-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Amoeba
- Thread starter Jon
- Start date
"Create?" In what sense do you mean this?
They can culture amoeba and cause their reproduction, but no one can simply assemble the right chemical components into an amoeba.
They can culture amoeba and cause their reproduction, but no one can simply assemble the right chemical components into an amoeba.
Upvote
0
Late_Cretaceous
<font color="#880000" ></font&g
Here is a recent press release about an viable organism being synthesized from ordinary chemicals in the lab. Viruses, in this case the polio virus, are not free living - but they are life nevertheless.
PRESS RELEASE
Researchers in New York have created infectious polioviruses from ordinary, inert chemicals they obtained from a scientific mail-order house, marking the first time a functional virus has been made from scratch and raising a host of new scientific and ethical concerns.
The Stony Brook team started with nothing more than a written copy of the virus's RNA code, a string of 7,741 molecular "letters" that tell the virus how to function.
The first task was to construct a strand of RNA that reflected that written blueprint. But since RNA is relatively unstable in the laboratory, the team first made a DNA version of the virus's code by ordering customized pieces of DNA from an Iowa-based company that sells made-to-order snippets of genetic material. The team assembled the molecules into a DNA equivalent of the full-length polio genome, then used an enzyme that turns DNA into RNA to make a working copy of the poliovirus's natural RNA core.
When placed in a tube filled with appropriate chemicals and enzymes, those pieces of RNA did what they do in nature: They copied themselves and started producing proteins, including protein shells into which newly made pieces of RNA were spontaneously packaged.
The result was countless functional polioviruses.
"This shows it's now possible to go from data printed on a piece of paper or stored in a computer and, without the organism itself. . . . reconstruct a life form," said John La Montagne, deputy director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health. 1
PRESS RELEASE
Researchers in New York have created infectious polioviruses from ordinary, inert chemicals they obtained from a scientific mail-order house, marking the first time a functional virus has been made from scratch and raising a host of new scientific and ethical concerns.
The Stony Brook team started with nothing more than a written copy of the virus's RNA code, a string of 7,741 molecular "letters" that tell the virus how to function.
The first task was to construct a strand of RNA that reflected that written blueprint. But since RNA is relatively unstable in the laboratory, the team first made a DNA version of the virus's code by ordering customized pieces of DNA from an Iowa-based company that sells made-to-order snippets of genetic material. The team assembled the molecules into a DNA equivalent of the full-length polio genome, then used an enzyme that turns DNA into RNA to make a working copy of the poliovirus's natural RNA core.
When placed in a tube filled with appropriate chemicals and enzymes, those pieces of RNA did what they do in nature: They copied themselves and started producing proteins, including protein shells into which newly made pieces of RNA were spontaneously packaged.
The result was countless functional polioviruses.
"This shows it's now possible to go from data printed on a piece of paper or stored in a computer and, without the organism itself. . . . reconstruct a life form," said John La Montagne, deputy director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health. 1
Upvote
0
Late_Cretaceous
<font color="#880000" ></font&g
The scary thing is that - even if a disease like smallpox were truely eradicated, it is possible to recreate it.
Upvote
0
Late_Cretaceous
<font color="#880000" ></font&g
Mycoplasma genitalium is the "simplest" organism - capable of reproducing on thier own- known. In otherwords it has the shortest genome. Unlike viruses - which hijack the machinery of a cell because they lack the necessary structures, mycoplasms have the essencial structures are capable of reproducing on thier own. Scientists are currently working on generating an artificial life form based on the Mycoplasma genitalium's genome.
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
From non-living chemicals? No. However, scientists have made more primitive cells -- called protocells -- from amino acids
http://www.siu.edu/~protocell/
http://www.theharbinger.org/articles/rel_sci/fox.html
Upvote
0
How can scientist say that they know how an amoeba got here if they don't even know how to make an amoeba?
(just wondering.....)
Upvote
0
Melchior
Active Member
Amoeba are very complex cells even more complex then most of the cells in your body. With that in mind, about the time we are able to create amoeba's from scratch, we will be able to create totally functioning multicelled animals from scratch, maybe even humans.
Although we curently lack the technology and knowledge to create a cell from scratch, it is well known what needs to be done to reach that state. We know the kind of nano-technology that needs to be created, as well as a better understanding of how DNA is read, processed, and exceuted in cells to perform tasks and replicate.
So even though the answer is that we can't do it right now, we will be able to in the future. And as your young, it may even be in your lifetime.
Don't make the mistake of fitting God into the gaps of human knowledge and ability as those gaps close and have been closing on deists for 100s of years.
Upvote
0
Quath
Senior Member
They don't know how amoeba got here, but they do have self-consistent theories that can explain how they did come into being that fit with observable data.
Also, you don't have to know how to make something to know how it came into being. For example, you could go to Gateway Computers and see them make a computer. You know people and machines made them even though you don't know how to make one yourself.
Scott (Quath)
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
What does that have to do with anything? We can't make a galaxy, either, but that doesn't stop us from knowing how galaxies got here.
The amoeba, like us, is the product of 3.8 billion years of evolution. And yes, we know natural selection can make things. Since you like computer programming, maybe you'd like this paper:
AI Samuel, Some studies on machine learning using the game of checkers. IBM Journal of Research Development, 3: 211-219, 1964. Reprinted in EA Feigenbaum and J Feldman, Computers and Thought, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964 pp 71-105.
In this study Samuel had Darwinian selection write a program to play checkers. The program got so good that it eventually beat the human checkers champ. When Samuel went back to examine the code, he found huge stretches of it that he had no idea what it did! So, Samuel couldn't make that program, but he knew Darwinian selection did.
We have seen that, when amino acids are dry heated or heated at hydrothermal vents, they form proteins. When water is added or in cooler water outside the vents, the proteins spontaneously make cells.
As Melchior explains, don't try to jam God into gaps in human knowledge. As the gaps close, God inevitably gets squeezed out. There are other ways to view God's interaction with nature that don't involve gaps.
Upvote
0
DNAunion: No, you've merely imagined that.
If you disagree, then please provide material that supports your assertion, along with the full reference so that we can check up on you.
Upvote
0
I was just wondering how they could know what the probability of getting an amoeba is without knowing how to make one...
Upvote
0
that would be more like creationism, wouldn't it? if you can't create it, it didn't exist?
can you create a star and observe it from life to death? why not? oh, probably because the life span of a star is a billion years or so. does that mean any theory we create is automatically wrong? or can we look at what we already have, what is observable within a person's lifetime, and draw conclusions with what is observed?
can you create a star and observe it from life to death? why not? oh, probably because the life span of a star is a billion years or so. does that mean any theory we create is automatically wrong? or can we look at what we already have, what is observable within a person's lifetime, and draw conclusions with what is observed?
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
6. G Vogel, A sulfurous start for protein synthesis? Science 281:627-628, Jul. 31, 1998. Protein synthesis catalyzed by sulfer and nickel compounds at volcanic vents. Primary article is C Huber and G Wachtershauser, Peptides by activation of amino acids with CO on (ni4Fe)S surfaces: implications for the origin of life. Science 281: 670-671, Jul.31, 1998.
16. Imai, E., Honda, H., Hatori, K., Brack, A., Matsuno, K. (1999). Elongation of Oligopeptides in a simulated submarine hydrothermal system. Science283: 831-833.
J Biochem (Tokyo) 1985 May;97(5):1521-4 Thermophilic microspheres of peptide-like polymers and silicates formed at 250 degrees C. Yanagawa, H., Kojima, K.
Orig Life Evol Biosph 1988;18(3):179-207 Construction of protocellular structures under simulated primitive earth conditions. Yanagawa, H., Ogawa, Y., Kojima, K., Ito, M.
Upvote
0
DNAunion: Oops, I think you just made a big mistake.
I happen to be somewhat familiar with the first two articles you site, from Science, and off the top of my head, neither of them shows what you claim they do: that when amino acids are ... heated at hydrothermal vents, they form proteins.
Now, instead of just references - which are virtually useless by themselves - care to give us the exact statements from those two articles that you claim support your position?
PS: In case you forgot, I originally asked not just for references, but for MATERIAL and references. So, where's the beef?
Upvote
0
If it takes scientist who spend years trying to work out simple life forms with high tech and expensive equipment and years of knowledge. How come life come on this planet came by itself without any knowledge or lab or even any motivation?
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
From the first paper: "amino acids were converted into their peptides by use of coprecipitated<SUP> </SUP>(Ni,Fe)S and CO in conjunction with H<SUB>2</SUB>S (or CH<SUB>3</SUB>SH) as a catalyst<SUP> </SUP>and condensation agent at 100°C and pH 7 to 10 under anaerobic,<SUP> </SUP>aqueous conditions. These results demonstrate that amino acids<SUP> </SUP>can be activated under geochemically relevant conditions."
