Camaban

I was wondering if anyone would be kind enough to give me a summarisation of this site:

<a href="http://corona.eps.pitt.edu/www_GPS/courses/GEO0871/Cells/abiogenesis.html" target="_blank">http://corona.eps.pitt.edu/www_GPS/courses/GEO0871/Cells/abiogenesis.html</a>

One of these years, I've really got to get round to taking a biology course.

Thanks

pz

It already is a summary! It looks like some fairly brief lecture notes on abiogenesis.

Camaban

I'll rephrase that.

A person I'm arguing with in another forum claims there's information there that makes the calculations this thread is about possible. After looking through it, I can't really see that there's enough information, and would like to know if someone here can see something I'm missing. (Apologies, Tired, sick and hungover, so not thinking too well today)

Doubting Didymus

I think that site is as succinct as it can get.

Where did you find it, by the way? It is an extremely good outline of both the best and most problematic aspects of going abiogenesis theories.

I particularly like the suggestion that clay crystasls might have been helpfull for getting one-directional polymers.

Also, most biology courses will give you absolutely zip insight into abiogenesis. It's really mostly up to the chemists until we have a protocell.

Edit: As for information that makes it possible to calculate probability, I can't see it. Perhaps the person you are talking to can be more specific?

I suspect they think the references in the 'reality check' parts that deal with the current problems and unknowns make abiogenesis a theory in crisis, or something.

[ October 02, 2002: Message edited by: Doubting Didymus ]</p>

Camaban

argument on another forum.

<a href="http://boards.swirve.com/board.cgi?boardset=utopia&boardid=politics&spec=46 59869" target="_blank">http://boards.swirve.com/board.cgi?boardset=utopia&boardid=politics&spec=46 59869</a>

<a href="http://boards.swirve.com/board.cgi?boardset=utopia&boardid=politics&thread= 124&spec=4659847" target="_blank">http://boards.swirve.com/board.cgi?boardset=utopia&boardid=politics&thread= 124&spec=4659847</a>

Inefficient design compared with this, covers wide range of topics (Politics forum) and the Fundies there are ill-practised enough at arguing that it gives me an ego boost because I'm finally doing well

Camaban

Probably

Will do, Thanks

Doubting Didymus

from the original poster of that article.

I was right, this feller thinks that gaps in a theory indicate that the theory is improbable. What he wants to do is say: 'the probability of the right number of amino acids and sugars falling into the right place is ten to the hundred million blab blab'. Thus ignoring the rest of the article, which suggests that the simple polymers and monomers that would occur naturally slowly began to form RNA. Because the model is so gradual, probability is meaningless to it.

Camaban

Well, asked (and topped the thread to make sure those bloody spammers don't get it.... I really hate those board designs) And awaiting response now.

Thanks for the info.