The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-07-2016, 05:06 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(07-07-2016 04:47 PM)u196533 Wrote:  
(06-07-2016 05:22 PM)Chas Wrote:  Try parsing the whole post this time. Facepalm


I am not discussing basic thermodynamics. Yes. Energy added to an open system can lower it's entropy. However in a chemical system, a reaction that increases energy and lowers entropy will not occur spontaneously. In order to that to occur some other force must be in play. Please spend a few minutes googling Gibbs Free energy equation. That should give you enough background to follow the conversation.

I have taken physical chemistry so I understand what Gibbs free energy is. Dodgy

There is no "other force" besides the energy entering from the outside. Do you understand how photosynthesis works?
Your insistence on some imagined "driving force" is ludicrous.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
07-07-2016, 05:16 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(07-07-2016 05:06 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(07-07-2016 04:47 PM)u196533 Wrote:  I am not discussing basic thermodynamics. Yes. Energy added to an open system can lower it's entropy. However in a chemical system, a reaction that increases energy and lowers entropy will not occur spontaneously. In order to that to occur some other force must be in play. Please spend a few minutes googling Gibbs Free energy equation. That should give you enough background to follow the conversation.

I have taken physical chemistry so I understand what Gibbs free energy is. Dodgy

There is no "other force" besides the energy entering from the outside. Do you understand how photosynthesis works?
Your insistence on some imagined "driving force" is ludicrous.

Photosynthesis is far too complex to be part of abiogenesis. It could not have been available to the early primitive life forms described by abiogenesis.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2016, 05:53 PM (This post was last modified: 07-07-2016 05:57 PM by Chas.)
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(07-07-2016 05:16 PM)u196533 Wrote:  
(07-07-2016 05:06 PM)Chas Wrote:  I have taken physical chemistry so I understand what Gibbs free energy is. Dodgy

There is no "other force" besides the energy entering from the outside. Do you understand how photosynthesis works?
Your insistence on some imagined "driving force" is ludicrous.

Photosynthesis is far too complex to be part of abiogenesis.

You have made a claim - now provide evidence.
A single bacterium can be powered by it. It powered by light. No other "driving force".

Quote:It could not have been available to the early primitive life forms described by abiogenesis.

It is but one example that refutes your silly contention of a "driving force".

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2016, 06:09 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(07-07-2016 05:00 PM)u196533 Wrote:  
(06-07-2016 02:02 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You can't possibly be serious ? YOU have been saying all along in this thread that "life this and life that" in terms of what it requires and does. And NOW, we find you can't even tell us what it is ? OMG. You are a fake.


Yes it can, and yes it has. DNA. Evolved systems employ DNA. You have NO understanding of Biochemistry.
DNA encodes for structures, behaviors, memories, reflexes, instinctual behaviors, etc etc. You need to take Biology 101, and not from a fool creationist.

And BTW, "appeal to authority" is a fallacy and invalid ONLY if the "authority" is in some other field, than the one in question. You say everything you can't answer is "strawman". LOL.
(I get you people like to pretend to be "logical" and pretend to know about Logic).
In fact Szostack is one of the leading authorities IN THIS FIELD in the world, so an appeal to what he knows and says, is perfectly legitimate, (as opposed to you, you who are a total amateur), and know next to nothing about Biology and Biochemistry.

Early primitive life forms did not have DNA per the story of abiogenesis. Szostack theorized RNA not DNA. I think he would acknowledge that the ideas in his video are no longer valid. If you are going to appeal to an authority, get the latest and greatest.
Once again, Do you even read and understand the garbage you post?

Speaking of "garbage" .... still waiting for you to tell us exactly how molecules and atoms work differently in living systems. You said you had better higher level videos. Let's see them, now. You have debunked NOT one SPECIFIC thing Szostack said.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2016, 06:13 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(07-07-2016 05:16 PM)u196533 Wrote:  Photosynthesis is far too complex to be part of abiogenesis. It could not have been available to the early primitive life forms described by abiogenesis.

Says who? You? And what might your qualifications be?

