real life wrote:rosborne979 wrote:real life wrote:However, even an old Earth in the range that you postulate does not give sufficient time for the generation of life from raw chemicals to complex organisms.
DNA came before cells...... And before DNA there were simpler replicative molecules.
Whether you postulate DNA first and then cells, or the cell first then DNA you have huge problems.
First, a molecule as large and complex as DNA is unlikely to have developed and remained intact without the protection of the cell membrane and the support of the rest of the cell.
Viral DNA isn't large or complex. You also forget that not all organisms have DNA as their genetic material, but also RNA, which can also serve as a "protein".
Quote:If DNA developed first, before the cell, how did the DNA contain the correct code for a cell and sub-cellular structures that had never yet existed[/u]? Where did the information come from?
What? Obviously the DNA didn't code for cell and sub-cellular structures right away. Must have taken ages.
Quote:Was it just luck that on the first try the DNA developed all[/u] of the instructions for a successful cell including the construction of complex, interdependent sub-cellular components, the feeding of the cell, waste disposal, protection for the cell including instructions for a semi-permeable membrane, and instructions for reproduction?
Maybe. Maybe it was God. Thing is, you can't say it was either way.
Quote:If the DNA didn't produce the instructions for all of these functions successfully on the first try, the likely result would be death and the end of the cellular line. Did the DNA survive this demise to 'try again' until it succeeded?
Of course, not. Natural selection states that if DNA didn't survive this demise it won't be able to try again. DNA can take a large number of combinations. Not all of the DNA molecules produced would be the same. Some would have survived, those that didn't, wouldn't have. That is the point of natural selection: there are lots of variations and only the successful ones survive.
And it is possible that it might not have been DNA. It could have been lipids coming together first. Could have been RNA.
Quote:If a cell dies today, does the DNA just 'keep on truckin' ?
You know the answer to that. Apoptosis means the cell instantly shreds any DNA. Necrosis means that the cell bursts and the DNA is destroyed by the cell's natural enzymes going all over the place.
What is your point?
Your argument will only make sense if everything was the same. Yet everything couldn't possibly have been the same in the beginning, because everything was created "randomly".
Quote:How many times did a DNA molecule have to form spontaneously of its own accord until one was formed that DID have all of the instructions correct , so that it would insure the survival and successful replication of the cell?
Possibly a lot. Your point being? What, just because it seems impossible to you, a mere human, someone who cannot possibly understand everything in God's Earth, that means it's not right?
Quote:Do we see DNA generating spontaneously today?
Where'd you find the chemicals to do so? The chemicals that would enable that to happen obviously aren't here anymore. Obviously, the conditions that first made the DNA generate spontaneously are no longer present, so the answer is obviously no.
Quote:If simpler molecules that became part of the cell existed first, did the DNA contain the code for them? If not, when the cell reproduced are these molecules carrying on their own program independent of, and unaffected by the DNA?
By simpler molecules, what are you talking about? The lipids? No, the DNA wouldn't have coded for lipids. They still don't. DNA only codes for RNA and RNA codes for proteins. That's it. Nothing more.
RNA can code for RNA enzymes that can act just as well as protein enzymes.
So, got any positive evidence for ID lately? Or are you still working from argument through lack of proof?
