abiogenesis

This is my argument for abiogenesis. please keep in mind that the theory of evolution, the big bang theory, and abiogenesis are not mutually inclusive, i just happen to believe all are true, or at least are the most probable given the knowledge man has accumulated. The links to the mentioned sources are:

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/ribonucleotides/
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/090111-creating-life.html
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/10/forgotten-exper/#previouspost
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/12/in-a-vat-primor/
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

i hope you have found this interesting and informative. Please feel free to discuss, comment and even argue this topic. Thanks for watching.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• evolution
• abiogenesis
• creation
• science
• RNA
• amino acid
• John Sutherland
• University
• Manchester
• Jack Szostak
• Stanley Miller
• Yoshihiro Furukawa
• Tohoku
• Antonio Lazcano
• Scripps
• Research
• Institute
• Tracey Lincoln
• Gerald Joyce
• Darwin
• volcano
• volcanic eruptions
• little warm pond
• drying ponds
• hydrothermal vents
• chondrite
• meteorites
• meteor
• Harvard
• Luke Leman

[thisis3d]

and there are gene duplication mutations, which copy entire genes, and the copy in some cases can be expressed differently. but as i see it, you are starting on the faulty premise of for it to be a mutation it has to be big and change a lot. but that is rarely the case seeing as how large changes would be dangerous, but many tiny ones accumulating work just fine. blue eyes came from a mutation, it was a new trait, there for new information, but it didn't change anything. because most are neutral

[thisis3d]

funny you mention trees seeing as how ring dating doesn't imply a flood ever occurred. also dirt can get shifted around, mudslides what have you. and not all layers are laid down slowly, some a laid down quickly. such as from volcanoes, or sediment.

[thisis3d]

but the earth was never flat. if it was where did people live under the water? we know from geology that there was a super continent a long time ago but it wasn't flat. plate tectonics. the bible has contradictions. cain was sentence to roam the world forever as a vagabond but latter he steeled down a built a city. also the bible has some scientific inaccuracies, like ants not having overseers they have queens, its a documented fact they have queens.

[thisis3d]

also genetics would not allow the wide variety of dogs to come from one pair, unless mutations occurred every generation to generate a ton of new genes. but still inbreeding results in bad consequences. such as flipper babies and hemophilia. cheetahs are so closely related, because of a population bottle neck around 10k years ago, that viruses have a 70% lethality rate, and some have up to a 90%. now if all thing alive today descended from one pair then everything would be like this

[thisis3d]

a breed of dog isan't a species. a species is where two populations of the same species become so different from one another they can' breed anymore. we have seen it in plants, incests. and possibly in birds with the monarch fly catcher birds being sexually isolated based on color

[thisis3d]

the thing with ERVS is that the virus became inactive, meaning it was very detrimental for the virus to settle in that location. also the thing with these ERVs is that they don't settle in the same spot in different DNA strands, viruses only infects one species, unless it mutates and moves to another species. viruses insert at random meaning duplicate insertion points is almost impossible

[MajSmJz]

we'd expect that viruses would be content settling into our DNA or the ape's in similar places - where they get the most benefit from.

So now you've given me some data and interpreted it your way. I've interpreted it my way. Which one is correct? Only one of them is, at most. Whenever certain data can be interpreted in several ways, it cannot be used as a proof for something. You'd have to disprove all other interpretation but yours to have SOLID PROOF. Which is more than can be done. Peace.

[MajSmJz]

place and see it scramble up the existing info and make new info that would be better. It's a nice story and believable to the laic ear, yet never observed.

Both humans and apes have ERVs. Could be they have a common ancestor from which they obtained them, or a common designer that designed a major portion of their DNAs to be almost identical, since they live in similar environments and have to be constructed similarly in order to live optimally. And since large portions of DNA are similar,

[MajSmJz]

and since there are trees all over the world going vertically through the layers, therefore connecting them, some even bottom-up, we can infer the layers aren't of different ages (i.e. billions of years). Could be worldwide flood, it's 100% possible.

I still hold to what I said: you need an increase of information for evolution to occur, and we haven't observed that yet. It doesn't only mean increase in base pairs, but that's one way of increasing info. The other is to observe mutation take

[MajSmJz]

observed that. Could be that chromosomes never fused, but have always been this way.

If we flatened the Earth's surface, the present water would've covered the wole Earth with 2,2km of water layer. So there's plenty. All the mountains we see today came about after and during the flood.

The Bible has no contradictions, those that some people expose as supposed contradictions, can easily be explained away.

All the Earth's layers that you see around the world may have formed because of the flood