XPost: alt.atheism, alt.talk.creationism, alt.philosophy   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
   From: dale@dalekelly.org   
      
   On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 16:23:36 -0700 (PDT), nature bats last   
    wrote:   
      
   >On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 4:18:12 PM UTC-7, Dale wrote:   
   >> On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 15:17:06 -0700 (PDT), nature bats last   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >> >On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 2:12:08 PM UTC-7, Dale wrote:   
   >> >   
   >   
   >.> >.> correct me if I am wrong, but as far as evidence goes the only thing I   
   >.> >.> have heard is that amino acids can be made into DNA, not even   
   >.> >.> non-sentient one celled organisms   
   >> >   
   >.> >OK, I'll correct you; that's wrong: amino acids and DNA   
   >.> >are two entirely different classes of chemicals. There are   
   >> >no amino acids in DNA; there is no DNA in amino acids.   
   >>   
   >.> I didn't specify path   
   >   
   >There is no path -- they're two separate categories   
   >of chemicals. Neither is a part of the other.   
      
      
   I heard amino acid sequences can make up proteins, proteins can makeup   
   RNA/DNA?   
      
      
   >   
   >Seth   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> >   
   >> >>   
   >> >> also, this is not actually abiogenesis because it involves the   
   >> >> biogenesis of the scientist   
   >> >>   
   >> >   
   >> >.> another point, is that all ingredients, the periodic table, etc.,   
   >> >.> could have come from biogeneis   
   >> >   
   >> >Beg pardon?  Life does not create the chemical elements.   
   >> >Those existed before life, and a number of them were necessary   
   >> >for life to exist.   
   >>   
   >> repeatable? what if life always existed and there was no genesis?   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> >   
   >> >   
   >> >> and an assumption of abiogenesis is   
   >> >> made in current experiments   
   >> >>   
   >> >> such an assumption would involve the need for statistics and   
   >> >> probabilities   
   >> >>   
   >> >   
   >> >.> life coming from life, biogenesis, has some much more evidence   
   >> >   
   >> >True...but if you want to generalize that to something like   
   >> >"Life always and only comes from life", then you're saying the   
   >> >universe is eternal.  Among other things.   
   >> >   
   >>   
   >> if I had to make a guess ...   
   >>   
   >> >   
   >> >.> you can't remove the living scientist from the experimental equation,   
   >> >.> even if the scientist makes an automatic observer and goes away and   
   >> >.> come back, the scientist still made the observer   
   >> >   
   >> >I really don't think that collapse of the wave function has   
   >> >much relevance here.   
   >>   
   >> there is no other explanation, Many Worlds and Transactional fail   
   >> statistics   
   >>   
   >> >   
   >> >   
   >> >Seth   
   >> >   
   >> >   
   >> >> --   
   >> >> Dale   
   >> >> http://www.dalekelly.org   
   >> --   
   >> Dale   
   >> http://www.dalekelly.org   
   --   
   Dale   
   http://www.dalekelly.org   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)