Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Date:
January 27, 2015
Source:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Summary:
Water-filled micropores in hot rock may have acted as the nurseries in which life on Earth began. A team has now shown that temperature gradients in pore systems promote the cyclical replication and emergence of nucleic acids.
Prove to me life came magically from non life.This is a supporting article to the OP:
The origin of life: Labyrinths as crucibles of life
The origin of life Labyrinths as crucibles of life -- ScienceDaily
Date:
January 27, 2015
Source:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Summary:
Water-filled micropores in hot rock may have acted as the nurseries in which life on Earth began. A team has now shown that temperature gradients in pore systems promote the cyclical replication and emergence of nucleic acids.
Very interesting experiment.
More at the link.
Now, Frankie Boy, go post about something that you 'know ' something about, like your hollow moon. LOL
Like every other time you've done it, insulting me does not correct your fundamental misunderstanding of how the world functions.
How badly must it suck that there's far more real scientific evidence that the Moon is an artificial sphere than there is for manmade global climate warming change disruption or whatever you're calling it today
Now, Frankie Boy, go post about something that you 'know ' something about, like your hollow moon. LOL
Like every other time you've done it, insulting me does not correct your fundamental misunderstanding of how the world functions.
How badly must it suck that there's far more real scientific evidence that the Moon is an artificial sphere than there is for manmade global climate warming change disruption or whatever you're calling it today
I always had a sneaking suspicion that the moon was actually the Death Star. thanks for the confirmation
This is a supporting article to the OP:
The origin of life: Labyrinths as crucibles of life
The origin of life Labyrinths as crucibles of life -- ScienceDaily
Date:
January 27, 2015
Source:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Summary:
Water-filled micropores in hot rock may have acted as the nurseries in which life on Earth began. A team has now shown that temperature gradients in pore systems promote the cyclical replication and emergence of nucleic acids.
Very interesting experiment.
More at the link.
Yes, of course, sorry if actual science scares you.This is a supporting article to the OP:
The origin of life: Labyrinths as crucibles of life
The origin of life Labyrinths as crucibles of life -- ScienceDaily
Date:
January 27, 2015
Source:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Summary:
Water-filled micropores in hot rock may have acted as the nurseries in which life on Earth began. A team has now shown that temperature gradients in pore systems promote the cyclical replication and emergence of nucleic acids.
Very interesting experiment.
More at the link.
Yes.
Water filled micropores in hot rocks
of course
Yes, of course, sorry if actual science scares you.This is a supporting article to the OP:
The origin of life: Labyrinths as crucibles of life
The origin of life Labyrinths as crucibles of life -- ScienceDaily
Date:
January 27, 2015
Source:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Summary:
Water-filled micropores in hot rock may have acted as the nurseries in which life on Earth began. A team has now shown that temperature gradients in pore systems promote the cyclical replication and emergence of nucleic acids.
Very interesting experiment.
More at the link.
Yes.
Water filled micropores in hot rocks
of course
Who knows? It's plausible, we've seen organic compounds form naturally, and the conditions within the micro pores give a plausibility.Yes, of course, sorry if actual science scares you.This is a supporting article to the OP:
The origin of life: Labyrinths as crucibles of life
The origin of life Labyrinths as crucibles of life -- ScienceDaily
Date:
January 27, 2015
Source:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Summary:
Water-filled micropores in hot rock may have acted as the nurseries in which life on Earth began. A team has now shown that temperature gradients in pore systems promote the cyclical replication and emergence of nucleic acids.
Very interesting experiment.
More at the link.
Yes.
Water filled micropores in hot rocks
of course
So the molecules were trapped like rats in the water filled micropores and that's how 2000 proteins magically assembled themselves (remember, using only left handed amino acids) to form the first cell.
Plausible as in we could recreate the same situation and observe it?Who knows? It's plausible, we've seen organic compounds form naturally, and the conditions within the micro pores give a plausibility.Yes, of course, sorry if actual science scares you.This is a supporting article to the OP:
The origin of life: Labyrinths as crucibles of life
The origin of life Labyrinths as crucibles of life -- ScienceDaily
Date:
January 27, 2015
Source:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Summary:
Water-filled micropores in hot rock may have acted as the nurseries in which life on Earth began. A team has now shown that temperature gradients in pore systems promote the cyclical replication and emergence of nucleic acids.
Very interesting experiment.
More at the link.
Yes.
Water filled micropores in hot rocks
of course
So the molecules were trapped like rats in the water filled micropores and that's how 2000 proteins magically assembled themselves (remember, using only left handed amino acids) to form the first cell.
Of course not, the odds of such an event happening are extraordinary, which is why we only have life on this planet within our solar system, well, we don't know about europa/etc yet, but hopefully soon, none the less, we've formed the compounds, however, expecting a cell to form based on the limited experiments done is ridiculous.Plausible as in we could recreate the same situation and observe it?Who knows? It's plausible, we've seen organic compounds form naturally, and the conditions within the micro pores give a plausibility.Yes, of course, sorry if actual science scares you.This is a supporting article to the OP:
The origin of life: Labyrinths as crucibles of life
The origin of life Labyrinths as crucibles of life -- ScienceDaily
Very interesting experiment.
More at the link.
Yes.
Water filled micropores in hot rocks
of course
So the molecules were trapped like rats in the water filled micropores and that's how 2000 proteins magically assembled themselves (remember, using only left handed amino acids) to form the first cell.
Some might say the odds make it impossible...Of course not, the odds of such an event happening are extraordinary, which is why we only have life on this planet within our solar system, well, we don't know about europa/etc yet, but hopefully soon, none the less, we've formed the compounds, however, expecting a cell to form based on the limited experiments done is ridiculous.Plausible as in we could recreate the same situation and observe it?Who knows? It's plausible, we've seen organic compounds form naturally, and the conditions within the micro pores give a plausibility.Yes, of course, sorry if actual science scares you.Yes.
Water filled micropores in hot rocks
of course
So the molecules were trapped like rats in the water filled micropores and that's how 2000 proteins magically assembled themselves (remember, using only left handed amino acids) to form the first cell.
Yes, but the problem with your assessment is, it's a very plausible way to explain the formation of life, supported by observations and our understanding of the world, it may be extremely implausible, but given billions of years, who knows? Then again, we're lucky this planet has life at all ,let alone that we evolved.Some might say the odds make it impossible...Of course not, the odds of such an event happening are extraordinary, which is why we only have life on this planet within our solar system, well, we don't know about europa/etc yet, but hopefully soon, none the less, we've formed the compounds, however, expecting a cell to form based on the limited experiments done is ridiculous.Plausible as in we could recreate the same situation and observe it?Who knows? It's plausible, we've seen organic compounds form naturally, and the conditions within the micro pores give a plausibility.Yes, of course, sorry if actual science scares you.
So the molecules were trapped like rats in the water filled micropores and that's how 2000 proteins magically assembled themselves (remember, using only left handed amino acids) to form the first cell.
Who knows? It's plausible, we've seen organic compounds form naturally, and the conditions within the micro pores give a plausibility.Yes, of course, sorry if actual science scares you.This is a supporting article to the OP:
The origin of life: Labyrinths as crucibles of life
The origin of life Labyrinths as crucibles of life -- ScienceDaily
Date:
January 27, 2015
Source:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Summary:
Water-filled micropores in hot rock may have acted as the nurseries in which life on Earth began. A team has now shown that temperature gradients in pore systems promote the cyclical replication and emergence of nucleic acids.
Very interesting experiment.
More at the link.
Yes.
Water filled micropores in hot rocks
of course
So the molecules were trapped like rats in the water filled micropores and that's how 2000 proteins magically assembled themselves (remember, using only left handed amino acids) to form the first cell.
It's not any more plausible than any other way given the fact that it has never happened. It's always given billions of years to make it seem rational even though it is not. If it followed some chemical process then it would be able to be recreated...Yes, but the problem with your assessment is, it's a very plausible way to explain the formation of life, supported by observations and our understanding of the world, it may be extremely implausible, but given billions of years, who knows? Then again, we're lucky this planet has life at all ,let alone that we evolved.Some might say the odds make it impossible...Of course not, the odds of such an event happening are extraordinary, which is why we only have life on this planet within our solar system, well, we don't know about europa/etc yet, but hopefully soon, none the less, we've formed the compounds, however, expecting a cell to form based on the limited experiments done is ridiculous.Plausible as in we could recreate the same situation and observe it?Who knows? It's plausible, we've seen organic compounds form naturally, and the conditions within the micro pores give a plausibility.So the molecules were trapped like rats in the water filled micropores and that's how 2000 proteins magically assembled themselves (remember, using only left handed amino acids) to form the first cell.
You fail to understand that just because something is extremely implausible doesn't mean it can't happen, especially if what we know supports it. (E.G. the big bang, which is a fact, although EXTREMELY implausible)It's not any more plausible than any other way given the fact that it has never happened. It's always given billions of years to make it seem rational even though it is not. If it followed some chemical process then it would be able to be recreated...Yes, but the problem with your assessment is, it's a very plausible way to explain the formation of life, supported by observations and our understanding of the world, it may be extremely implausible, but given billions of years, who knows? Then again, we're lucky this planet has life at all ,let alone that we evolved.Some might say the odds make it impossible...Of course not, the odds of such an event happening are extraordinary, which is why we only have life on this planet within our solar system, well, we don't know about europa/etc yet, but hopefully soon, none the less, we've formed the compounds, however, expecting a cell to form based on the limited experiments done is ridiculous.Plausible as in we could recreate the same situation and observe it?Who knows? It's plausible, we've seen organic compounds form naturally, and the conditions within the micro pores give a plausibility.
Big bang not a fact...You fail to understand that just because something is extremely implausible doesn't mean it can't happen, especially if what we know supports it. (E.G. the big bang, which is a fact, although EXTREMELY implausible)It's not any more plausible than any other way given the fact that it has never happened. It's always given billions of years to make it seem rational even though it is not. If it followed some chemical process then it would be able to be recreated...Yes, but the problem with your assessment is, it's a very plausible way to explain the formation of life, supported by observations and our understanding of the world, it may be extremely implausible, but given billions of years, who knows? Then again, we're lucky this planet has life at all ,let alone that we evolved.Some might say the odds make it impossible...Of course not, the odds of such an event happening are extraordinary, which is why we only have life on this planet within our solar system, well, we don't know about europa/etc yet, but hopefully soon, none the less, we've formed the compounds, however, expecting a cell to form based on the limited experiments done is ridiculous.Plausible as in we could recreate the same situation and observe it?
Yes, it is a fact. Hubble's law? Cosmic microwave background radiation? Light elements supporting the big bang models? It's the most plausible and supported theory regarding the origin of the universe as of now.Big bang not a fact...You fail to understand that just because something is extremely implausible doesn't mean it can't happen, especially if what we know supports it. (E.G. the big bang, which is a fact, although EXTREMELY implausible)It's not any more plausible than any other way given the fact that it has never happened. It's always given billions of years to make it seem rational even though it is not. If it followed some chemical process then it would be able to be recreated...Yes, but the problem with your assessment is, it's a very plausible way to explain the formation of life, supported by observations and our understanding of the world, it may be extremely implausible, but given billions of years, who knows? Then again, we're lucky this planet has life at all ,let alone that we evolved.Some might say the odds make it impossible...Of course not, the odds of such an event happening are extraordinary, which is why we only have life on this planet within our solar system, well, we don't know about europa/etc yet, but hopefully soon, none the less, we've formed the compounds, however, expecting a cell to form based on the limited experiments done is ridiculous.
Some might say the odds make it impossible...Of course not, the odds of such an event happening are extraordinary, which is why we only have life on this planet within our solar system, well, we don't know about europa/etc yet, but hopefully soon, none the less, we've formed the compounds, however, expecting a cell to form based on the limited experiments done is ridiculous.Plausible as in we could recreate the same situation and observe it?Who knows? It's plausible, we've seen organic compounds form naturally, and the conditions within the micro pores give a plausibility.Yes, of course, sorry if actual science scares you.
So the molecules were trapped like rats in the water filled micropores and that's how 2000 proteins magically assembled themselves (remember, using only left handed amino acids) to form the first cell.
Big bang not a fact...You fail to understand that just because something is extremely implausible doesn't mean it can't happen, especially if what we know supports it. (E.G. the big bang, which is a fact, although EXTREMELY implausible)It's not any more plausible than any other way given the fact that it has never happened. It's always given billions of years to make it seem rational even though it is not. If it followed some chemical process then it would be able to be recreated...Yes, but the problem with your assessment is, it's a very plausible way to explain the formation of life, supported by observations and our understanding of the world, it may be extremely implausible, but given billions of years, who knows? Then again, we're lucky this planet has life at all ,let alone that we evolved.Some might say the odds make it impossible...Of course not, the odds of such an event happening are extraordinary, which is why we only have life on this planet within our solar system, well, we don't know about europa/etc yet, but hopefully soon, none the less, we've formed the compounds, however, expecting a cell to form based on the limited experiments done is ridiculous.
So suddenly because something is currently the most plausible theory it is fact? Funny how one can make so many stretches but has no doubts about the science behind it...Yes, it is a fact. Hubble's law? Cosmic microwave background radiation? Light elements supporting the big bang models? It's the most plausible and supported theory regarding the origin of the universe as of now.Big bang not a fact...You fail to understand that just because something is extremely implausible doesn't mean it can't happen, especially if what we know supports it. (E.G. the big bang, which is a fact, although EXTREMELY implausible)It's not any more plausible than any other way given the fact that it has never happened. It's always given billions of years to make it seem rational even though it is not. If it followed some chemical process then it would be able to be recreated...Yes, but the problem with your assessment is, it's a very plausible way to explain the formation of life, supported by observations and our understanding of the world, it may be extremely implausible, but given billions of years, who knows? Then again, we're lucky this planet has life at all ,let alone that we evolved.Some might say the odds make it impossible...