"They think, therefore I am" - god
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2016, 06:40 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(07-07-2016 06:13 PM)TechnoMonkey Wrote:  
(07-07-2016 05:16 PM)u196533 Wrote:  Photosynthesis is far too complex to be part of abiogenesis. It could not have been available to the early primitive life forms described by abiogenesis.

Says who? You? And what might your qualifications be?

"A wealth of evidence indicates that photosynthesis is an ancient process that originated not long after the origin of life " http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/154/2/434.full


Just spend 2 minutes googling and you'll find a boatload of evidence. Fo people who believe in natural aboigenesis, you sure don't know much about it. As a great philosopher once said, "When you belive in things you don't understand you suffer. Superstition aint the way"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2016, 06:42 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(07-07-2016 05:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(07-07-2016 05:16 PM)u196533 Wrote:  Photosynthesis is far too complex to be part of abiogenesis.

You have made a claim - now provide evidence.
A single bacterium can be powered by it. It powered by light. No other "driving force".

Quote:It could not have been available to the early primitive life forms described by abiogenesis.

It is but one example that refutes your silly contention of a "driving force".

"A wealth of evidence indicates that photosynthesis is an ancient process that originated not long after the origin of life " http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/154/2/434.full

Spend 2 minutes googling and you'll get a lot more evidence. It came after abiogenesis.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2016, 06:43 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(07-07-2016 06:40 PM)u196533 Wrote:  
(07-07-2016 06:13 PM)TechnoMonkey Wrote:  Says who? You? And what might your qualifications be?

"A wealth of evidence indicates that photosynthesis is an ancient process that originated not long after the origin of life " http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/154/2/434.full


Just spend 2 minutes googling and you'll find a boatload of evidence. Fo people who believe in natural aboigenesis, you sure don't know much about it. As a great philosopher once said, "When you belive in things you don't understand you suffer. Superstition aint the way"

Your point? Photosynthesis is simple enough to have evolved very early.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2016, 06:48 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(07-07-2016 06:09 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(07-07-2016 05:00 PM)u196533 Wrote:  Early primitive life forms did not have DNA per the story of abiogenesis. Szostack theorized RNA not DNA. I think he would acknowledge that the ideas in his video are no longer valid. If you are going to appeal to an authority, get the latest and greatest.
Once again, Do you even read and understand the garbage you post?

Speaking of "garbage" .... still waiting for you to tell us exactly how molecules and atoms work differently in living systems. You said you had better higher level videos. Let's see them, now. You have debunked NOT one SPECIFIC thing Szostack said.

Since you don't read your own posts, I should not be surprised you don't read mine.

He proposed RNA in a permeable membrane evolved closely to a geothermal vents that could be cold and hot.
RNA cannot withstand the high temperatures of a geothermal vent as suggested.
RNA is very unstable. It uses ribose vs deoxyribose so it wants to react with water. It has to be shielded from water so the permeable membranes suggested won’t work.

He also proposes that the cell evolved over time from something simple to what we see today. However, all modern cell structures are remarkably similar within all species. There is no evidence that there has been evolution within a cell.

That debunks 3 specific things.

"exactly how molecules and atoms work differently in living systems"
I have described this close to 10 times. Living things extract energy from the environment in order to lower energy. That is a violation of the basic drive of chemistry (lower energy and increase entropy) and has never been observed in a non-living chemical system.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2016, 06:50 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(07-07-2016 06:43 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(07-07-2016 06:40 PM)u196533 Wrote:  "A wealth of evidence indicates that photosynthesis is an ancient process that originated not long after the origin of life " http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/154/2/434.full


Just spend 2 minutes googling and you'll find a boatload of evidence. Fo people who believe in natural aboigenesis, you sure don't know much about it. As a great philosopher once said, "When you belive in things you don't understand you suffer. Superstition aint the way"

Your point? Photosynthesis is simple enough to have evolved very early.

My entire argument has been about abiogenesis. If photosynthesis was not available to pre-biotic or very early primitive life forms, it could not explain self preservation in those simple chemical systems.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: