one experiment on tuesday and again on friday and get different results. We could then find some way to get free energy. The example I've seen was if gravity was weaker on tuesdays, then we could lift a bunch of water up and let it back down through the rest of the week to power a turbine. We would get more energy out of it than we put in. The logic goes the other way as well so that we can assume either and get the other.

It may well be that time translation invariance fails for the "whole universe". This seems highly likely to me in fact. At any rate, the expansion is thought to be driven by "vacuum energy". So to actually harness it, we would have to find some way to stop some large portion of space from expanding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

This is not what I said when I talked about the track record of science. In the thread where I brought up this topic, I initially stated that by using science's track record of evidence-based research, we could assume that abiogenesis would end up being the more likely idea regarding how life arose in the universe. I also stated that it is likely they will develop a highly factual theory of the origin of life like they've done in a multitude of other areas.

---

That's the exact same thing that I've stated here. You just reworded it slightly different this time around. It's not like you're arguing against me you're reaffirming that my statement was indeed accuarte. Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUELINE

That is not the same as saying "abiogenesis is true now because it might be proven so in the future." We cannot possibly know that unless we pull a Tardis out of thin air and go for a ride.

---

It could also be thrown completely out in the future. Which is why we were not arguing what "MAY" happen in the future because one just doesn't know. we were arguing the here and now and today, abiogenesis is not a very feasible idea for the origin of life.

:roll:

No, it isn't the same. You said we say it's "in the box," we say it's the most likely explanation we have while retaining that it isn't a scientific fact at the moment. They are different.

Various aspects of scientific research may be thrown out in the future, but unless you show that life has always existed in the universe, abiogenesis (defined as life from non-life in this case, not specifically the scientific concept and the research surrounding it) will not.

So why can't an intelligent creator equally be the most likely explanation? I'm not just limiting the creator to the Christian God, I mean, any Supernatural creator? Why isn't a concept like this a part of this equation of most likely events of life originating?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

So why can't an intelligent creator equally be the most likely explanation? I'm not just limiting the creator to the Christian God, I mean, any Supernatural creator? Why isn't a concept like this a part of this equation of most likely events of life originating?

---

Because we don't have any evidence of anything ever being caused by something supernatural. Not one instance. Or that anything supernatural even exists. However we have a number of examples of natural causes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

So why can't an intelligent creator equally be the most likely explanation? I'm not just limiting the creator to the Christian God, I mean, any Supernatural creator? Why isn't a concept like this a part of this equation of most likely events of life originating?

---

Because we run into the problem of trying to understand the supernatural, to gain knowledge of the unknowable, which is an impossible task. By definition, if something is supernatural, then it cannot be understood by humans, because it transgresses the boundaries of human understanding. A being that is supernatural is not bound by the natural laws of the universe because it is above or beyond the natural universe. It is not linked to the causal relationships that essentially define the natural universe and everything in it. Because of this, man cannot possibly know anything about this being. So how can a totally incomprehensible being be used as an explanation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stonedape

Because we don't have any evidence of anything ever being caused by something supernatural. Not one instance. Or that anything supernatural even exists. However we have a number of examples of natural causes.

---

I agree we have plenty examples of natural causes, one being life only brings about life. Abiogenesis is not among any example of natural causes. We do not have a single drop of evidence that supports abiogenesis either. Also, abiogenesis is an un-natural event there is absolutely nothing natural about it. So why are we not equally giving the same likelihood of another concept that cannot be supported by science in the same retrospect?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Because we run into the problem of trying to understand the supernatural, to gain knowledge of the unknowable, which is an impossible task.

---

Well isn't this the same thing that is currently going on with abiogenesis? Urey Miller's experiment only worked with a made-up scenario. An environment that has no scientific basis to support the validity of it and plenty of scientific evidence that goes against it. However, within an environment that has scientific basis regarding the 'true' conditions of early Earth, his experiment breaks down and hits a major dead end, one which is unrecoverable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUELINE

By definition, if something is supernatural, then it cannot be understood by humans, because it transgresses the boundaries of human understanding. A being that is supernatural is not bound by the natural laws of the universe because it is above or beyond the natural universe. It is not linked to the causal relationships that essentially define the natural universe and everything in it. Because of this, man cannot possibly know anything about this being. So how can a totally incomprehensible being be used as an explanation?

---

Abiogenesis falls directly in line with the unknowable. We have not one drop of evidence that supports it. It truly is, in all sense of the word 'unknowable'. Because we cannot observe it, we cannot test it nor can we duplicate it. Because of this man cannot possible know the unknowable events that may or may have transpired. So how can an event of this nature not be equally faulty on the same level that a transcendent being who is also unknowable be faulty?

Thinking back on that question I've asked you before. Why do you think such an event like abiogenesis could gather momentum in the future thus giving it more plausibility. Your answer was because of Science track records. What you fail to understand is that Science track record is only good for explaining 'natural phenomena' with that being said, abigoenesis is considered an un-natural event. Science track records doesn't support un-natural phenomena. You're are not being completely honest with yourself and giving the rights of passage to other possible events that are equally unknown. Which one would have to wonder why do you put 'faith' into abiogenesis. I say faith because that's exactly what you have but you have to much pride to admit it.

How the hell did that man get to the top of that telephone pole? Clearly this is not something for science to determine, science can't go back in a time machine and make any observations or acquire evidence about it, or perform any tests. What do you mean he probably climbed it, that's totally unscientific. Can you prove it? I don't care if you've seen people climbing other things before, that's totally unrelated. Why aren't you giving credence to my equally likely theory that angels carried him up there?

I'll give credence to that theory because I actually have faith and a strong conviction that angels exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

Well isn't this the same thing that is currently going on with abiogenesis? Urey Miller's experiment only worked with a made-up scenario. An environment that has no scientific basis to support the validity of it and plenty of scientific evidence that goes against it. However, within an environment that has scientific basis regarding the 'true' conditions of early Earth, his experiment breaks down and hits a major dead end, one which is unrecoverable.

---

Abiogenesis is not supernatural because it is characterized by natural materials and causal relationships. Researching it implies gaining knowledge of the currently unknown, not unknowable. Regarding the Urey-Miller experiment, I'm not sure what you mean.

Quote:

---

Abiogenesis falls directly in line with the unknowable. We have not one drop of evidence that supports it. It truly is, in all sense of the word 'unknowable'. Because we cannot observe it, we cannot test it nor can we duplicate it. Because of this man cannot possible know the unknowable events that may or may have transpired. So how can an event of this nature not be equally faulty on the same level that a transcendent being who is also unknowable be faulty?

---

There is evidence of abiogenesis, but not having evidence doesn't necessarily mean something is unknowable. Since abiogenesis is not characterized as supernatural (do you think scientists would be doing research if it was?), it is within the realm of human understanding. There is a lot of research being done.

Quote:

---

Thinking back on that question I've asked you before. Why do you think such an event like abiogenesis could gather momentum in the future thus giving it more plausibility. Your answer was because of Science track records. What you fail to understand is that Science track record is only good for explaining 'natural phenomena' with that being said, abigoenesis is considered an un-natural event. Science track records doesn't support un-natural phenomena. You're are not being completely honest with yourself and giving the rights of passage to other possible events that are equally unknown. Which one would have to wonder why do you put 'faith' into abiogenesis. I say faith because that's exactly what you have but you have to much pride to admit it.

---

Again, abiogenesis (the modern concept, just so we're clear) is not characterized as an unnatural event. I'm not quite sure you keep saying this. I could post a multitude of papers regarding abiogenesis by scientists to show how abiogenesis is not unnatural.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

Abiogenesis is not supernatural because it is characterized by natural materials and causal relationships.

---

It's characterized by pseudo relationtionships that would transpire in a likely science fiction novel. There is nothing natural about an event that clearly violates the laws of chemistry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUELINE

Researching it implies gaining knowledge of the currently unknown, not unknowable. Regarding the Urey-Miller experiment, I'm not sure what you mean.

---

I'm not surprised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUELINE

There is evidence of abiogenesis

---

There isn't, however there is evidence against it. This one is true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUELINE

Since abiogenesis is not characterized as supernatural (do you think scientists would be doing research if it was?)

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUELINE

Again, abiogenesis (the modern concept, just so we're clear) is not characterized as an unnatural event. I'm not quite sure you keep saying this.

---

I've been mentioning Urey Miller's experiment this entire discussion is this not the modern concept? :wtf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUELINE

I could post a multitude of papers regarding abiogenesis by scientists to show how abiogenesis is not unnatural.

---

I could equally post a multitude of papers that shows just the opposite. Look, I'm not saying that one day just maybe one day there could be evidence for it. I'll give you that hope, But we are discussing the concept and where it lies into the realm of validity as of today 2011. So as of today, there is absolutely no evidence for it. Post your papers and we can compare apples to apples and see what comes up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

clearly violates the laws of chemistry.

there is evidence against it.

I could equally post a multitude of papers that shows just the opposite.

---

I have a decent education in chemistry and can't think for the life of me what these clear violations are. Anyway, this is me calling your bluff. Post your evidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

I agree we have plenty examples of natural causes, one being life only brings about life. Abiogenesis is not among any example of natural causes. We do not have a single drop of evidence that supports abiogenesis either. Also, abiogenesis is an un-natural event there is absolutely nothing natural about it. So why are we not equally giving the same likelihood of another concept that cannot be supported by science in the same retrospect?

---

I personally don't know the theory of absiogenesis. Would you mind telling me which parts of it have to do with the supernatural?

You should know by now that I am an un-believer not a believer. I don't claim to know how the universe or life started. I just assume it was through some kind of natural cause, because we don't have any evidence of the supernatural. Nor even a good definition of what that is. What are supernatural forces made of?

We do have reason to believe that life sprung from natural causes. This is what I assume, I don't know it, but it makes much more sense. The reason being we only know of natural causes. The only evidence of supernatural are anecdotes. I'm not trying to claim any theory is correct, just that whatever it was, it was natural rather than supernatural. Even if God did it, God did it through natural means.

The reason we don't give any credence to the theory that God did it, is we don't know what God is even. We have no evidence of what God is even. However we do know what gasses and electricity are, we do know that they are real, we have evidence(those things are involved in the theory of absiogenesis, correct? I realy don't know it).

EDIT: I just wanna add that we shouldn't give credence to any theory that we don't have evidence for. Like Gods or angels or flying spahgetti monsters. I'd guess that there is some reason why people are giving absiogenesis credence.

Here's another argument for god in the spirit of the thread.


God is our friendly opponent in a game. We're confronted with a vast sea of unexplained phenomena. We put down a theory in an attempt to exlain some of them. We do an experiment. If we correctly predict the outcome of the experiment, we get a point. If we fail to predict it, God gets a point.

It's a really fun game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

It's characterized by pseudo relationtionships that would transpire in a likely science fiction novel. There is nothing natural about an event that clearly violates the laws of chemistry.

There isn't, however there is evidence against it. This one is true.

---

The research says otherwise.

Quote:

---

I'm not surprised.

---

I was asking for a clarification, not childlike condescension.

Quote:

---

Yes.

---

Why?

Quote:

---

I've been mentioning Urey Miller's experiment this entire discussion is this not the modern concept? :wtf:

---

Sometimes I get the feeling you don't really know what you're talking about, so I had to clarify.

Quote:

---

I could equally post a multitude of papers that shows just the opposite. Look, I'm not saying that one day just maybe one day there could be evidence for it. I'll give you that hope, But we are discussing the concept and where it lies into the realm of validity as of today 2011. So as of today, there is absolutely no evidence for it. Post your papers and we can compare apples to apples and see what comes up.

---

A Combined Experimental And Theoretical Study On The Formation Of The Amino Acid Glycine And Its Isomer In Extraterrestrial Ices by Philip D. Holtom, Chris J. Bennett, Yoshihiro Osamura, Nigel J Mason and Ralf. I Kaiser, The Astrophysical Journal, 626: 940-952 (20th June 2005) - this paper covers empirical determination of mechanisms required to form the aming acid glycine, under the conditions extant in deep space (specifically, in cometary ices).

A Production Of Amino Acids Under Possible Primitive Earth Conditions by Stanley L. Miller, Science, 117: 528-529 (15th May 1953) - this is THE paper by Stanley Miller, in which he determined that it was possible to form amino acids simply by having electric discharges pass through prebiotic gases.

A Rigorous Attempt To Verify Interstellar Glycine by I. E. Snyder, F. J. Lovas, J. M. Hollis, D. N. Friedel, P. R. Jewell, A. Remijan, V. V. Ilyushin, E. A. Alekseev and S. F. Dyubko, The Astrophysical Journal, 619(2): 914-930 (1st February 2005) {Also available at arXiv.org] - another paper covering the matter of glycine synthesis in interstellar space.

A Self-Replicating Ligase Ribozyme by Natasha Paul & Gerald F. Joyce, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA., 99(20): 12733-12740 (1st October 2002) - First of many papers covering the existence of sef-replicating short strands of RNA (autocatalytic RNA ribozymes), and analysis of the behaviour thereof.

A Self-Replicating System by T. Tjivuka, P. Ballester and J. Rebek Jr, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 112: 1249-1250 (1990) - demonstration of the existence of autocatalytic organic reactions in other molecules, in this amino-adenosine.

Activated Acetic Acid By Carbon Fixation On (Fe,Ni)S Under Primordial Conditions by Claudia Huber and Günter Wächetershäuser, Science, 276: 245-247 (11th April 1997) - empirical demonstration of the ability of sediments containing certain mineral ions to catalyse organic reactions under the conditions present around deep sea hydrothemral vents, thus allowing for the formation of necessary building blocks under those conditions.

An Asymmetric Underlying Rule In The Assignment Of Codons: Possible Clue To A Quick Early Evolution Of The Genetic Code Via Successive Binary Choices by Marc Delarue, The RNA Journal, 13(2): 161-169 (12th December 2006) - demonstration of the evolvability of the genetic code during the "RNA world" stage, involving assignments of codons based upon specific classes of chemical reaction.

An Expanded Set Of Amino Acid Analogues For The Ribosomal Translation Of Unnatural Peptides by Matthew C. T. Hartman, Kristopher Josephson, Chi-Wang Lin and Jack W. Szostak, PLoS One, 2(10): e972 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000972 (October 2007) - demonstration that new variations of the genetic code can be produced in vitro, and exotic amino acids incorporated into the genetic code via appropriate chemical manipulation.

Attempted Prebiotic Synthesis Of Pseudouridine by Jason P. Dworkin, Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere, 27: 345-355 (1997) - investigation of the mechanisms of synthesis of pseudouridine, a modified base found in the RNA molecules of a number of modern living organisms.

Autocatalytic Aptazymes Enable Ligand-Dependent Exponential Amplification Of RNA by Bianca J. Lam and Gerald F. Joyce, Nature Biotechnology, 27(3): 288-292 (March 2009) - demonstration that an extended class of RNA molecules can replicate under appropriate conditions, dependent upon the ligands that they react with, and that these can be harnessed for a variety of medical diagnostic applications.

Carbonyl Sulphide-Mediated Prebiotic Formation Of Peptides by Luke Leman, Leslie Orgel and M. Reza Ghadiri, Science, 306: 283-286 (8th October 2004) - demonstration that amino acids can form peptide chains in prebiotic ocean conditions, coutesy of catalysis by carbonyl sulphide, a volcanic gas that is readily soluble in water, and which improves the rate of peptide formation to the extent that 80% yields can be obtained at room temperature in under 24 hours.

Catalysis In Prebiotic Chemistry: Application To The Synthesis Of RNA Oligomers by James P. Ferris, Prakash C. Joshi, K-J Wang, S. Miyakawa and W. Huang, Advances in Space Research, 33: 100-105 (2004) - empirical demosntration in the laboratory that RNA molecules can be synthesised under prebiotic conditions by catalysis on montmorillonite clays, and that under certain conditions, RNA molecules consisting of more than 40 bases can be synthesised catalytically in this manner.

Cations As Mediators Of The Adsorption Of Nucleic Acids On Clay Surfaces In Prebiotic Environments by Marco Franchi, James P. Ferris and Enzo Gallori, Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere, 33: 1-16 (2003) - another empirical demonstration that nucleic acids can be formed by catalytic reactions on montmorillonite clay surfaces under prebiotic ocean conditions.

Chemistry for the Synthesis of Nucleobase-Modified Peptide Nucleic Acid by R. H. E. Hudson, R. D. Viirre, Y. H. Liu, F. Wojciechowski and A. K. Dambenieks, Pure Appl. Chem., 76(7-8) 1591-1598, 2004 - empirical demonstration that alternative nucleic acids exist, and that these could be formed under prebiotic conditions.

Coevolution Of Compositional Protocells And Their Environment by Barak Shenhav, Aia Oz and Doron Lancet, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 362: 1813-1819 (9th May 2007) - development of a chemically realisable model for protocells, that can be tested via computer simulation in order to determine the likely behaviour of protocells formed via the relevant processes.

Computational Models For The Formation Of Protocell Structures by Linglan Edwards, Yun Peng and James A. Reggia, Artificial Life, 4(1): 61-77 (1998) - computer modelling of lipid self-assembly and its relevance to protocell formation.

Conditions For The Emergence Of Life On The Early Earth: Summary And Reflections by Joshua Jortner, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 361: 1877-1891 (11th September 2006) - review paper covering the mutliple approaches to the question of the origin of life, from prebiotic chemistry, through to the genetic manipulation of model organisms in the laboratory to create a 'minimal' cell.

Coupled Growth And Division Of Model Protocell Membranes by Ting F. Zhu and Jack W. Szostak, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 131: 5705-5713 (2009) - empirical demonstration of the validity of a model for protocell division without loss of protocell contents, facilitating future research into actual replicating protocells.

Darwinian Evolution On A Chip by Brian M. Paegel and Gerald F. Joyce, Public Library of Science Biology, 6(4): e85 (April 2008) - empirical demonstration that RNa molecule populations undergo Darwinian evolution when subject to relevant chemical selection pressures, in a manner that can be replicated in a well-equipped school laboratory.

Early Anaerobic Metabolisms by Don E Canfield, Minik T Rosing and Christian Bjerrum, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 361: 1819-1836 (11th September 2006) - demonstration that theories about the metabolic processes of the earliest true cells are consistent with isotopic measurements of extremely ancient strata of the relevant age.

Efficient And Rapid Template-Directed Nucleic Acid Copying Using 2′-Amino-2′,3′-dideoxyribonucleoside-5′-Phosphorimidazolide Monomers by Jason P. Schrum, Alonso Ricardo, Mathangi Krishnamurthy, J. Craig Blain and Jack W. Szostak, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 131(40): 14560-14570 (16th September 2009) - empirical demonstration that encapsulated nucleic acids inside lipid vesicles can replicate, and thus form the basis for model protocells in laboratory investigations.

Emergence Of A Replicating Species From An In Vitro RNA Evolution Reaction by Ronald R. Breaker and Gerald F. Joyce, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 91: 6093-6097 (June 1994) - production of a replicating RNA species via in vitro evolution from a population of RNA molecules.

Enzymatic Synthesis Of DNA On Glycerol Nucleic Acid Templates Without Stable Duplex Formation Between Product And Template by Ching-Hsuan Tasi, Jingyang Chen and Jack W. Szostak, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 104(37): 14598-14603 (11th September 2007) - demonstration in the laboratory that nucleic acid synthesis using glycerol nucleic acid (GNA) could have provided a pathway from RNA to DNA.

Evolution And Self-Assembly Of Protocells by Ricard V. Solé, The International Journal of Biochemistry & Cell Biology, 41: 274-284 (2009) - demonstration that the protocell formation problem may be easier to solve than previously thought, concentrating upon mechanisms for coupling metabolism and container.

Evolution Of Amino Acid Frequencies In Proteins Over Deep Time: Inferred Order Of Introduction Of Amino Acids Into The Genetic Code by Dawn J. Brooks, Jacques R. Fresco, Arthur M. Lesk and Mona Singh, Molecular and Biological Evolution, 19(10): 1645-1655 (2002) - determination of the likely sequence of insertion of amino acids into the genetic code, based upon analysis of the behaviour of present day transcription systems, and simulations taking into account the differential chemistry of certain classes of amino acid.

Experimental Models Of Primitive Cellular Compartments: Encapsulation, Growth And Division by Martyn M. Hanczyk, Shelley M. Fukijawa and Jack W. Szostak, Science, 302: 618-622 (24th October 2003) - empirical demonstration in the laboratory, that montmorillonite clays catalyse the formation of lipid vesicles from micelles, thus facilitating protocell formation in a prebiotic environment, including the encapsulation of any RNA molecules formed catalytically on the same montmorillonite substrates.

Formation Of Bimolecular Membranes From Lipid Monolayers And A Study Of Their Electrical Properties by M. Montal and P. Mueller, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 69(12): 3561-3566 (December 1972) - systematic investigation of the behaviour of lipid bilayers, and how they can be formed from less complex lipd structures.

Formation Of Protocell-Like Structures From Glycine And Formaldehyde In A Modified Sea Medium by Hiroshi Yanagawa and Fujio Egami, Proceedings of the Japan Academy, 53: 42-45 (12th January 1977) - demonstration that structures resembling hypothesised protocells could be produced in prebiotic open oceanic conditions.

Formation Of Protocell-Like Vesicles In A Thermal Diffusion Column by Itay Budin, Raphael J. Bruckner and Jack W. Szostak, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 131: 9628-9629 (2009) - demonstration that thermal diffusion columns associated with hydrothermal vents could have accelerated the formation of protocells.

From Volcanic Origins Of Chemoautotrophic Life To Bacteria, Archaea And Eukarya by Günter Wächtershaüser, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Part B, 361: 1787-1808 (7th September 2006) - review paper covering the hypothesis that metabolism of iron and sulphur, as seen in very ancient bacterial and archaeal lineages, could have formed the basis for the modern domains of life.

Functional Information And The Emergence Of Biocomplexity by Robert M. Hazen, Patrick L. Griffin, James M. Carothers and Jack W. Szostak, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 104 supplement 1: 8574-8581 (15th May 2007) - demonstration that functional information of the sort needed for the development of metabolisms could have emerged from simpler chemical antecedents.

Generic Darwinian Selection In Catalytic Protocell Assemblies by Andreea Munteanu, Camille Stephan-Otto Attolini, Steen Rasmussen, Hans Ziock and Ricard V. Solé, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 362: 1847-1855 (2007) - demonstration that several different protocell models of varying initial complexity all undergo Darwinian evolution.

Homochiral Selection In The Montmorillonite-Catalysed And Uncatalysed Prebiotic Synthesis Of RNA by Prakash C. Joshi, Stefan Pitsch and James P. Ferris, Chemical Communications (Royal Society of Chemistry), 2497-2498 (2000) [DOI: 10.1039/b007444f] - demonstration that homochiral synthesis of RNA occurs on montmorillonite clay substrates, resulting in chiral selection for particular enantiomers.

How Life Began On Earth: A Status Report by Jeffrey L. Bada, Earth & Planetary Science Letters, 226: 1-15 (22nd July 2004) - review paper covering a number of relevant abiogenetic hypotheses, and their applicability to the origin of life problem.

Hyperthermophiles In The History Of Life by Karl O. Stetter, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 361: 1837-1843 (11th September 2006) - demonstration by molecular phylogeny that hyperthermophilic bacteria and archaea are amongst the most ancient of surviving lineages, thus supporting the hypothesis that such organisms were amongst the first true living cells.

Identification Of Diamino Acids In The Murchison Meteorite by Uwe J. Meierhenrich, Guillermo M. Muñoz Caro, Jan Hendrik Brederhöft, Elmar K. Jessberger and Wolfram H-P. Thiemann, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 101(25):9182-9286 (22nd June 2004) - determination of the existence of a range of interesting amino acid compounds in a meteorite, supporting the hypothesis that some prebiotic organic molecules could have arrived from space, and assisted the formation of life on Earth.

Implications Of A 3.472-3.333?GYr-Old Subaerial Microbal Mat From The Barberton Greenstone Belt, South Africa, For The UV Environmental Conditions Of The Early Earth by Frances Westall, Cornel E.J de Ronde, Gordon Southam, Nathalie Grassineau, Maggy Colas, Charles Cockell and Helmut Lammer, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 361: 1857-1876 (11th September 2006) - determination of the existence of microbial fossils, possibly dating back 3.4 billion years, suggesting that conditions for the first living organisms were not as hostile as previously thought.

Information Transfer From Peptide Nucleic Acids To RNA By Template-Directed Syntheses by Jürgen G. Schmidt, Peter E. Nielsen and Leslie E. Orgel, Nucleic Acids Research, 25(23): 4794-4802 (1997) - empirical demonstration in the laboratory that information can be transferred from peptide nucleic acids to RNA, as a possible intermediate step in the formation of the genetic basis of life.

Interstellar Glycine by Yi-Jehng Kuan, Steven B. Charnley, Hui-Chun Huang, Wei-Ling Tseng, and Zbigniew Kisiel, The Astrophysical Journal, 593: 848-867 (20th August 2003) - determination that the amino acid glycine is present in detectable levels in deep interstellar space.

Is There A Common Chemical Model For Life In The Universe? by Steven A. Benner, Alonso Ricardo and Matthew A. Carrigan, Current Opinion in Chemical Biology, 8: 672-689 (22nd October 2004) - proposal that a range of alternative chemistries could also produce 'organisms' that canundergo Darwinian evolution.

Kin Selection And Virulence In The Evolution Of Protocells And Parasites by Steven A. Frank, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Part B, 258: 153-161 (1994) - demonstration that the existence of 'parasitic' systems can drive the evolution of protocells at an accelerated rate.

Ligation Of The Hairpin Ribozyme In cis Induced By Freezing And Dehydration by Sergei A. Kazakov, Svetlana V. Balatskaya and Brian H. Johnston, The RNA Journal, 12: 446-456 (2006) - demonstration that repeated cycles of freezing and dehydration can drive the formation of RNA molecules, thus allowing for their appearance under cold prebiotic conditions.

Lipid Bilayer Fibres From Diastereomeric And Enantiomeric N-Octylaldonamides by Jürgen-Hinrich Fuhrhop, Peter Schneider, Egbert Boekema and Wolfgang Helfrich, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 110: 2861-2867 (1988) - empirical demonstration that relevant lipid compounds are capable of self-assembling spontaneously into hollow fibres.

"Living" Under The Challenge Of Information Decay: The Stochastic Corrector Model Versus Hypercycles by Elias Zintzaras, Mauro Santos and Eörs Szathmáry, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 217: 167-181 (2002) - comparison of the viability of two different protocell models, and their ability to withstand deleterious mutations when subject to evolutionary pressures.

Membrane Self-Assembly Processes: Steps Toward The First Cellular Life by Pierre-Alain Monnard and David W. Deamer, The Anatomical Record, 268: 196-207 (2002) - investigation of the viability of lipid vesicles as the outer integument of the first protocells.

Mineral Catalysis And Prebiotic Synthesis: Montmorillonite-Catalysed Formation Of RNA by James P. Ferris, Elements, 1: 145-149 (June 2005) - empirical demonstration of the viability of the RNA world hypothesis, courtesy of the existence of an effiicient means of producing RNA molecules catalytically on montmorillonite clays.

Mineral Surface Directed Membrane Assembly by Martyn M. Hanczyc, Sheref S. Mansy and Jack W. Szostak, Origins of Life and Evolution of Biospheres, 37(1): 67-82 (February 2007) - Another laboratory demonstration that montmorillonite clays can produce lipid vesicles encapsulating RNA molecules under prebiotic cconditions.

Model Of Self-Replicating Cell Capable Of Self-Maintenance by Naoaki Ono and Takashi Ikegami, in Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Advances in Artificial Life, 1674: 399-406 (25th June 1999) (also available as full paper at arXiv.org: adap-org/9905002v2) - mathematical and computer modelling of a hypothetical protocell, demonstrating that such a system would be capable of dynamic maintenance of its outer integument, and would also be capable of a simplified form of cell division.

Molecular Asymmetry In Extraterrestrial Chemistry: Insights From A Pristine Meteorite by Sandra Pizzarello, Yongsong Huang and Marcelo R. Alexandre, Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 105(10): 3700-3704 (11th March 2008) - determination that moelcular asymmetry (chiral chemistry) occurs naturally, courtesy of the existence of chiral molecules in a meteorite.

Molecular Dynamics Simulation Of The Formation, Structure, And Dynamics Of Small Phospholipid Vesicles by Siewert J. Marrink and Alan E. Mark, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 125: 15233-15242 (2003) - computer modelling of lipd vesicle formation, and comparison of the model with actual experimental results obtained from real lipid vesicle formation, to ensure the robustness of the model.

Molecular Messages by Jack W. Szostak, Nature, 423: 689 (12th June 2003) - review paper covering the question of defining the information content of organic molecules in a rigorous manner.

Montmorillonite Catalysis Of 30-50 Mer Oligonucleotides: Laboratory Demonstration Of Potential Steps In The Origin Of The RNA World by James P. Ferris, Origins of Life and Evolution of the biosphere, 32: 311-332 (2002) - another paper demosntrating the validity of montmorillonite catalysis for prebiotic RNA formation, demonstrating that RNA molecules up to 50 bases long can be formed via this means.

Montmorillonite Catalysis Of RNA Oligomer Formation In Aqueous Solution: A Model For The Prebiotic Formation Of RNA by James P. Ferris and Gözen Ertem, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 115: 12270-12275 (1993) - another paper on montmorillonite catalysis!

Montmorillonite-Catalysed Formation Of RNA Oligomers: The Possible Role Of Catalysis In The Origins Of Life by James P. Ferris, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 361: 1777-1786 (7th September 2006) - yet another paper demonstrating the validity of montmorillonite catalysis for RNA formation (!)

Nucelotide Synthetase Ribozymes May Have Emerged First In The RNA World by Wentao Ma, Chunwu Yu, Wentao Zhang and Jiming Hu, The RNA Journal, 13: 2012-2019, 18th September 2007 - paper covering a computer simulation aimed at determining the viability of the self-replicating ribozyme hypothesis.

Nutrient Uptake By Protocells: A Liposome Model System by Pierre-Alain Monnard and David W. Deamer, Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere, 31: 147-155 (2001) - laboratory demonstration of the ability of model protocells to acquire nutrients to fuel their chemical processes.

Organic Compounds In Carbonaceous Meteorites by Mark A. Sephton, Natural Products Reports (Royal Society of Chemistry), 19: 292-311 (2002) - a full assay of organic molecules found in various meteorites, including amino acids, sugar-related compounds, pyrimidines and purines (the latter two essential for RNA and DNA formation).

Peptide Formation Mediated By Hydrogen Cyanide Tetramer: A Possible Prebiotic Process by Sherwood Chang, José Flores and Cyril Ponnamperuma, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 64(3) 1011-1015 (1st November 1969) - demonstration in the laboratory of another possible peptide formation process that could have taken place on a prebiotic Earth.

Peptide Nucleic Acids Rather Than RNA May Have Been The First Genetic Molecule by Kevin E. Nelson, Matthew Levy and Stanley L. Miller, Proc. Natl, Acad. Sci. USA., 97(8): 3868-3871, 11th April 2000 - demonstration that electric discharge synthesis produces the precursor molecules required to form peptide nucleic acids, which may have been precursors to RNA.

Peptides By Activation Of Amino Acids With CO On (Ni,Fe)S Surfaces: Implications For The Origin Of Life by Claudia Huber and Günter Wächtershäuser, Science, 281: 670-672 (31st July 1998) - demonstration of another peptide formation mechanism relevant to hydrothermal vents, involving vlcanic carbon monoxide and hydrogen sulphide, in combination with nickel and iron compounds in clays.

Phenotypic Diversity And Chaos In A Minimal Cell Model by Andreea Munteanu and Ricard V. Solé, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 240: 434-442 (2006) - computer simulation work aimed at demonstrating the ability of a protocell model to exhibit emergent complexity.

Prebiotic Amino Acids As Asymmetric Catalysts by Sandra Pizzarello and Arthur L. Weber, Science, 303: 1151 (20 February 2004) - empirical demonstration in the laboratory that amino acids can act as asymmetric (chiral) catalysts.

Prebiotic Chemistry And The Origin Of The RNA World by Leslie E. Orgel, Critical Reviews in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 39: 99-123 (2004) - review paper covering relevant research into the RNA world hypothesis.

Prebiotic Materials From On And Off The Early Earth by Max Bernstein, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 361: 1689-1702 (11th September 2006) - determination of the viability of the 'chemical seeding from space' hypothesis for a range of organic molecules.

Prebiotic Synthesis On Minerals: Bridging The Prebiotic And RNA Worlds by James P. Ferris, Biological Bulletin, 196: 311-314 (June 1999) - review paper covering relevant empirical findings supporting the RNA world hypothesis.

Preparation Of Large Monodisperse Vesicles by Ting F. Zhu and Jack W. Szostak, PLoS One, 4(4): e5009 (April 2009) - demonstration of a mechanism for producing lipid vesicles of a range of sizes, which may have prebiotic relevance.

Racemic Amino Acids From The Ultraviolet Photolysis Of Interstellar Ice Analogues by Max P. Bernstein, Jason P. Dworkin, Scott A. Sandford, George W. Copoper and Louis J. Allamandola, Nature, 416: 401-403 - empirical demonstration that amino acids can be synthesised in the conditions extant in deep space, by ultraviolet photolysis of relevant precursor molecules within analogues of cometary ices, by replicating the relevant conditions in the laboratory.

Reconstructing The Emergence Of Cellular Life Through The Synthesis Of Model Protocells by Sheref S. Mansy and Jack W. Szostak, [/i]Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology[/i], Volume LXXIV (4th September 2009) - summary of current (as of 2009) experimental progress toward building working model protocells in the laboratory.

Replicating Vesicles As Models Of Primitive Cell Growth And Division by Martin M. Hanczyc and Jack W. Szostak, Current Opinion In Chemical Biology, 8: 660-664 (22nd October 2004) - another paper demonstrating that lipid vesicles can perform a range of mechanical and chemical functions relevant to protocell formation and activity.

Ribosomal Synthesis Of Unnatural Peptides by Kristopher Josephson, Matthew C. T. Hartman and Jack W. Szostak, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 127: 11727-11735 (2005) - empirical demonstration of the reassignments of codons in the genetic code of Escherichia coli to code for amino acids not found in nature, thus demonstrating that the genetic code is not a fixed entity.

Ribozymes: Building The RNA World by Gerald F. Joyce, Current Biology, 6(8): 965-967, 1996 - first steps in the synthesis of RNA ribozymes making possible later research.

RNA Catalysis In Model Protocell Vesicles by Irene A Chen, Kourosh Salehi-Ashtiani and Jack W Szostak, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 127: 13213-13219 (2005) - a documented early empirical attempt to construct model protocells in the laboratory.

RNA-Catalysed Nucleotide Synthesis by Peter J. Unrau and David P. Bartel, Nature, 395: 260-263 (17th September 1998) - development of an RNA molecule that catalyses synthesis of nucleotides for more RNA production, this RNA molecule being produced by in vitro evolution.

RNA-Catalyzed RNA Polymerization: Accurate and General RNA-Templated Primer Extension by Wendy K. Johnston, Peter J. Unrau, Michael S. Lawrence, Margaret E. Glasner and David P. Bartel, Science, 292: 1319-1325, 18th May 2001 - one of the first papers documenting the production of an RNA ribozyme, and demonstration that its replication was high-fidelity, yet imperfect.

RNA-Directed Amino Acid Homochirality by J. Martyn Bailey, FASEB Journal (Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology), 12: 503-507 (1998) - demonstration of the ability of RNA molecules to perform chiral selection of amino acids.

RNA Evolution And The Origin Of Life by Gerald F. Joyce, Nature, 338: 217-224 (16th March 1989) - review paper covering RNA world hypotheses and extant research.

Selection And Evolution Of Enzymes From A Partially Randomised Non-Catalytic Scaffold by Burckhard Seelig and Jack W. Szostak, Nature, 448: 828-833 (16th August 2007) - demonstration that relevant enyzmatic activity can arise de novo through in vitro evolution of RNA ligases.

Self Replicating Systems by Volker Patzke and Günter von Kiedrowski, ARKIVOC 5: 293-310, 2007 - review paper covering self-replicating chemical systems in general.

Self-Assembling Amphiphilic Molecules Synthesis In Simulated Interstellar/Precometary Ices by Jason P. Dworkin, David W. Deamer, Scott A. Sandford and Louis J. Allamandola, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 98(3): 815-819 (30th January 2001) - laboratory demonstration that a range of self-assembling molecules can be synthesised in deep space conditions (cometary ices).

Self-Assembly Of Surfactant-Like Peptides With Variable Glycine Tails To Form Nanotubes And Nanovesicles by Steve Santoso, Wonmuk Hwang, Hyman Hartman and Shuguang Zhang, Nano Letters, 2(7): 687-691 (2002) - laboratory demonstration that certain peptide molecules also self-assemble, this time into tubes and vesicles.

Self-Assembly Processes In The Prebiotic Environment by David Deamer, Sara Singaram, Sudha Rajamani, Vladimir Kompanichenko and Stephen Guggenheim, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 361: 1689-1702 (11th September 2006) - demonstration of the sort of chemical processes that can take place on clay substrates resulting in self-assembling molecules.

Self-Organising Biochemical Cycles by Leslie E. Orgel, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 97(23): 12503-12507 (7th November 2000) - paper reviewing the plausibility of self-organising chemical processes with or without genetic polymers.

Self-Sustained Replication Of An RNA Enzyme by Tracey A. Lincoln and Gerald F. Joyce, ScienceExpress, DOI: 10.1126/science.1167856 (8th January 2009) - another paper on self-replicating RNA enzymes, this time pairs of cross-replicating enzymes.

Semipermeable Lipid Bilayers Exhibit Diastereoselectivity Favouring Ribose by M. G. Sacerdote and Jack W. Szostak, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 102(17): 6004-6008 (26th April 2005) - demonstration that lipid bilayers act as chemical filters, exercising selectivity in the molecules transmitted across the boundary.

Sequence- And Regio-Selectivity In The Montmorillonite-Catalysed Synthesis Of RNA by Gözen Ertem and James P. Ferris, Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere, 30: 411-422 (2000) - yet another paper on RNA synthesis by catalysis on montmorillonite!

Shrink-Wrap Vescicles by Shelley M. Fukijawa, Irene A. Chen and Jack W. Szostak, Langmuir: The ACS Journal of Surfaces and Colloids, 21(26): 12124-12129 (20th December 2005) [Note: published online 10th November 2005] - demonstration that lipid vesicles can undergo major size changes and still retain their contents.

Simulation Of The Spontaneous Aggregation Of Phospholipids Into Bilayers by Siewert J. Marrink, Eric Lindahl, Olle Edholm and Alan E. Mark, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 123: 8638-8639 (2001) - generation of a computer model simulating the formation of lipid bilayers, and verification of the robustness of the model, by comparison of its predictions with experimental results from real bilayer formation.

Single-Molecule Imaging Of An In Vitro Evolved RNA Aptamer Reveals Homogeneous Ligand Binding Kinetics by Mark P. Elenko, jack W. Szostak and Antoine M. van Oijen, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 131: 9866-9867 (2009) - production of an RNA atpamer by in vitro evolution, followed by direct examination of its reaction kinetics at the atomic level using fluorescence labelling.

