omo_to_dun:

The OP is just looking for trouble. He asks, "what is the origin of life?",  then if an atheist says he doesn't know, the OP then mocks him. If you have a cure for our ignorance, please share. But don't resort to faith or an imaginary absentee father in the sky. We need something tangible.

By changing the way we mix the ingredients together, we managed to make ribonucleotides,” said Sutherland. “The chemistry works very effectively from simple precursors, and the conditions required are not distinct from what one might imagine took place on the early Earth.”

“Ribonucleotides are simply an expression of the fundamental principles of organic chemistry,” said Sutherland. “They’re doing it unwittingly. The instructions for them to do it are inherent in the structure of the[b] precursor materials.[/b] And if they can self-assemble so easily, perhaps they shouldn’t be viewed as complicated.”

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLL

THEY MIXED WHAT? INGREDIENTS? INGREDIENTS MADE FROM WHAT? WHERE DID THE INGREDIENTS COME FROM IN THE ORIGINAL SPARK?

manmustwac:

Sexkillz just letting u know that am thinking of locking this topic.

THEY MIXED WHAT? INGREDIENTS? INGREDIENTS MADE FROM WHAT? WHERE DID THE INGREDIENTS COME FROM IN THE ORIGINAL SPARK?

omo_to_dun:

My question thus is this, why is the creation story that you believe more valid than others?

Good question fam. That's what our beliefs and faiths are all about (simply put).

Even as a theist, the story of creation will forever be confusing to me, because according to my bible, there are two fundamental stories. It's either both of them are false, one of them is, or the people that "composed" that part of the bible are just utterly confused. All I believe and know is that God created our existence and everything encompassing it. I don't know how he did it.

You're an atheist?! You're messing with my head.  

About the creation myths: Yh, the stories always seem like Aesop's fables (Fabu ) to me.  However, like I said earlier  on this thread, my/our faith is beyond these silly myths.  

sexkillz:

^^^Are they LIVING MOLECULES? Or DEAD ONES? If they are LIVING MOLECULES, How did they come ALIVE? If they are DEAD MOLECULES, can LIFE COME FROM DEAD THINGS? Or DID SOMEONE ACTUALLY CREATE THEM?

omo_to_dun:

^
Boy, abeg shut up and go sit in a corner. I was replying BABE, not you. Instead of constantly screaming, please change your font and use coherent statements to pass your points across. And please, try to reduce your use of smileys: they get in the way of smoothly assimilating the points you are trying to convey. All you have been doing on this thread is [i]b[/i]itch, scream, and use one liners. Take a page out of BABE's book and use your head to write though provoking statements, not to parade childish behaviors.

omo_to_dun:

^
@BABE
I do read the Bible very very well. It would be foolish of me to argue about a book that I haven't read. I do engage in logical theological arguments , for example, "Is God omniscient? Does Hell exist?", using verses from the Bible. It is a healthy exercise. However, I cannot overlook the contradictions in the Bible. Faith is not enough for me. Even Christians don't agree on everything. My Christians friend always exhort me not to isolate a particular verse in the Bible, but to look at the overall arc, in order words, the big picture. That statement always angers me because I do not read the Bible simply just to prove others wrong. I read it with an open mind. But when I read about a God allowing His people to enjoy slavery in Egypt for 400 years or so while He is chilling in heaven with His minions, that doesn't go down well with me. That also bothers me: God has a preference. Tufiakwa. I don't wanna serve a biased God. Mba. A God who hated Esau before he was even born. Lailai. Sorry for going off on a tangent.

mantraa:

"A fundamental but elusive step in the early evolution of life on Earth has been replicated in a laboratory.

mantraa:

Researchers synthesized the basic ingredients of RNA, a molecule from which the simplest self-replicating structures are made. Until now, they couldn’t explain how these ingredients might have formed.

mantraa:

“It’s like molecular choreography, where the molecules choreograph their own behavior,” said organic chemist John Sutherland of the University of Manchester, co-author of a study in Nature Wednesday.

mantraa:

RNA is now found in living cells, where it carries information between genes and protein-manufacturing cellular components. Scientists think RNA existed early in Earth’s history, providing a necessary intermediate platform between pre-biotic chemicals and DNA, its double-stranded, more-stable descendant.

mantraa:

However, though researchers have been able to show how RNA’s component molecules, called ribonucleotides, could assemble into RNA, their many attempts to synthesize these ribonucleotides have failed. No matter how they combined the ingredients — a sugar, a phosphate, and one of four different nitrogenous molecules, or nucleobases — ribonucleotides just wouldn’t form.

mantraa:

Sutherland’s team took a different approach in what Harvard molecular biologist Jack Szostak called a “synthetic tour de force” in an accompanying commentary in Nature.

“By changing the way we mix the ingredients together, we managed to make ribonucleotides,” said Sutherland. “The chemistry works very effectively from simple precursors, and the conditions required are not distinct from what one might imagine took place on the early Earth.”

mantraa:

Like other would-be nucleotide synthesizers, Sutherland’s team included phosphate in their mix, but rather than adding it to sugars and nucleobases, they started with an array of even simpler molecules that were probably also in Earth’s primordial ooze.

They mixed the molecules in water, heated the solution, then allowed it to evaporate, leaving behind a residue of hybrid, half-sugar, half-nucleobase molecules. To this residue they again added water, heated it, allowed it evaporate, and then irradiated it.

At each stage of the cycle, the resulting molecules were more complex. At the final stage, Sutherland’s team added phosphate. “Remarkably, it transformed into the ribonucleotide!” said Sutherland.

BABE!:

LMAO-- You're a trip. You're making me laugh at blasphemous statements. That ain't right.

At what your friend said: I do agree with him/her. A good number of unserious christians (especially pastors and "men of God", only extract the parts that suit them and their problems, or the parts they want to hear. Most atheists have more knowledge of the bible than some so called christian sef.

BABE!:

I remember arguing with you about[b] Underrated and Overrated characters in the bible. Mr. Samson for one vexes me.;  people talk about him like he's all that; he was a "good" guy. This dude was an undisputed jerk![/b]  

BABE!:

I don't want to argue with you about you saying God is biased. Coz, yes to some extent, he is. He chose Israelites. He chose Abraham. Etc. However, who am I to question his choices though.?  That's why he's God. Roger!

davidylan:


Now lets not try to be evasive, ignorant and deceitful all at the same time . . . .

HAIRCRAFT:

this thread is quite interesting, I am no atheist neither do i belong to any religion, but bet me I sincerely appreciate these atheist guys. their level of sound mind only goes a long way to show how deep they have searched. I think it all boils down to knowing thyself. you are all that matters and if you can discover that power of the 'you', of the 'I', all quarrels will be settled. I truly wish to get acquainted with any of my atheist friends here especially hirika