From: me22over7@gmail.com   
      
   On 18/07/2025 12:48 am, RonO wrote:   
   > On 7/17/2025 12:44 AM, 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.   
   >>   
   >>   
   > It is only an example of the continuation of Biblical creationist's   
   > denial of the fact that nature is not Biblical.   
   >   
   > Tour really doesn't care if some god was responsible for making these   
   > initial polymers (if they ever needed to exist because no one knows what   
   > the first molecular self replicators were).  That god is not the god   
   > described in the Bible.  Like you, he only wants to deny reality.   
   >   
   > Has anyone proposed that the origin of life depends on condensation   
   > polymerization in solution?   
      
   Yes. You know...primordial soup, warm little pond, early ocean,   
   hydrothermal vents, etc?   
      
   RNA likely wasn't what the first self   
   > replicators were made of.  The RNA world would have come after there   
   > were simple molecular self replicators.  Everything that I recall has   
   > been looking for catalytic surfaces that could be mineral or part   
   > mineral to make macromolecules.  I do not think that anyone ever wanted   
   > to depend on amino acids or nucleotides combining in solution.  Yes, the   
   > reaction will spontaneously occur, but no one was depending on it to   
   > happen to form long polymers.  If the long polymers were self   
   > replicators they would have the catalytic ability to make more long   
   > polymers.  They would not be subject to the Tour's time limit, and if   
   > the first ploymers were formed by the catalytic activity of clay or   
   > other mineral surfaces they would not be subject to Tour's time limit.   
   >   
   > Google definition of catalysis:   
   > Catalysis is the process of increasing the rate of a chemical reaction   
   > by adding a substance called a catalyst, which itself is not consumed in   
   > the reaction. Catalysts work by providing an alternative reaction   
   > pathway with a lower activation energy, making it easier for the   
   > reaction to proceed. Catalysis is crucial in many industrial processes,   
   > as well as in biological systems like the human body.   
   >   
   > Tour knows that there never was any ID creation science, and he knows   
   > that what he is doing is not support for his religious beliefs.  It is   
   > only denial for the sake of denial.   
   >   
   > You do owe, at least, me the explanation that I requested after   
   > answering all your denial posts.   
      
   I do appreciate your consistent engagement, and would like to be as   
   upfront as I can, so here you are:   
      
   >   
   > REPOST:   
   > MarkE, you likely owe everyone a straight forward statement on how you   
   > intend to integrate the god that would have been responsible for setting   
   > chirality into the initial lifeforms over 3 billion years ago into your   
   > Biblical beliefs.  Such a god would not be the god described in the   
   > Bible, so what good would filling that gap with a god do for you?  Gap   
   > denial was all that the ID perps ever had, and the only thing that   
   > creationists like Tour can continue with.  Isn't it senseless to keep   
   > doing that at this time?  Tour even admits that he has known that ID has   
   > always been a scam, and that he doesn't know how to do any ID science,   
   > so there obviously had never been any ID science to sell to creationist   
   > rubes.   
   >   
   > Most of the other IDiots quit supporting the gap denial because they had   
   > their faces rubbed in the fact that the god that filled the Top Six gaps   
   > is not the Biblical god that they want to worship.  Bill would rather   
   > lie about never supporting the creationist ID scam rather than deal with   
   > the Top Six in a straight forward and honest manner.  Bill is the IDiot   
   > that once claimed that he knew some real ID scientists, that had the   
   > real ID science, but he wouldn't tell us who they were, nor what ID   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)