3
   

In Science We Trust: Evolution Creates Life

 
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Feb, 2018 12:38 pm
@edgarblythe,
Very Happy Smile Laughing Razz Embarrassed Drunk Mr. Green
0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Feb, 2018 07:18 pm
@edgarblythe,
Aren't you at all shocked, Edgar, at how a scientist can totally avoid reality, outright deny science and the truth?

Everyone knows that Arab "hijackers" had no way, zero chance to have put US government/military nanothermite in the twin towers, and ESPECIALLY WTC7!!!

Do you think that there are a lot of Americans who are comfortable with their governments murdering their own citizens?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Feb, 2018 10:19 pm
@oristarA,
Some of the most recent findings about abiogenesis revolve around "Tubules" found in 4.2 By 'banded iron" Formations (Not Mesabi). Ince iron predates the task of "over concentrated Oxygen), Its early "life-like" propwrties are lately of interest.
"Fossil" iron tubules have three proprties that make it the latest "flavor" for abiogenesis
1.The tubeules show photic direction for an entire formational boundary

2The tubules xhibit spiral structure that could serve as a biotic "cast" for severl spiral feqtures in molecules within more complex organim

3The tubules, by exhibiting brnching, seem to indicate growth and metabolim

4All the iwotopic ratios of Carbon within the iron tubule are C12>>C13.

Look like life ay not be s Unique as weve been trying to make it. Abiogenesis may have happened quickly .Banded irons occur between 4.2 to 2.7 BILLION years back (come next saturday) .

Organic Evolution begins after life first appears. Abiogenesis seems to hve occured severl ways and maybe margulis was correct that very early life may have been variable, commensal and sequentially integrated. . Go back to your circular "Common ancestry" cladogram (It was the wheel with which ) you started this thread ).

They are attempting to discover Lambda values (geologic ages for the participants). Most of the Lambda values will be studied from the non-coding sections of the genomes, since these segments have upper limits to their population variability.

Recent research seems to be clustering away from concentrations on "pre biotic chemical evolution" to an analogy more about a planetray junkyard in which "junk parts"(pre biotic blobs,, layers, and tubules) fester in a water and ammonia soup base ,and in which pieces of the junk just happens to fit together"
In that , I see my pet statement of "dont forget panspermia " as something that needs more careful analysis before always its dismissed.


camlok
 
  2  
Reply Tue 13 Feb, 2018 02:32 pm
@farmerman,
Just a few posts before this one, you, farmerman said, "Im done with you" to Ori. What gives? You are all over the map.

0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/10/2018 at 11:01:21