Amino acid synthesis

[Hollie]

The beginnings of life does not have to be DNA surrounded by cellulose, etc. Research (I forget where) found that a viable form of "life" that can replicate is in the form of RNA surrounded and protected by lipids. Furthermore perhaps not all four, AGCT bases are necessary. Maybe (or maybe not) just two can work. Once a very simple system that can replicate arises, mutations and evolution will do the rest.

.

You forget the need for specific nucleic acid synthesis and the synthesis of sugars and the synthesis of fatty acids at the same place and time.

Guess why humans cannot restore life to a cell with too much loss of information lost due to entropy - or simply: the difference between a dead cell and a living cell. It is obviously easier to restore life to a dead cell than to create a dead cell from non-living matter.

Note that I was posting about amino acid synthesis (thread title). Would you like me to start a thread on nucleic acid synthesis?

I didn't forget about sugars or lipids. I am thinking that there could have been many simple replicating systems that are precursors to the more complex amino acids. In one sense they could be sort of like catalysts that set the stage for more complex systems. They don't have to actually follow a definition of life, but they could eventually lead to that.

As far as the low probability of complex systems spontaneously forming, think of Markov Chains, where there are a number of simpler steps of higher probability that lead to a more complex result. Lipids and RNA would be later in the chain.
.

OK, but what chemical reactions are you proposing for sugars or lipids? Like nucleic acids, I will eventually start a separate thread on sugars to ribose, and also lipids. I will be concentrating on amino acids in this thread but I do not wish to ignore your points.

For now, here is one problem with having chemical reactions producing amino acids at the same time as having chemical reactions producing sugars: From page 51 of:

https://www.krusch.com/books/evolution/Mystery_of_Lifes_Origin.pdf

"Reaction of Carbonyl Group with Amino Group
The reaction of compounds containing a free amino group (-NHz) with compounds containing a carbonyl group C> C=O) would have been a very important destructive process. This reaction would vastly diminish concentrations of important organic compounds in the primitive ocean. It can be written generally as follows: "

See the link for the structural diagrams of the molecules involved, namely:

carbonyl group (>C=O) + amino group (H2N) yields OH-C-NH yields Imine (>C=N) + water (H2O)

The problem is that in order to synthesize sugars you need the carbonyl group but in order to synthesize amino acids you need the amino group. But these will react with each other and thus destroy the chemical pathway to sugars and amino acids. Note that Miller-Urey were not trying to synthesize sugars (or lipids or nucleic acids) - they were trying to synthesize amino acids.

Thaxton et al continue (p. 51):

"Many substances used in prebiotic simulation experiments (see Chapter 3) presumably would have been present in the oceanic soup. According to the general equation above, the amino group (-NHz) of amines (including the free amino group in purines and pyrimidines) and amino acids would combine with the carbonyl group(> C=O) of reducing sugars, aldehydes, and a few ketones. Huge amounts of essential organic compounds would thus be removed from the soup by these reactions. [35]"

Reference 35: A. Nissenbaum, 1976. Origins of Life 7, 413.

Also from page 51:

"These reactions would have greatly diminished not only amino acid concentration but also the concentration of aldehydes. Buildup of concentrations of aldehydes, especially formaldehyde, would have been important in the primordial synthesis of sugars. Polymerization of formaldehyde in alkaline solution has given a variety of sugars vital to life, including glucose, ribose, and deoxyribose. Studies of thermodynamic and kinetic stability of the important sugars suggest, however, that only insignificant amounts of them could have existed in the primordial ocean.36 Add to this the chemical reality of reactions of sugars with amino compounds and the problem is seen as acute. Such low sugar concentrations argue strongly against formation of nucleic acids since they contain sugar."

Reference 36:

36. Abelson, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S., p. 1365. [=PNAS]

When I get to it, since nucleic acid synthesis and the synthesis of sugars are linked, I will start a thread on nucleic acid and sugar synthesis. In my next post I will explain some of the terms you all may not be familiar with - e.g.: Imine.

Yes -if you study Imines you will see what Imine - or, er: I mean!

If you're going to cut and paste the entirety of the creationist Thaxton's book, why not make a thread and post the contents there?

I gave the link. How about actually addressing the evidence I provided from chemistry?

You are cutting and pasting entire portions of a book authored by creationists. If your cutting and pasting is intended to be evidence, evidence of what? Are you suggesting the Thaxton book is evidence of gods?

 

[ChemEngineer]

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

You are the babe, esalla!

 

[esalla]

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

You are the babe, esalla!

Aye Matey

 

[ChemEngineer]

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

You are the babe, esalla!

After esalla showed her true colors in another thread, I retract the comment above forcefully.

 

[esalla]

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

You are the babe, esalla!

After esalla showed her true colors in another thread, I retract the comment above forcefully.

Lol. Nothing changes the fact that amino acids can not be formed from elements without the arranging code of DNA arranging them

So shake the bucket all you want

 

[Newtonian]

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

You are the babe, esalla!

After esalla showed her true colors in another thread, I retract the comment above forcefully.

Lol. Nothing changes the fact that amino acids can not be formed from elements without the arranging code of DNA arranging them

So shake the bucket all you want

Change formed to selected - i.e. the 20 amino acids in proteins. One of the difficulties in synthesis pathways to amino acids are the destructive interfering cross reactions From page 51 of:

https://www.krusch.com/books/evolution/Mystery_of_Lifes_Origin.pdf

"The reaction of compounds containing a free amino group (-NHz) with compounds containing a carbonyl group C> C=O) would have been a very important destructive process. This reaction would vastly diminish concentrations of important organic compounds in the primitive ocean."

Confirming the formation of Imines in these reactions:

19.8: Nucleophilic Addition of Amines - Imine and Enamine Formation

The nucleophilic addition of amines involves reacting primary or secondary amines with carbonyl compounds like aldehydes or ketones. This forms imines (with primary amines) or enamines (with …

chem.libretexts.org

Excerpt:

"Reaction with Primary Amines to form Imines
The reaction of aldehydes and ketones with ammonia or 1º-amines forms imine derivatives, also known as Schiff bases (compounds having a C=N function). Water is eliminated in the reaction, which is acid-catalyzed and reversible in the same sense as acetal formation. The pH for reactions which form imine compounds must be carefully controlled. The rate at which these imine compounds are formed is generally greatest near a pH of 5, and drops at higher and lower pH's. At high pH there will not be enough acid to protonate the OH in the intermediate to allow for removal as H2O. At low pH most of the amine reactant will be tied up as its ammonium conjugate acid and will become non-nucleophilic."

Note that I have already posted that the synthesis of certain amino acids are best in specific environments: wet vs dry, hot vs cold, acid vs. alkaline. The above quote gives one reason why ph (acid or base/alkaline - ph 7 is neutral) is so crucial.

These environments cannot exist in the same place at the same time unless by an intelligent chemist.

From Thaxton et al concerning gthe reaction of the amino group with the carbonyl group to form Imines (Ibid):

>C=O + H2N yields OH-C-NH which yields >C=N + H2O

 

[ChemEngineer]

Very deep stuff, Newtonian. Mercy boo hoo. I think that's French.

 

[Newtonian]

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

You are the babe, esalla!

After esalla showed her true colors in another thread, I retract the comment above forcefully.

Lol. Nothing changes the fact that amino acids can not be formed from elements without the arranging code of DNA arranging them

So shake the bucket all you want

Good point esalla. And far more concise than my posts!

Stated another way - informational molecules do not form by chance - statistical molecules form by chance. The evidence for this includes the chemical reaction product proportions in various types of origin of life synthesis experiments.

 

[Newtonian]

Very deep stuff, Newtonian. Mercy boo hoo. I think that's French.

Thank you. Though the relevant geological evidence is more in the upper crust of our planet. I think deeper iron deposits (for example) tend to be less oxidized that iron deposits closer to the surface - am I correct?

The reason that question is relevant to thread title is that Oxygen (which caused oxidation of minerals) makes amino acid synthesis more difficult - though an intelligent chemist could still do it!

Of course, I have a sense of humor - as in very deep stuff!

 

[Newtonian]

The different environments required for different amino acids are, in part, due to the difference in the properties of each amino acid. Consider the following from (but not cut and paste):

Amino Acids Reference Chart

Amino acid reference chart contains the twenty amino acids found in eukaryotes, grouped according to their side chains and charge. Discover our full product line of amino acids, including Alanine, Isoleucine, Leucine, Valine, Phenylalanine, Tryptophan, Tyrosine, Aspargine, Cysteine, Glutamine...

www.sigmaaldrich.com

Aliphatic - alanine , glycine, isoleucine , leucine , proline , valine
Aromatic - phenylalanine , tryptophan , tyrosine
Acidic - aspartic acid, glutamic acid
Basic - arginine , histidine , lysine
Hydroxylic - serine, threonine
Sulphur-containing - cysteine , methionine
Amidic (containing amide group) - asparagine, glutamine

For example, obviously you cannot get a sulphur containing amino acid like methionine in an organic soup containing Sulphur. More on methionine synthesis in my next post:

 

[ChemEngineer]

Until man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge. - Thomas Edison

Please see the similarity in schematics between a NEC monitor and that of a single cell here.
With the plans, humans can build a NEC monitor. A living cell, not so much.

 

[Newtonian]

Obviously the famous Miller-Urey experiment did not contain any sulphur in its simulated CH4, NH3, H2, H2O environment. Perhaps this is why Miller never published the results of his 1958 synthesis experiment which did contain Sulphur and did produce the Sulphur containing amino acid methionine in minute product proportion.

Details of a recent study of this postulated pre-biotic environment is found here:

Prebiotic Synthesis of Methionine and Other Sulfur-Containing Organic Compounds on the Primitive Earth: A Contemporary Reassessment Based on an Unpublished 1958 Stanley Miller Experiment

Original extracts from an unpublished 1958 experiment conducted by the late Stanley L. Miller were recently found and analyzed using modern state-of-the-art analytical methods. The extracts were produced by the action of an electric discharge on a mixture ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

See the article for in depth study. A few basic excerpts for now: [bracketts mine] including other relevant experiments:

"The extracts were produced by the action of an electric discharge on a mixture of methane (CH4), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), ammonia (NH3), and carbon dioxide (CO2). Racemic methionine was formed in significant yields, together with other sulfur-bearing organic compounds.....

"it was identical to the amino acid synthesized by the Strecker reaction (HCN + NH3 + aldehyde) when 3-methylthiopropanal (HSCH2CH2CHO) was used as the starting aldehyde. They determined its structure as the γ-methylthiol of α-amino-n-butyric acid (2-amino-4-methylthio-butyric acid, CH3SCH2CH2CH(NH2)COOH) and after conferring with Mueller, named the amino acid methionine. ...

[Note: I already posted that pathways to amino acids via HCN cannot happen in the presence of water because water reacts (hydrolysis) with both HCN and plausible next step molecules. Note that Water is not present in this Strecker synthesis]

"There have been several attempts to synthesize sulfur amino acids from a variety of model reducing prebiotic atmospheres and different energy sources including spark discharges (Heyns et al. 1957), electron beams (Choughuley and Lemmon 1966) and UV light (Khare and Sagan 1971; Sagan and Khare 1971; Steinman et al. 1968). In all of these experiments methionine was either not reported as a product or was only tentatively identified (Van Trump and Miller 1972). A detailed investigation of the prebiotic synthesis of methionine was carried out by Van Trump and Miller (1972) who used an electric discharge acting on a simulated primitive Earth atmosphere containing methane (CH4), molecular nitrogen (N2), ammonia (NH3), water (H2O), and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) or methane thiol (CH3SH). ...

[In this case no carbon dioxide (CO2)]

"Additionally, other amino acids detected in the mixture, namely the butyric acid isomers (detected here, but described in detail in another manuscript in preparation) are not common biological compounds..... , Van Trump and Miller (1972) gave the yield of glycine from a similar experiment (based on carbon added as methane) as 0.068%. ....

[Note the low yield of Glycine compare with Miller's famous earlier experiment. Also note this source actually admits the problem of isomers produced which are not in amino acids found in proteins.]

"

Fig. 2
Moles (relative to glycine = 1) of the various sulfur compounds detected in vials of dried residues obtained from the sparking of a CH4, H2S, NH3 and CO2 gas mixture."

Note that while methionine was produced at less than 1% proportion, no cysteine (the other sulphur containing amino acid in proteins) was detected. Instead, cysteamine was produced.

Cysteamine is actually a Cysteine reducer which prevents buildup of Cysteine crystals.

Bottom line - just another example of the different environments required to produce significant proportions of different amino acids.

to be continued

 

[ChemEngineer]

Until man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge. - Thomas Edison

Please see the similarity in schematics between a NEC monitor and that of a single cell here.
With the plans, humans can build a NEC monitor. A living cell, not so much.

Darwin's Tautologists have been uncharacteristically silent regarding the NEC monitor/single cell analogy comparison. Building man's machine, simple. Building Nature's God's creations, not so much.

 

[Hollie]

Until man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge. - Thomas Edison

Please see the similarity in schematics between a NEC monitor and that of a single cell here.
With the plans, humans can build a NEC monitor. A living cell, not so much.

Darwin's Tautologists have been uncharacteristically silent regarding the NEC monitor/single cell analogy comparison. Building man's machine, simple. Building Nature's God's creations, not so much.

I suppose "quoting" your own posts shields you from having to respond to comments you're not emotionally / intellectually prepared for.

 

[Newtonian]

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

You are the babe, esalla!

After esalla showed her true colors in another thread, I retract the comment above forcefully.

Lol. Nothing changes the fact that amino acids can not be formed from elements without the arranging code of DNA arranging them

So shake the bucket all you want

Yes, it is true that some chemical evolutionists favor RNA (and nucleic acid synthesis) first, while others still hold to Miller's model of protein (and amino acid synthesis) first.

However, as I posted, some amino acids - notably Alanine and Glycine, have been synthesized without selection by DNA or RNA. You would be accurate if you posted proteins rather than amino acids.

The primary problem with any synthesis experiments is a lack of reporting of the actual chemical reaction product proportions - for example, in amino acids synthesis experiments the predominance of formic acid over amino acids, not to mention the proportions of amino acids not used in proteins.

 

[Newtonian]

Until man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge. - Thomas Edison

Please see the similarity in schematics between a NEC monitor and that of a single cell here.
With the plans, humans can build a NEC monitor. A living cell, not so much.

Darwin's Tautologists have been uncharacteristically silent regarding the NEC monitor/single cell analogy comparison. Building man's machine, simple. Building Nature's God's creations, not so much.

And yet, as Hebrews 3:4 states, even a house requires a builder - houses do not assemble by chance!

 

[Hollie]

Until man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge. - Thomas Edison

Please see the similarity in schematics between a NEC monitor and that of a single cell here.
With the plans, humans can build a NEC monitor. A living cell, not so much.

Darwin's Tautologists have been uncharacteristically silent regarding the NEC monitor/single cell analogy comparison. Building man's machine, simple. Building Nature's God's creations, not so much.

And yet, as Hebrews 3:4 states, even a house requires a builder - houses do not assemble by chance!

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

You are the babe, esalla!

After esalla showed her true colors in another thread, I retract the comment above forcefully.

Lol. Nothing changes the fact that amino acids can not be formed from elements without the arranging code of DNA arranging them

So shake the bucket all you want

Yes, it is true that some chemical evolutionists favor RNA (and nucleic acid synthesis) first, while others still hold to Miller's model of protein (and amino acid synthesis) first.

However, as I posted, some amino acids - notably Alanine and Glycine, have been synthesized without selection by DNA or RNA. You would be accurate if you posted proteins rather than amino acids.

The primary problem with any synthesis experiments is a lack of reporting of the actual chemical reaction product proportions - for example, in amino acids synthesis experiments the predominance of formic acid over amino acids, not to mention the proportions of amino acids not used in proteins.

I'm surprised that the religionist creationists spend such inordinate amounts of time trying to tear down peer reviewed science as opposed to offering something.... anything, to support their claims to supernatural creator gods.

 

[Newtonian]

Ign

Until man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge. - Thomas Edison

Please see the similarity in schematics between a NEC monitor and that of a single cell here.
With the plans, humans can build a NEC monitor. A living cell, not so much.

Darwin's Tautologists have been uncharacteristically silent regarding the NEC monitor/single cell analogy comparison. Building man's machine, simple. Building Nature's God's creations, not so much.

And yet, as Hebrews 3:4 states, even a house requires a builder - houses do not assemble by chance!

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

You are the babe, esalla!

After esalla showed her true colors in another thread, I retract the comment above forcefully.

Lol. Nothing changes the fact that amino acids can not be formed from elements without the arranging code of DNA arranging them

So shake the bucket all you want

Yes, it is true that some chemical evolutionists favor RNA (and nucleic acid synthesis) first, while others still hold to Miller's model of protein (and amino acid synthesis) first.

However, as I posted, some amino acids - notably Alanine and Glycine, have been synthesized without selection by DNA or RNA. You would be accurate if you posted proteins rather than amino acids.

The primary problem with any synthesis experiments is a lack of reporting of the actual chemical reaction product proportions - for example, in amino acids synthesis experiments the predominance of formic acid over amino acids, not to mention the proportions of amino acids not used in proteins.

I'm surprised that the religionist creationists spend such inordinate amounts of time trying to tear down peer reviewed science as opposed to offering something.... anything, to support their claims to supernatural creator gods.

Ignoring your rhetoric, which model do you prefer: protein first, RNA first, or something else?

 

[Hollie]

Ign

Until man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge. - Thomas Edison

Please see the similarity in schematics between a NEC monitor and that of a single cell here.
With the plans, humans can build a NEC monitor. A living cell, not so much.

Darwin's Tautologists have been uncharacteristically silent regarding the NEC monitor/single cell analogy comparison. Building man's machine, simple. Building Nature's God's creations, not so much.

And yet, as Hebrews 3:4 states, even a house requires a builder - houses do not assemble by chance!

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

You are the babe, esalla!

After esalla showed her true colors in another thread, I retract the comment above forcefully.

Lol. Nothing changes the fact that amino acids can not be formed from elements without the arranging code of DNA arranging them

So shake the bucket all you want

Yes, it is true that some chemical evolutionists favor RNA (and nucleic acid synthesis) first, while others still hold to Miller's model of protein (and amino acid synthesis) first.

However, as I posted, some amino acids - notably Alanine and Glycine, have been synthesized without selection by DNA or RNA. You would be accurate if you posted proteins rather than amino acids.

The primary problem with any synthesis experiments is a lack of reporting of the actual chemical reaction product proportions - for example, in amino acids synthesis experiments the predominance of formic acid over amino acids, not to mention the proportions of amino acids not used in proteins.

I'm surprised that the religionist creationists spend such inordinate amounts of time trying to tear down peer reviewed science as opposed to offering something.... anything, to support their claims to supernatural creator gods.

Ignoring your rhetoric, which model do you prefer: protein first, RNA first, or something else?

I prefer the model that can pass peer review. An inquisitive science will likely discover the viable model.

But, ya' never know. Maybe your gods will wipe the planet clean of those vile humans again, because they're gods of love.

 

[Newtonian]

Ign

Until man duplicates a blade of grass, nature can laugh at his so-called scientific knowledge. - Thomas Edison

Please see the similarity in schematics between a NEC monitor and that of a single cell here.
With the plans, humans can build a NEC monitor. A living cell, not so much.

Darwin's Tautologists have been uncharacteristically silent regarding the NEC monitor/single cell analogy comparison. Building man's machine, simple. Building Nature's God's creations, not so much.

And yet, as Hebrews 3:4 states, even a house requires a builder - houses do not assemble by chance!

Sure it does, you have heard of sperm and eggs, turning into embryos, then infants, then kids, then adults with no brain like you

You are my Doctoral toy for the day

Bill Gates dropped out doofy

You are the babe, esalla!

After esalla showed her true colors in another thread, I retract the comment above forcefully.

Lol. Nothing changes the fact that amino acids can not be formed from elements without the arranging code of DNA arranging them

So shake the bucket all you want

Yes, it is true that some chemical evolutionists favor RNA (and nucleic acid synthesis) first, while others still hold to Miller's model of protein (and amino acid synthesis) first.

However, as I posted, some amino acids - notably Alanine and Glycine, have been synthesized without selection by DNA or RNA. You would be accurate if you posted proteins rather than amino acids.

The primary problem with any synthesis experiments is a lack of reporting of the actual chemical reaction product proportions - for example, in amino acids synthesis experiments the predominance of formic acid over amino acids, not to mention the proportions of amino acids not used in proteins.

I'm surprised that the religionist creationists spend such inordinate amounts of time trying to tear down peer reviewed science as opposed to offering something.... anything, to support their claims to supernatural creator gods.

Ignoring your rhetoric, which model do you prefer: protein first, RNA first, or something else?

I prefer the model that can pass peer review. An inquisitive science will likely discover the viable model.

But, ya' never know. Maybe your gods will wipe the planet clean of those vile humans again, because they're gods of love.

Nice dodge Hollie. I'll ask again:

Which model do you prefer: Protein first or RNA first?

Is that question too difficult for you to answer?

See this link for a discussion of some of the chemistry details and their implications for the origin of life on earth:

Atmospheric Prebiotic Chemistry and Organic Hazes

Earth’s atmospheric composition at the time of the origin of life is not known, but it has often been suggested that chemical transformation of reactive species in the atmosphere was a significant source of prebiotic organic molecules. Experimental ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A few excerpts:

"it has often been suggested that chemical transformation of reactive species in the atmosphere was a significant source of prebiotic organic molecules. Experimental and theoretical studies over the past half century have shown that atmospheric synthesis can yield molecules such as amino acids and nucleobases, but these processes are very sensitive to gas composition and energy source. Abiotic synthesis of organic molecules is more productive in reduced atmospheres, yet the primitive Earth may not have been as reducing as earlier workers assumed, and recent research has reflected this shift in thinking. ...

The idea of the prebiotic Earth as a roiling organic “soup” with a highly reduced atmosphere of H2, H2O, methane (CH4), and ammonia (NH3) was first presented by Oparin [32]. Such an atmosphere was part of his model of chemical evolution in which reduced gases led to the production of organic molecules, providing an environment more conducive to the evolution of life. The landmark experiments by Miller and Urey, partially modeled on Oparin’s hypothesis, demonstrated production of amino acids via the action of an electric discharge on a H2, H2O, CH4, and NH3 gas mixture, supporting the theory of prebiotic synthesis in a reduced primitive atmosphere [33-35]. Sagan and Mullen [24] determined that moderate quantities (ppm) of NH3 would resolve the Faint Young Sun Paradox. However, since the early 1980s, it has been thought that the primitive atmosphere was more oxidized, and contained large quantities of carbon dioxide. Comparisons of the carbon reservoirs on Earth and Venus (the former being equivalent in magnitude, but sequestered largely in the crust) suggest that CO2 on the early Earth could have provided the needed warming if it was more abundant in the atmosphere [36]. NH3 was shown to have a very short lifetime in the atmosphere of the early Earth due to photodissociation [37]. CO2, however, was assumed to be abundant and long-lived in the ancient atmosphere; as long as volcanic emissions were as high as those seen today and weathering was low, CO2 could have accumulated to large concentrations in the atmosphere [38]. A partial pressure of 0.20 bar CO2, more than 500 times the present atmospheric level, would have been needed to maintain a surface temperature above the freezing point of water [38]. Such an atmosphere may have been less favorable to the formation of organic molecules, although not necessarily prohibitive depending on ocean chemistry [39, 40]."

Still think the famous Miller experiment is irrelevant? Note that earth's crustal carbonates were deposited by the geologic carbon cycle which required earth's primordial oceans - but this also required Calcium ions which Thaxton et al pointed out destroy organic molecules.

Note that this extensive (and likely peer reviewed which you seem to care about [not me]) gives plenty of detail but does not mention that photolysis of water would produce free Oxygen, and even more noteworthy does not mention the chemical reaction product proportions produced in Miller type experiments including the predominance of formic acid.

Nor does it mention that the amino group (in amino acids, etc.) would have reacted with the carbonyl group (the group is mentioned, but not the chemical reaction) (in aldehydes and sugars) and thus destroys chemical pathways both to amino acids and sugars (as in RNA for example).