Fisrt of all, where did these "complex organic compounds come from"? As far as what happened at Cornell, Stanley Miller and Harold Urey obtained amino acids using electrical sparks. Sagan, who was a professor at Cornell, showed the experiment on an episode of Cosmos. However, amino acids are NOT life! Interestingly, forty years later, Miller himself admitted that the question of the origin of life is much more difficult than he, or anyone else, had thought! As an example. the cell itself is an extremely complex machine that could not have come about in piecemeal fashion.
The major biochemicals in living cells are proteins and nucleic acids. No biologically significant proteins or nucleic acids have been made in ANY experiments such as those of Miller or those who have followed him.
Proteins are strings of amino acids whose enzymatic activities arise from active groups within a specific three-dimensional shape. These are due to a precise sequence of the amino acids.
Peptization, the joining of the amino acids to form a protein by the elimination of water, is difficult to accomplish by non-biological means. Proteinoids are unstable in the presence of water. Since they cannot replicate themselves, natural selection cannot be a driving force in their improvement. The precise order of amino acids in proteins in cells is governed by information on the nucleic acids that code for them, so this could not be achieved by chance. Since proteins are needed to make proteins, how could a first protein have occurred by chance?
I don't understand the "poorly understood rules of thumb" comment. Are you saying that the scientific community is still trying to understand the First and Second Laws? I mentioned it because the entropy principle is the most devastating argument against evolution. As far as complete order goes, I must clarify my point. It's obvious to all that the universe is "winding down" so to speak, which means that there must have been a point at which it was in complete and perfect order. Why? Because according to evolution, things progressed from simple systems (like inorganic compounds) to complex systems (like organic compounds) and on to complex life. Since everything is now heading towards complete disorder, and everything started with complete disorder, then there must have been a "midpoint" or apex where everything was in perfect order. Given the knowledge and observations we now have about physics, this theory seems impossible. I would also like to ask you about this "volume of evidence that points to evolution." Please name specifics.
The "Earth is an open system" argument is popular with evolutionists. First of all, you and Hawking are right. The Earth is an open system powered by the sun. However, there is no such thing as a closed system, unless you count the universe itself. All systems are open systems since there is no such thing as a truly isolated system. Emile Borel proved this mathematically, as mentioned by Dr. David Layzer, Professor of Astronomy at Harvard, in his article titled "The Arrow of Time," Scientific American, (Vol. 223, December 1975), p. 56. He stated, "Borel showed that no finite physical system can be considered closed." Therefore, the Second Law actually applies to open systems as well, especially since absolutley no violations of it have ever been recorded or observed!
I've always found it pointless to even believe in ET life. If one believes in the Theory of Evolution (yes, it's just a theory, not a fact, despite the way it's taught in our schools) then forget it. Life is so complex that it could NEVER have come about by itself, let alone persist and develop. That was Darwin's problem: he never knew about the cell, DNA, amino acids, etc. Furthermore, no evolutionist has yet to explain how something can come from nothing (First Law of Thermodynamics) or how things can go from complete disorder and chaos to complete order (Second Law of Thermodynamics).
Slashdot Mirror
Fisrt of all, where did these "complex organic compounds come from"? As far as what happened at Cornell, Stanley Miller and Harold Urey obtained amino acids using electrical sparks. Sagan, who was a professor at Cornell, showed the experiment on an episode of Cosmos. However, amino acids are NOT life! Interestingly, forty years later, Miller himself admitted that the question of the origin of life is much more difficult than he, or anyone else, had thought! As an example. the cell itself is an extremely complex machine that could not have come about in piecemeal fashion. The major biochemicals in living cells are proteins and nucleic acids. No biologically significant proteins or nucleic acids have been made in ANY experiments such as those of Miller or those who have followed him. Proteins are strings of amino acids whose enzymatic activities arise from active groups within a specific three-dimensional shape. These are due to a precise sequence of the amino acids. Peptization, the joining of the amino acids to form a protein by the elimination of water, is difficult to accomplish by non-biological means. Proteinoids are unstable in the presence of water. Since they cannot replicate themselves, natural selection cannot be a driving force in their improvement. The precise order of amino acids in proteins in cells is governed by information on the nucleic acids that code for them, so this could not be achieved by chance. Since proteins are needed to make proteins, how could a first protein have occurred by chance?
I don't understand the "poorly understood rules of thumb" comment. Are you saying that the scientific community is still trying to understand the First and Second Laws? I mentioned it because the entropy principle is the most devastating argument against evolution. As far as complete order goes, I must clarify my point. It's obvious to all that the universe is "winding down" so to speak, which means that there must have been a point at which it was in complete and perfect order. Why? Because according to evolution, things progressed from simple systems (like inorganic compounds) to complex systems (like organic compounds) and on to complex life. Since everything is now heading towards complete disorder, and everything started with complete disorder, then there must have been a "midpoint" or apex where everything was in perfect order. Given the knowledge and observations we now have about physics, this theory seems impossible. I would also like to ask you about this "volume of evidence that points to evolution." Please name specifics.
The "Earth is an open system" argument is popular with evolutionists. First of all, you and Hawking are right. The Earth is an open system powered by the sun. However, there is no such thing as a closed system, unless you count the universe itself. All systems are open systems since there is no such thing as a truly isolated system. Emile Borel proved this mathematically, as mentioned by Dr. David Layzer, Professor of Astronomy at Harvard, in his article titled "The Arrow of Time," Scientific American, (Vol. 223, December 1975), p. 56. He stated, "Borel showed that no finite physical system can be considered closed." Therefore, the Second Law actually applies to open systems as well, especially since absolutley no violations of it have ever been recorded or observed!
I've always found it pointless to even believe in ET life. If one believes in the Theory of Evolution (yes, it's just a theory, not a fact, despite the way it's taught in our schools) then forget it. Life is so complex that it could NEVER have come about by itself, let alone persist and develop. That was Darwin's problem: he never knew about the cell, DNA, amino acids, etc. Furthermore, no evolutionist has yet to explain how something can come from nothing (First Law of Thermodynamics) or how things can go from complete disorder and chaos to complete order (Second Law of Thermodynamics).