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

In keeping with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, all energy transfers are sloppy. This means that a great deal more energy must be put into something before you can hope to get even a minuscule percentage of that energy back. Because lipids contain such a high amount of energy that serves a wide degree of functions (they are used to power both biomechanics and automobiles), this implies that an even greater amount of highly specialized energy must first go into its production.
Considering that lipids are a biomolecule, produced only by living or dead organisms (right?), and are also essential for the survival of all living organisms, how could they be produced by non-biological means? Are there any theories? Any experiments? I am very familiar with the Urey-Miller experiment, but that only seems to apply to very basic, unshaped amino acids in an unusable ratio and under impossible circumstances. So, how does this help Atheism and evolution? Any ideas would be appreciated.

2006-09-02 18:49:01 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

7 answers

Atheism? Evolution? Abiogenesis is a theory that does not have to do with either.

I do not have you answer on hand. But I will do a quick search and get back to you.

Here is one article. I will be back with more.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_doland/creator.html#meyer2
"Abiogenesis may have occurred in hydrothermal vents under the ocean, which would have been shielded from ultraviolet light."
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB050.html

Thanks you for asking I learned alot. I now need to go back and reread the enformation. I might be able to use it in a debate.

2006-09-02 18:54:27 · answer #1 · answered by upallnite 5 · 0 0

well fire fits all the categories of life doesn't it? Maybe everything that was needed was in the molten core that sprang upwards when the initial big earthquake happened.

And don't forget Lightning was running rampid at the earth's near beginning, something about the stabilization of the geomagnet something or another. They say lightning doesn't strike twice in the same place, but I know for a fact that the same theater I work at has been hit by lightning 5 times in the last 5 years....

but then again...it could be possible that David Blaine and David Copperfield got together and disappeared back in time and together they coellessed their magic skills and exploded into a fireyball of power. They might have solved all our problems....creation of life...and them disappearing for one last final trick that they never come back from.

2006-09-02 18:55:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Lipids can form naturally through Miller-Urey style experiments. IIRC they can also be formed in meteorite impacts, but it's been a long time since I've looked into this.

2014-03-17 07:04:59 · answer #3 · answered by Kevan 1 · 0 0

DNA is rather complicated information, or perhaps basic information demands an smart clothier. We use layout tests continuously. to illustrate, in case you stumbled on a handful of exchange on the sidewalk, you will possibly end that it have been lost by ability of twist of fate. yet once you stumbled on a stack of quarters on the sidewalk, you will possibly end that it have been left by ability of smart layout. in case you stumbled on a appealing swirl of rocks on the coastline, you will comprehend an unintended development left by ability of the tide. yet while the rocks spelled, "i like Angela," you will possibly comprehend smart layout. The notice abiogenesis refers back to the theory that residing organisms can get up spontaneously from inanimate remember. because of the fact that we won't be able to get complicated information and the super complexity of a residing cellular from inanimate remember, abiogenesis has been discredited. by ability of how, the Miller-Urey test did no longer create existence, and it imagined an environment inconsistent with the primordial earth. Cheers, Bruce

2016-11-06 08:01:54 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

people generalize on this site way too much.
atheist does not equal evolutionist.
Also my chemistry, biology and such is a little rusty, you might get a more thoughtful answer in the science section

2006-09-02 18:55:41 · answer #5 · answered by Lexi 5 · 1 0

To your way of thinking we should just assign anything we don't understand to a god and stop all inquiries. If that were the case we would not be communicating right now.
Tammi Dee

2006-09-02 19:00:12 · answer #6 · answered by tammidee10 6 · 0 0

How does this have anything to do with you trying to prove Creationism? Your logic is lacking.

2006-09-02 18:51:48 · answer #7 · answered by Girl Wonder 5 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers