English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

How Did The DNA Originate?

2006-08-30 06:00:20 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

7 answers

It was created with Adam. NO trial and error but just choice by each person as to what they choose to do with thier life.

2006-08-30 06:06:38 · answer #1 · answered by ramall1to 5 · 0 2

Darwin called the process "survival of the fittest". If the genes brought forth an organism better suited to survive the environment in which it found itself, that organism would probably live long enough to procreate and pass on those genes. If the genes weren't good enough, the organism probably would NOT survive long enough to pass them on. That's a form of "trial and error".

As for DNA, nobody's figured out yet exactly how those four amino acids (adenine, guanine, cytosine and thymine) managed to come into being, combine in just the right way to begin a DNA chain and then go on to heights of glory, culminating in us.

As for the lab experiments using the chemical components of earth's ancient atmosphere shot with electricity (lightning), yes; it does produce organic molecules. Unfortunately it does NOT produce amino acids, just the molecules which eventually should become those amino acids. And they've been trying like crazy for more than 25 years now. Must be frustrating as anything, especially as these were a bunch of scientists dead set on proving that there was no need for any supernatural event to create real life on earth. They averred and avowed that life would "just happen". Well.........maybe in a coupla billion more years, if they can keep the experiment going that long.

2006-08-30 13:19:47 · answer #2 · answered by Granny Annie 6 · 0 0

For some aspects of nature, yes.

I'll start by explaining the origin of DNA. If you want more info from people more knowledgeable than me, look up "abiogenesis" or "Urey-Miller Experiment" on a search engine, wikipedia, etc. When the Earth was formed, its environment was completely different. Scientists recreated this environment on a smaller scale. When electricity (to represent lightning) was added to provide energy to the gases, RNA nucleotides were formed. I don't know how RNA led to the synthesis of DNA nucleotides, but I have to assume that either RNA synthesis was responsible or DNA formed through a similar process.

Next, the trial and error in nature thing. Evolution is sort of based on trial and error. DNA mutates, causing each new organism to be slightly different from its parents. Let's say that an animal eats fruit from trees. There is competition for the lower-hanging fruit, but the food higher up is available for all animals. Meanwhile, a primitive version of a giraffe with a "normal" neck has children. One has a slightly above-average-sized neck and one has a small neck. The animal with the small neck has trouble competing for and getting food, so it dies. Meanwhile the long-necked brother gets its fruit with less competition. Only the long-necked brother survives to reproduce. This system of natural selection could be considered trial and error, but I don't know what is and what isn't trail and error.

Another example of trial and error in nature is figuring out which foods to eat. Early humans, for instance, may have tried to eat rotting carcasses or raw meat. They tried different foods and did different things to it. Eventually, they figured out that when they cooked food with fire, they didn't get sick. Through trial and error, early humans figured out what and how to eat properly.

2006-08-30 13:18:11 · answer #3 · answered by x 5 · 1 0

Sure; What replicates is successful, what doesn't is not.

No-one knows how DNA originated, but we do know that amino acids are formed naturally in clouds of interstellar gas and dust by the action of UV light on organic chemicals, and we know that any self-replicating unit (whether it be molecule or cell or multi-celled organism) is subject to copying errors and thus will *inevitably* be modified over time. There is no reason to think that we will not connect up all these facts and others in a rationally justifiable theory of abiogenesis, given time. The fact that we don't *yet* know everything is no good reason to invent supernatural explanations.

2006-08-30 13:09:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Random chemical changes (please don't tote out the fundie-altered statistics on that) and evolution.

Pull your head out of the buy-bull and take a science class!

2006-08-30 13:13:35 · answer #5 · answered by Marc B 3 · 1 0

Yes absolutely.
It's too long to answer your quest.

2006-08-30 13:07:54 · answer #6 · answered by Joeng 3 · 2 0

no--created on both counts of question--isn't God awesome!!!

2006-08-30 13:09:03 · answer #7 · answered by phyllis_neel 5 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers