Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
Miller proved that amino acids could form on their own. The author of the site then makes, as John Kerry would say "a colossal error in judgment" when they say that "proteins which emerged by chance formed themselves into cell membrane-like structures which 'somehow' came into existence." Amino Acids have things called side chains which determine various chemical properties about them, they will fit themselves into protein chains based on these side chains, not randomly.
Nothing new. Any half-way educated biology student knows that the Miller-Urey experiment was based on assumptions about the earth's atmosphere that were later shown to be false. Miller himself pioneered the refutation of his own experiment.
No one touts the Miller-Urey experiment anymore except for Creationists.
HRE I partially disagree, the Miller Urey experiment does show that some of the building blocks of life can come from chemical reactions. The problem comes when people (mainly creationist groups) take the experiment beyond itself and start making claims that scientists today assume the atmosphere that was assumed in the experiment, or that it didn't show a cell being formed, so its worthless, etc.
It's similar to the light/dark moth study. People try to stretch the experiment out then claim that it failed. They say that it doesn't prove macro evolution so its a failure, ignoring that it was never ment to prove macro evolution, and within its realm gives us valuable information.
Nothing new. Any half-way educated biology student knows that the Miller-Urey experiment was based on assumptions about the earth's atmosphere that were later shown to be false. Miller himself pioneered the refutation of his own experiment.
No one touts the Miller-Urey experiment anymore except for Creationists.
Then how come I read about it constantly in every junior high and high school science class? --True_Blue, the product of a public education
It does, and the M-U experiment has credibility in the fact that basic amino acids can form themselves.
Abiogenesis is quickly gaining credibility, especially with the experiments performed by Wachterhauser dealing with the origination of life and deap sea vents.
Because its a historical topic related to biology and evolution. What do they say about it in high school science class?
because to be wuite honest, high school education sucks. One of the first things that I was told on arriving at university was: "forget about all that stuff they taught you at school, because most of it is wring anyway" In this debate, forget about what high school education told you, and focus on the actual research being done. unless you fel like discussing the plum pudding, or solar system models of the atoms and so on
__________________ MSci MSc ARCS DIC PhD..... yes, I am bragging.
Linear Mode