"Peptides were formed from phenylalanine (F), tyrosine (Y), and glycine (G). In each run 500 µmol of the amino acid were reacted<SUP> </SUP>in a slurry of 1 mmol of FeS and 1 mmol of NiS in 10 ml of water<SUP> </SUP>with 4 mmol of CO gas (1 bar) in the presence of 500 umol of hydrogen<SUP> </SUP>sulfide or methanethiol at 100°C and pH 7 to 10.<SUP> </SUP>In some of the runs 500 µmol of Na<SUB>2</SUB>HPO<SUB>4</SUB> were added. After 1, 2,<SUP> </SUP>or 4 days, we determined the yield of the peptides and the pH<SUP> </SUP>in the water phase ... In runs 13 and 14 and 19 to 22, about 3 nmol of tripeptides<SUP> </SUP>(Y-Y-Y) were detected after 1 and 4 days. "
BTW, I suspect you will try to play the game of "peptide" vs "protein". They are synonymous with peptide simply being reserved for shorter proteins.
Second paper: "When fluid containing<SUP> </SUP>glycine repeatedly circulated through the hot and cold regions<SUP> </SUP>in the reactor, oligopeptides were made from glycine. When divalent<SUP> </SUP>ions (such as copper ions) were added under acidic conditions,<SUP> </SUP>oligoglycine was elongated up to hexaglycine.<SUP> "</SUP>
<SUP>"</SUP>In our flow reactor (Fig. 1) a high-temperature<SUP> </SUP>high-pressure fluid was injected into a low-temperature chamber<SUP> </SUP>that was maintained at about the same high pressure as the fluid.<SUP> </SUP>The fluid circulated in a closed manner in the system with a fixed<SUP> </SUP>turnover rate. The fluid was heated and compressed in one part<SUP> </SUP>of the circuit; the rest of the chamber was cooled externally.<SUP> </SUP>Samples of the fluid were repeatedly taken from the low-temperature<SUP> </SUP>chamber for measurement at a given time interval, and the fluid<SUP> </SUP>in the low-temperature chamber was then returned into the high-temperature<SUP> </SUP>high-pressure fluid."
"The results<SUP> </SUP>of interest were obtained for temperatures ranging roughly between<SUP> </SUP>200° and 250°C. ... A high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) profile of the<SUP> </SUP>products revealed that, with time, at least three different oligomers<SUP> </SUP>formed: diketopiperazine and the dimer and trimer of glycine ... When 10 mM CuCl<SUB>2</SUB> was added to the 100 mM glycine solution and the pH was adjusted to 2.5 by HCl at room temperature, higher<SUP> </SUP>oligomers were obtained (Fig. 3) ... A HPLC profile identified at least four different oligomers:<SUP> </SUP>diketopiperazine, diglycine, tetraglycine, and hexaglycine "
The time course was only 30 minutes. So imagine cycling for days or weeks.
"The fact that di- and triglycine were synthesized with no detectable amount of tetraglycine in pure water suggests that tetraglycine<SUP> </SUP>molecules could be rapidly hydrolyzed into two molecules of diglycine.<SUP> </SUP>Two molecules of diglycine could then yield two more molecules<SUP> </SUP>of triglycine when they reentered the reaction region in the high-pressure<SUP> </SUP>high-temperature chamber. The initial increment of the yields<SUP> </SUP>of triglycine also suggests that monomeric glycine could aminolyse<SUP> </SUP>diketopiperazine to form triglycine"
"The presence of copper ions seems to have prevented the hydrolysis of tetraglycine. Tetraglycine therefore reentered the reaction<SUP> </SUP>region and further reacted with a glycine, producing a diglycine,<SUP> </SUP>a triglycine, or a diketopiperazine molecule when the amount of<SUP> </SUP>tetraglycine becomes sufficient. The presence of even-numbered<SUP> </SUP>oligomers up to hexaglycine and the absence of detectable amounts<SUP> </SUP>of both tri- and pentaglycine suggest that the chain elongation<SUP> </SUP>proceeds mainly by aminolysis of diketopiperazine.<SUP> "</SUP>
<SUP>"</SUP>Stepwise synthesis of<SUP> </SUP>oligoglycine in our flow reactor seems to suggest that submarine<SUP> </SUP>hydrothermal vents in the Archean ocean could have readily facilitated<SUP> </SUP>the multiplicative oligomerization of these monomers, even in<SUP> </SUP>the absence of ribosomes or ribozymes.<SUP> "</SUP>
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
The lab equipment and knowlegdge comes from 1) trying to figure out what the chemistry was and 2) trying to duplicate it.
Obviously the chemistry works whether we know how it does or not.
Think of it this way: it took some pretty fancy equipment and years of training and knowledge to get atoms to spit or fuse. Yet they do so quite well in nature all the time. Does any creationist claim that they need "knowledge" or "motivation"? Why not? Why reserve that caveat only to chemistry of life?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
