Scientists create self replicating RNA

[Athrond]

Self replicating evolving molecules developed. From sciencedaily

Not content to stop there, the researchers generated a variety of enzyme pairs with similar capabilities. They mixed 12 different cross-replicating pairs, together with all of their constituent subunits, and allowed them to compete in a molecular test of survival of the fittest. Most of the time the replicating enzymes would breed true, but on occasion an enzyme would make a mistake by binding one of the subunits from one of the other replicating enzymes. When such "mutations" occurred, the resulting recombinant enzymes also were capable of sustained replication, with the most fit replicators growing in number to dominate the mixture. "To me that's actually the biggest result," says Joyce.

The research shows that the system can sustain molecular information, a form of heritability, and give rise to variations of itself in a way akin to Darwinian evolution. So, says Lincoln, "What we have is non-living, but we've been able to show that it has some life-like properties, and that was extremely interesting."

Only a matter of time, ofcourse, but interesting non the less!

 

[grimbly]

Here's another short article on that work.
http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/01/replicatingrna.html

Very interesting but it's still just a RNA!!!

 

[Athrond]

Indeed - the enzumes evolve though and goes a long way of making a case for abiogenesis.

 

[Chalnoth]

I rather liked PZ's take on it:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/01/chemical_replicators.php

 

[ranmaonehalf]

More evidence of ID.

 

[Zone]

Hi Athrond,
As a geneticist, etc it's obvious (to me) that you (a Atheist / a believer of & in Darwin's delusions) do not even have a macroscopic far-less a microscopic hypothesis what you're thinking, believing &, or saying.... Therefore, pertaining to DNA mutation(s) I have a gift (below) for any student(s) of "Darwinian Theory" whom intellectually is obviously & absolutely determined to commit scholastic suicide via any means necessary unequivocally.... The image below is used only as hilarity.

​

Continuing my ("blueprint-codes") dissertation(s) wherein "DNA" (i.e., Deoxyribonucleic Acid) & "RNA" (i.e., Ribonucleic Acid) is concerned.​

Double Helix DNA

The four nucleotides found within "Deoxyribonucleic Acid" (i.e., DNA) are given one letter (A, G, C, T) abbreviations as shorthand for the four bases below:

• A → Adenine ​
• G → Guanine ​
• C → Cytosine ​
• T → Thymine ​

​

Note: The image illustration (above) delineates the atomic structure of the 50S Subunit from Haloarcula marismortui. Proteins are shown in blue & the two RNA strands in orange & yellow. The small patch of green in the center of the subunit is the active site.

​

Note: The image illustration (above) delineates the atomic structure of the 30S Subunit from Thermus thermophilus. Proteins are shown in blue & the single RNA strand in orange.

RNA (i.e., Ribonucleic Acid) similar to DNA (i.e., Deoxyribonucleic Acid) has already been designed & given (via The Lord my God את השילוש הקדוש) the amazing abilities & I listed just a few of the below:

• Messenger Ribonucleic Acid (i.e., mRNA) is a molecule of RNA encoding a chemical "blueprint" for a protein product.

• Transfer Ribonucleic Acid (i.e., tRNA) is a small RNA nucleotides that transfers a specific amino acid to a growing polypeptide chain at the ribosomal site of protein synthesis during translation.

• Transfer messenger Ribonucleic Acid (i.e., tmRNA) locates any damaged program(s) & repair itself via the, ribosomes build proteins from the genetic instructions held within messenger RNA.

• Ribosomal RNA (i.e., rRNA) is the central component of the ribosome, the protein manufacturing machinery of all living cells.

Impartially &, or unbiasedly speaking, standing upon the foundation(s) & under the banner(s) of empirical evidence(s) / proof(s) wherein The Lord my God (i.e., את השילוש הקדוש) & the "Anthropic Principle" (i.e., "Intelligent Design") has already proven evolution, Darwinism, etc to be 100% fallacies, incorrect, etc. But pertaining to "irreducible complexities" Darwin (obviously) was never a scientist, etc he was nothing more that a itinerant individual.

But, as a Christian, etc.... I say (in love) to any believer(s) &, or student(s) of "Darwinian Theory" whom desires to requisite a authentic truth, but have difficulties whereas (flawed) text book literature is concerned. To exponentially increase the individual(s) understanding, knowledge, etc I recommend to (impartially &, or unbiasedly) watch the below video.​

Intelligent Design - Unlocking The Mysteries Of Life​

 

[Hespera]

I hope nobody is going to start answering zone.

 

[Chalnoth]

I hope nobody is going to start answering zone.

As do I.

 

[TemperateSeaIsland]

I wonder if these things can also carry out other catalytic processes, something like peptide bond formation would be very very exciting.

 

[Zone]

Pertaining to (Atheists, evolutionists &, or) Darwin's idiotic, imbecilic, nonsensical explanation(s) of anything, it would be absolutely not a wise decision to publicly delineate the individual(s) intellectual ineptness level(s).

 

[Chalnoth]

I wonder if these things can also carry out other catalytic processes, something like peptide bond formation would be very very exciting.

