All of the bases in DNA and RNA have now been found in meteorites; life’s precursors came from space

[Pro Plyd]

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/all-of-the-bases-in-dna-and-rna-have-now-been-found-in-meteorites

More of the ingredients for life have been found in meteorites.

Space rocks that fell to Earth within the last century contain the five
bases that
store information in DNA and RNA, scientists report April 26 in Nature
Communications.

These “nucleobases” — adenine, guanine, cytosine, thymine and uracil —
combine with sugars and phosphates to make up the genetic code of all life on
Earth. Whether these basic ingredients for life first came from space or
instead
formed in a warm soup of earthly chemistry is still not known (SN: 9/24/20).
But the discovery adds to evidence that suggests life’s precursors originally
came from space, the researchers say.

Scientists have detected bits of adenine, guanine and other organic compounds
in meteorites since the 1960s (SN: 8/10/11, SN: 12/4/20). Researchers have
also
seen hints of uracil, but cytosine and thymine remained elusive, until now.

“We’ve completed the set of all the bases found in DNA and RNA and life on
Earth, and they’re present in meteorites,” says astrochemist Daniel Glavin of
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md.
...

[jillery]

On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 20:55:26 -0600, Pro Plyd <inv...@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

Nucleotides in meteorites show that such biotic molecules can be
formed abiotically, which disproves the idea that the chemistry of
life requires some magical life force. However, none of these
molecules are capable of reproducing themselves, and so would not have
been responsible for starting life on Earth. Instead, it's more
likely that an analogous but earthbound process created these
molecules, perhaps abiotically, which then became involved in
abiogenesis.

--
You're entitled to your own opinions.
You're not entitled to your own facts.

[Dale]

On 4/28/2022 10:55 PM, Pro Plyd wrote:
> ... These “nucleobases” — adenine, guanine, cytosine, thymine and uracil —

> combine with sugars and phosphates to make up the genetic code of all

> life on Earth ...

has this "combine" ever been observed?

of what I have studied a primordial soup test has never succeeded

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_soup

since all things are part of "The Whole"

there is no kind of creation, miracles, and magic

all things are just an "experience"


--
Mystery? -> https://www.dalekelly.org/

[Glenn]

No it does not. It shows only that these molecules exist on meteorites.

>which disproves the idea that the chemistry of
> life requires some magical life force.

No, that disproves nothing.

>However, none of these
> molecules are capable of reproducing themselves, and so would not have
> been responsible for starting life on Earth.

No it does not, nor is it known or demonstrated by the discovery of their existence on meteorites that such molecules are not capable of reproducing themselves.

>Instead, it's more
> likely that an analogous but earthbound process created these
> molecules, perhaps abiotically, which then became involved in
> abiogenesis.
>

No, you have nothing to base such a likelihood on.

But keep up the good work of making evolution and science look like a farce.

[jillery]

Neither you nor your cite specifies what is a primordial soup "test",
so it's unsurprising that you think it has never succeeded.

[jillery]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 12:05:03 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
wrote:

I realize this might be beyond your abilities, but consider that those
doing the collection and analysis accounted for Earthly contamination.

>>which disproves the idea that the chemistry of
>> life requires some magical life force.
>No, that disproves nothing.

Your reply above disproves you have any intention of posting anything
substantive.

>>However, none of these
>> molecules are capable of reproducing themselves, and so would not have
>> been responsible for starting life on Earth.
>No it does not, nor is it known or demonstrated by the discovery of their existence on meteorites that such molecules are not capable of reproducing themselves.

You demand proof of a negative. OTOH nucleotides are well understood,
as are the mechanisms of self-reproduction.

>>Instead, it's more
>> likely that an analogous but earthbound process created these
>> molecules, perhaps abiotically, which then became involved in
>> abiogenesis.
>>
>No, you have nothing to base such a likelihood on.

So you think it's more likely these nucleotides reproduced themselves?
If so, you have nothing to base such a positive claim on. If not,
your comment above is just more of your mindless noise.

>But keep up the good work of making evolution and science look like a farce.

Yeah, I get that a lot from willfully stupid trolls.

[Dale]

On 4/29/2022 6:12 PM, jillery wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 13:19:52 -0400, Dale <da...@dalekelly.org> wrote:
>
>> On 4/28/2022 10:55 PM, Pro Plyd wrote:
>>> ... These “nucleobases” — adenine, guanine, cytosine, thymine and uracil —
>>> combine with sugars and phosphates to make up the genetic code of all
>>> life on Earth ...
>>
>> has this "combine" ever been observed?
>>
>> of what I have studied a primordial soup test has never succeeded
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_soup
>>
>> since all things are part of "The Whole"
>>
>> there is no kind of creation, miracles, and magic
>>
>> all things are just an "experience"
>
>
> Neither you nor your cite specifies what is a primordial soup "test",
> so it's unsurprising that you think it has never succeeded.
>

said to be an environment and RNA that forms DNA

[jillery]

And what environment is that? You *still* don't say. You can't
"test" for an environment when you have no idea what is that
environment.

[Dale]

without mitochondrial-DNA around DNA won't last long?

[broger...@gmail.com]

There was prokaryotic life on earth for more than a billion years before the first eukaryotes (ie the first cells with mitochondria) evolved. So without mitochondrial DNA around, DNA lasted more than a billion years.

[jillery]

Non-sequiturs "R" Dale. Mitochondrial-DNA is DNA, and doesn't inform
"primordial soup" any more than does "Campbells".

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Can you speculate as to why Dale would think that mitochondrial DNA is
necessary for DNA to survive? Not all organisms have mitochondria at
all, and their DNA survives without problems.

--
Athel -- French and British, living mainly in England until 1987.

[Bob Casanova]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 13:19:52 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Dale <da...@dalekelly.org>:

>On 4/28/2022 10:55 PM, Pro Plyd wrote:
>> ... These “nucleobases” — adenine, guanine, cytosine, thymine and uracil —
>> combine with sugars and phosphates to make up the genetic code of all
>> life on Earth ...
>
>has this "combine" ever been observed?
>

Is English not your native language? "Combine with", in the
above, means "are combined with". So yes, it has been
observed and measured. Also folded, stapled and mutilated.
(That last is a rather old and dated literary reference, so
don't bother asking about it, for Dale values of "asking".)

>
>of what I have studied a primordial soup test has never succeeded
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_soup
>
>since all things are part of "The Whole"
>
>there is no kind of creation, miracles, and magic
>
>all things are just an "experience"
--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

[daud....@gmail.com]

:D

[Glenn]

On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 6:11:01 PM UTC-7, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 13:19:52 -0400, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Dale <da...@dalekelly.org>:
> >On 4/28/2022 10:55 PM, Pro Plyd wrote:
> >> ... These “nucleobases” — adenine, guanine, cytosine, thymine and uracil —
> >> combine with sugars and phosphates to make up the genetic code of all
> >> life on Earth ...
> >
> >has this "combine" ever been observed?
> >
> Is English not your native language? "Combine with", in the
> above, means "are combined with".

Sorry, Webster, but no other factors are mentioned that would
validate that inference.

>So yes, it has been
> observed and measured.

Again, no. Life uses mind-boggling processes to create DNA, which requires many existing protein machines, themselves supported by other existing cellular machinery.

>Also folded, stapled and mutilated.
> (That last is a rather old and dated literary reference, so
> don't bother asking about it, for Dale values of "asking".)

You're right about not bothering to ask. You're also right that "are combined" identifies existing life processes. Pity you knew that, yet pick on Dale anyway.

> >
> >of what I have studied a primordial soup test has never succeeded

Which provides a hint of the context of Dale's question. And he's right. OOL researchers have been trying to mix these basic ingredients and see life popping out for over half a century, and have failed.
> >
> >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_soup
> >

[jillery]

What matters here is what Dale thinks about his expressed claim and
how or even if it applies to "primordial soup". That some organisms
have no mitochondrial-DNA shows his claim to be factually incorrect.
So yes, I can speculate, but to what end?

[Pro Plyd]

Dale wrote:
> On 4/28/2022 10:55 PM, Pro Plyd wrote:
>> ... These “nucleobases” — adenine, guanine, cytosine, thymine and uracil —
>> combine with sugars and phosphates to make up the genetic code of all
>> life on Earth  ...
>
> has this "combine" ever been observed?

The results are all around us, all plants, animals, etc

[Pro Plyd]

How did they form?

>> which disproves the idea that the chemistry of
>> life requires some magical life force.
> No, that disproves nothing.

How did those molecules form?

>> However, none of these
>> molecules are capable of reproducing themselves, and so would not have
>> been responsible for starting life on Earth.
> No it does not, nor is it known or demonstrated by the discovery of their existence on meteorites that such molecules are not capable of reproducing themselves.

How did those molecules form?

>> Instead, it's more
>> likely that an analogous but earthbound process created these
>> molecules, perhaps abiotically, which then became involved in
>> abiogenesis.
>>
> No, you have nothing to base such a likelihood on.
>
> But keep up the good work of making evolution and science look like a farce.

As opposed to sky pixies and magic wands?

https://www.sciworthy.com/for-the-first-time-self-replicating-molecules-win-evolution/



https://www.quantamagazine.org/in-test-tubes-rna-molecules-evolve-into-a-tiny-ecosystem-20220505/

When researchers gave a genetic molecule the ability to replicate, it evolved
over time into a complex network of “hosts” and “parasites” that both
competed and cooperated to survive.

After a lengthy experiment with tantalizing implications for origin-of-life
studies, a research group in Japan has reported creating a test tube world of
molecules that spontaneously evolved both complexity and, surprisingly,
cooperation. Over hundreds of hours of replication, a single type of RNA
evolved into five different molecular “species” or lineages of hosts and
parasites that coexisted in harmony and cooperated to survive, like the
beginning of a “molecular version of an ecosystem,” said Ryo Mizuuchi, the
lead author of the study and a project assistant professor at the University
of Tokyo.

Their experiment, which confirmed previous theoretical findings, showed
that molecules with the means to replicate could spontaneously develop
complexity through Darwinian evolution, “a critical step for the emergence
of life,” the researchers wrote.
...


https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-29113-x
Evolutionary transition from a single RNA replicator to a
multiple replicator network

Abstract
In prebiotic evolution, self-replicating molecules are believed to have
evolved
into complex living systems by expanding their information and functions
open-endedly. Theoretically, such evolutionary complexification could occur
through successive appearance of novel replicators that interact with one
another to form replication networks. Here we perform long-term evolution
experiments of RNA that replicates using a self-encoded RNA replicase. The
RNA diversifies into multiple coexisting host and parasite lineages, whose
frequencies in the population initially fluctuate and gradually stabilize. The
final population, comprising five RNA lineages, forms a replicator network
with diverse interactions, including cooperation to help the replication
of all
other members. These results support the capability of molecular replicators
to spontaneously develop complexity through Darwinian evolution, a critical
step for the emergence of life.

[Dale]

so "it had to happen" ?

[Pro Plyd]

How does breathing-on-dirt-to-make-a-human fare?

[Pro Plyd]

According to laws of chemistry, physics, etc

[Dale]

just change not creation

[jillery]

What's the difference?