Structural Insights Into The Evolution Of A Non-Biological Protein: Importance Of Surface Residues In Protein Fold Optimisation by Matthew D. Smith, Matthew A. Rosenow, Meitian Wang, James P. Allen, Jack W Szostak and John C. Chaput, PLoS One, 2(5): e467. DOI :10.1371/journal.pone.0000467 - demonstration that protein folding is optimised by surface residues, thus facilitiating a wide range of evolutionary pathways for new protein formation.

Synchronisation Phenomena In Internal Reaction Models Of Protocells by Roberto Serra, Timoteo Carletti, Alessandro Filisetti and Irene Poli, Artificial life, 13: 123-128 (2007)

Synchronisation Phenomena In Protocell Models by Alessandro Filisetti, Roberto Serra, Timoteo Carletti, Irene Poli and Marco Villani, Biophysical Reviews and Letters, 3(1-2): 325-342 (2008)

Synthesis Of 35-40 Mers Of RNA Oligomers From Unblocked Monomers. A Simple Approach To The RNA World by Wenhua Huang and James P. Ferris, Chemical Communications of the Royal Society of Chemistry, 1458-1459 (2003)

Synthesis Of Activated Pyrimidine Ribonucleotides In Prebiotically Plausible Conditions by Matthew W. Powner, Béatrice Gerland and John D. Sutherland, [i]Nature, 459:239-242 (14th May 2009)

Synthesis Of Long Prebiotic Oligomers On Mineral Surfaces by James P. Ferris, Aubrey R. Hill Jr, Rihe Liu and Leslie E. Orgel, Nature, 381: 59-61 (2nd May 1996)

Synthesising Life by Jack W. Szostak, David P. Bartel and P. Luigi Luisi, Nature, 409: 387-390 (18th January 2001)

Synthetic Protocell Biology: From Reproduction To Computation by Ricard V. Solé, Andreea Munteanu, Carlos Rodriguez-Caso and Javier Macia, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 362: 1727-1739 (October 2007)

Systems Chemistry On Early Earth by Jack W. Szostak, Nature, 459: 171 (14th May 2009)

Template-Directed Synthesis Of A Genetic Polymer In A Model Protocell by Sheref S. Mansy, Jason P. Schrum, Mathangi Krisnamurthy, Sylvia Tobé, Douglas A. Treco and Jack W. Szostak, Nature, 454: 122-125 (4th June 2008)

The Antiquity Of RNA-Based Evolution by Gerald F. Joyce, Nature, 418: 214-221, 11th July 2002

The Case For An Ancestral Genetic System Involving Simple Analogues Of The Nucleotides by Gerald F. Joyce, Alan W. Schwartz, Stanley L. Miller and Leslie E. Orgel, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 84: 4398-4402 (July 1987)

The Descent of Polymerisation by Matthew Levy and Andrew D. Ellington, Nature Structural Biology, 8(7): 580-582, July 2001

The Emergence Of Competition Between Model Protocells by Irene A Chen, Richard W. Roberts and Jack W. Szostak, Science, 305:1474-1476 (3rd September 2004)

The Generality Of DNA-Templated Synthesis As A Basis For Evolving Non-Natural Small Molecules by Zev J. Gartner and David R. Liu, Journal of the American Chemical Society, 123: 6961-6963 (2001)

The Lifetimes Of Nitriles (CN) And Acids (COOH) During Ultraviolet Photolysis And Their Survival In Space by Max P. Bernstein, Samantha F. M. Ashbourne, Scott A. Sandford and Louis J. Allamandola, The Astrophysical Journal, 601: 3650270 (20th January 2004)

The Lipid World by Daniel Segré, Dafna Ben-Eli, David W. Deamer and Doron Lancet, Origins of Life And Evolution of the Biosphere, 31: 119-145, 2001

The Miller Volcanic Spark Discharge Experiment by Adam P. Johnson, H. James Cleaves., Jason D. Dworkin, Daniel P. Glavin, Antonio Lazcano and Jeffrey L. Bada, Science, 322: 404 (17th October 2008)

The Origin And Early Evolution Of Life: Prebiotic Chemistry, The Pre-RNA World, And Time by Antonio Laczano and Stanley R. Miller, Cell, 85: 793-798 (14th June 1996)

The Origin And Emergence Of Life Under Impact Bombardment by Charles S. Cockell, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 361: 1845-1856 (7th September 2006)

The Origin Of Replicators And Reproducers by Eörs Szathmáry, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 361: 1689-1702 (11th September 2006)

The Prebiotic Molecules Observed In The Interstellar Gas by P. Thaddeus, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 361: 1689-1702 (7th September 2006)

The Roads To And From The RNA World by Jason P. Dworkin, Antonio Lazcano and Stanley L. Miller, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 222: 127-134 (2003)

The Stability Of The RNA Bases: Implications For The Origins Of Life by Matthew Levy and Stanley R. Miller, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 95: 7933-7938 (July 1998)

Thermostability Of Model Protocell Membranes by Sheref S. Mansy and Jack W. Szostak, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 105(36): 13351-13355 (9th September 2008)

Toward Synthesis Of A Minimal Cell by Anthony C. Forster and George M. Church, Molecular Systems Biology (2006) doi:10.1038/msb4100090

Transcription And Translation In An RNA World by William R. Taylor, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Part B, 361: 1689-1702 (11th September 2006)

Two Step Potentially Prebiotic Synthesis Of α-D-Cystidine-5'-Phosphate From D-Glyceraldehyde-3-Phosphate by Carole Anastasi, Michael A. Crowe and John D. Sutherland, Journal of the American Chemical Society (Communications), 129: 24-24 (2007)

:panic: Peer-reviewed papers! Oh no!

Just remember that creationists can write peer reviewed papers too. They'll just be reviewed by other creationists ;)