Quote:

You do have a point: they didnt succeed in creating all 21 amino acids.




Apparently there are 22 amino acids, and its possible that we'll discover more.

Quote:

Given that the first life forms may have been very different from modern cells, you have absolutely no way of knowing that they in fact had all these 21 amino acids.




Neither does anyone. No one has any way of telling for sure exactly how non-life could randomly spring into life. The idea is preposterous to anyone except those unwilling to accept the obvious. But! That's not really a very scientific point, mostly just my opinion.

Anyway, I like the parallel that compares biogenesis with Frakenstein. "The only thing missing is the deformed assistant."

Quote:

In fact, the idea that the very first lifeforms were cells is certainly wrong;




Well, the only credible alternative I've heard to a simple cell is just a strand of RNA. RNA is highly unstable. It will decay at the slightest addition of energy.

Quote:

the they were likely not even as complex as viruses.




Is it just a coincidence that virii require life to already exist in order to reproduce? Let's hope the first lifeform was more complex.

Quote:

Even assuming that all 21 amino acids were absolutely needed for any kind of life to arise, so what? The experiment only lasted a short while, whereas Earth had a millions of years.




Believe me, if they thought they could just wait longer to produce the rest of the amino acids, they would have done it by now.

Quote:

Therefore your conclusion that this experiment disproves abiogenesis is grossly false. Ask any biochemist and I guarentee they will tell you more or less the same thing.




That's because they're waiting the fulfillment of a future prophecy.

But seriously. Isn't it obvious from the conclusions that they failed! Let's say they had produced ALL of the necessary components. They still have the problem of the racemic mixture. I know you guys aren't chemists, so its unfair of me to use an argument like this and ask you to explain how the amino acids couldn't have been filtered, but I'm not trying to corner you. I'm just trying to tell you why I think these experiments prove that life can't form on its own.

Then if they form a basic molecule of DNA, there's the problem of decay. Any unprotected molecule of genetic material will decay very, very quickly. But you need the genetic material in order to form any kind of protective mechanism (like, say, a cell membrane).

Its another version of the chicken and egg problem. You need genetic material to create the protective layer, but you need the protective layer to protect the genetic material.

Quote:

The purpose of the Urey-Miller experiment was proving that complex amino acids could have formed in the early earth atmosphere just from water and carbon dioxide.




It did a good job at that.

Quote:

This was not a proof of the origin of life. It was just a final rebuttal of the creationist faith that information gain - complex structures coming out of simple structures - were "impossible".




Energy was added via the 'lighting bolts' in the spark chamber. After that point, amino acids can combine on their own via peptide bonds. However, if they could somehow randomly organize themselves into information, that information is highly unstable. Any addition of energy is going to break it down. You can't shoot a lightning bolt at RNA to make it become anything else, its just going to fall apart.

Last edited by Irish_Farmer; 06/27/06 18:00.

"The task force finds that...the unborn child is a whole human being from the moment of fertilization, that all abortions terminate the life of a human being, and that the unborn child is a separate human patient under the care of modern medicine."