From: {$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk   
      
   On 17/07/2025 06:44, MarkE wrote:   
   >  From this recent EN article: https://evolutionnews.org/2025/07/new-   
   > article-from-james-tour-undermines-a-pillar-of-origin-of-life-theories/   
   >   
   > 'In comparison to a protein’s half-life, the rate of polypeptide chain   
   > elongation under prebiotic conditions is very long. Yang et al. (2025)   
   > identify numerous barriers to sustained polypeptide growth, including   
   > the formation of non-peptide linkages and cyclic structures, stringent   
   > environmental requirements, and unfavorable thermodynamics. Their   
   > analysis establishes that the rate of growth must be far smaller than   
   > one added amino acid per chain per day."   
   >   
   > "Even assuming one addition each day, synthesizing a protein of 200   
   > amino acids would require over six months. However, the growing chain   
   > would almost certainly degrade in a much shorter time span. The   
   > challenge is even greater for RNA, which has a significantly shorter   
   > half-life and encounters additional chemical and structural hurdles   
   > during formation."   
   >   
   > Paper here: https://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/biocosmos-2025-0010   
   >   
   > No doubt this paper will be critiqued and disputed, but it is I think an   
   > example of the ongoing scrutiny and developing fundamental challenges to   
   > OoL. My prediction is these will continue to emerge, weakening   
   > materialistic abiogenesis and strengthening ID's core claim.   
   >   
   >   
      
   Given that it is widely believed that proteins were a late addition to   
   the biological repertoire why do you accept the claim that this is a   
   challenge to spontaneous abiogenesis?   
      
   --   
   alias Ernest Major   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)