Well, even if they can't, I'm sure if they were allowed to reproduce under the right environment for long enough, they'd soon be able to.

 

[Athrond]

Pertaining (Atheists, evolutionists &, or) to Darwin's idiotic, imbecilic, nonsensical explanation(s) of anything, it would be absolutely not a wise decision to publicly delineate the individual(s) intellectual ineptness level(s).

You write so wierdly Zone, that I can't follow your meaning. I'm usually quite adept at reading english - but your style is almost gibberish to me.

If you want me to understand what you are saying, please take care in how you construct your sentences. all that (s), &/, and general wierd comma use and ()s confuses me.

Thanks

Athrond

 

[savedbyjesus]

Thank you Zone for the video I enjoyed it very much. We live in very exciting times.


In Christ,

Paul

 

[Athrond]

Well it seemed more rational than most videos. atleast they weren't threathening with hell - which is a refreshing change

Aside from that - it's all the pre-debunked arguments again, strawman arguments of what is "darwinism", and logical fallacies gallore. How long have the "irreducible complexity" of the chemical rotary engine thingy been debunked now?

Why, if ID is so wonderfull, can't it come up with some solid arguments FOR itself?

 

[Chalnoth]

Thank you Zone for the video I enjoyed it very much. We live in very exciting times.

Ugh. That video is so wrong on so many levels. It's basically a propaganda film with little else but lies all through.

Let me put it plainly: there is no science whatsoever in Intelligent Design. Zero. Zip. Nada. They have no testable theories. They have no hypotheses. They have no experiments. All that they do have are claims that certain things could not have evolved, with no evidence but their own ignorance to support those claims.

And I'm sorry, but the mere fact that these creationists are ignorant of how these things did evolve does not mean that said evolution is impossible. Most importantly, every single example that they've trotted out as being "impossible" has been shown to have evolved. Every single one.

If you'd really like to see why this is so, go ahead and present one single example (preferably in another thread) that you think disproves evolution. I can guarantee you that I can very rapidly find the evidence that scientists have already discovered that show this is wrong.

 

[Hespera]

Ugh. That video is so wrong on so many levels. It's basically a propaganda film with little else but lies all through.

Let me put it plainly: there is no science whatsoever in Intelligent Design. Zero. Zip. Nada. They have no testable theories. They have no hypotheses. They have no experiments. All that they do have are claims that certain things could not have evolved, with no evidence but their own ignorance to support those claims.

And I'm sorry, but the mere fact that these creationists are ignorant of how these things did evolve does not mean that said evolution is impossible. Most importantly, every single example that they've trotted out as being "impossible" has been shown to have evolved. Every single one.


If you'd really like to see why this is so, go ahead and present one single example (preferably in another thread) that you think disproves evolution. I can guarantee you that I can very rapidly find the evidence that scientists have already discovered that show this is wrong.

That is what I would like to see is ONE (1) piece of data that would serve to falsify evolution.

No need for long videos, or arguments. Just present the data.

People used to think the meteor crater in Arizona was a volcano.

Geologists studied it, and provided reams of info on it being a typical impact crater. Nothing about it other than the approx shape fits with a volcano. Ok, pile of data here, zero there. Same with creationism. Zero data.

 

[Matthewj1985]

Ugh. That video is so wrong on so many levels. It's basically a propaganda film with little else but lies all through.

Let me put it plainly: there is no science whatsoever in Intelligent Design. Zero. Zip. Nada. They have no testable theories. They have no hypotheses. They have no experiments. All that they do have are claims that certain things could not have evolved, with no evidence but their own ignorance to support those claims.

And I'm sorry, but the mere fact that these creationists are ignorant of how these things did evolve does not mean that said evolution is impossible. Most importantly, every single example that they've trotted out as being "impossible" has been shown to have evolved. Every single one.

If you'd really like to see why this is so, go ahead and present one single example (preferably in another thread) that you think disproves evolution. I can guarantee you that I can very rapidly find the evidence that scientists have already discovered that show this is wrong.

Also, Behe appears in the first few seconds. Behe is one of us evil "Darwinist" and will flatly tell you so. Another thing to ask yourself is why has there never been a peer reviewed paper that points towards ID and away from evolution? I find it funny that evolution is all this big lie with no evidence, yet every single new discovary we make fits right into the evolutionary model we have.

 

[pgp_protector]

I hope nobody is going to start answering zone.

I wonder how many have him on Ignore now ?

 

[Matthewj1985]

That is what I would like to see is ONE (1) piece of data that would serve to falsify evolution.

No need for long videos, or arguments. Just present the data.

People used to think the meteor crater in Arizona was a volcano.

Geologists studied it, and provided reams of info on it being a typical impact crater. Nothing about it other than the approx shape fits with a volcano. Ok, pile of data here, zero there. Same with creationism. Zero data.

I imagine all the crazy elements found no where else but in and around the crater were also a dead give-a-way.

 

[Zone]

Thank you Zone for the video I enjoyed it very much. We live in very exciting times.


In Christ,

Paul

Hi savedbyjesus,
You're more than welcome & all priase, honor, glory, etc goes to The Lord our God (i.e., את השילוש הקדוש).