Science can not even get when life started right

Status
Not open for further replies.

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,576
Reaction score
9,551
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,240
Reaction score
1,216
Points
245
Location
Virginia

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
You seem to be the one who got it wrong:
Haldane introduced the modern concept of abiogenesis in an eight-page article titled The origin of life, in the Rationalist Annual in 1929,[51] describing the primitive ocean as a "vast chemical laboratory" containing a mixture of inorganic compounds – like a "hot dilute soup" in which organic compounds could have formed. Under the solar energy the anoxic atmosphere containing carbon dioxide, ammonia and water vapour gave rise to a variety of organic compounds, "living or half-living things"​
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
210,258
Reaction score
36,862
Points
2,190

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
Learn something new every day

That is what makes science so great
Knowledge “evolves”
 

Angelo

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
21,195
Reaction score
7,131
Points
360
Location
_Arkansas~_The Natural State_

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
Humans are rookies in the grand time scale. It's natural to
learn from mistakes. The biggest problems we have are from making the same ones over and over and over.
 

Vandalshandle

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2013
Messages
21,150
Reaction score
3,969
Points
290
Location
Southern AZ

harmonica

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
30,990
Reaction score
7,439
Points
1,140
..well --obviously and undeniably, ''god'' did not ''energize'' a fully formed human into creation.....
 

progressive hunter

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
18,489
Reaction score
5,432
Points
290
..well --obviously and undeniably, ''god'' did not ''energize'' a fully formed human into creation.....
how can you know for sure???

the option is a fully grown adult male and female just appeared knowing how to take care of themselves and reproduce,,,
 

esalla

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2020
Messages
5,589
Reaction score
3,154
Points
893
Location
Area-51 sub level 28

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
You seem to be the one who got it wrong:
Haldane introduced the modern concept of abiogenesis in an eight-page article titled The origin of life, in the Rationalist Annual in 1929,[51] describing the primitive ocean as a "vast chemical laboratory" containing a mixture of inorganic compounds – like a "hot dilute soup" in which organic compounds could have formed. Under the solar energy the anoxic atmosphere containing carbon dioxide, ammonia and water vapour gave rise to a variety of organic compounds, "living or half-living things"​
Too bad that life is not made of randomly forming organic compounds. Life is made by organic compounds that are created and organized to do specific jobs by DNA
 

Angelo

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
21,195
Reaction score
7,131
Points
360
Location
_Arkansas~_The Natural State_

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
33,816
Reaction score
3,962
Points
1,140

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
Did you just say that science said life needed oxygen to evolve and that very little oxygen was present when the first life forms evolved? So Oxygen was present??? What’s your point again?!
 
OP
RetiredGySgt

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,576
Reaction score
9,551
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
You seem to be the one who got it wrong:
Haldane introduced the modern concept of abiogenesis in an eight-page article titled The origin of life, in the Rationalist Annual in 1929,[51] describing the primitive ocean as a "vast chemical laboratory" containing a mixture of inorganic compounds – like a "hot dilute soup" in which organic compounds could have formed. Under the solar energy the anoxic atmosphere containing carbon dioxide, ammonia and water vapour gave rise to a variety of organic compounds, "living or half-living things"​
Too bad that life is not made of randomly forming organic compounds. Life is made by organic compounds that are created and organized to do specific jobs by DNA
Which according to science required Oxygen in large enough quantity to do it. They now know that is not true.
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,240
Reaction score
1,216
Points
245
Location
Virginia
Too bad that life is not made of randomly forming organic compounds. Life is made by organic compounds that are created and organized to do specific jobs by DNA
Good thing that crystals, e.g., diamonds, are created by natural processes. Mix chemistry, physics, and time and you can get some amazing things.
 
OP
RetiredGySgt

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,576
Reaction score
9,551
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
Did you just say that science said life needed oxygen to evolve and that very little oxygen was present when the first life forms evolved? So Oxygen was present??? What’s your point again?!
READ the damn article numbnuts.
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,240
Reaction score
1,216
Points
245
Location
Virginia

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
You seem to be the one who got it wrong:
Haldane introduced the modern concept of abiogenesis in an eight-page article titled The origin of life, in the Rationalist Annual in 1929,[51] describing the primitive ocean as a "vast chemical laboratory" containing a mixture of inorganic compounds – like a "hot dilute soup" in which organic compounds could have formed. Under the solar energy the anoxic atmosphere containing carbon dioxide, ammonia and water vapour gave rise to a variety of organic compounds, "living or half-living things"​
Too bad that life is not made of randomly forming organic compounds. Life is made by organic compounds that are created and organized to do specific jobs by DNA
Which according to science required Oxygen in large enough quantity to do it. They now know that is not true.
You mean according you science required Oxygen. In reality science has known for a long time that oxygen was a late addition to the mix.
 
OP
RetiredGySgt

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,576
Reaction score
9,551
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
You seem to be the one who got it wrong:
Haldane introduced the modern concept of abiogenesis in an eight-page article titled The origin of life, in the Rationalist Annual in 1929,[51] describing the primitive ocean as a "vast chemical laboratory" containing a mixture of inorganic compounds – like a "hot dilute soup" in which organic compounds could have formed. Under the solar energy the anoxic atmosphere containing carbon dioxide, ammonia and water vapour gave rise to a variety of organic compounds, "living or half-living things"​
Too bad that life is not made of randomly forming organic compounds. Life is made by organic compounds that are created and organized to do specific jobs by DNA
Which according to science required Oxygen in large enough quantity to do it. They now know that is not true.
You mean according you science required Oxygen. In reality science has known for a long time that oxygen was a late addition to the mix.
Obviously you did NOT read the damn article.
 
OP
RetiredGySgt

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,576
Reaction score
9,551
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
You seem to be the one who got it wrong:
Haldane introduced the modern concept of abiogenesis in an eight-page article titled The origin of life, in the Rationalist Annual in 1929,[51] describing the primitive ocean as a "vast chemical laboratory" containing a mixture of inorganic compounds – like a "hot dilute soup" in which organic compounds could have formed. Under the solar energy the anoxic atmosphere containing carbon dioxide, ammonia and water vapour gave rise to a variety of organic compounds, "living or half-living things"​
Too bad that life is not made of randomly forming organic compounds. Life is made by organic compounds that are created and organized to do specific jobs by DNA
Which according to science required Oxygen in large enough quantity to do it. They now know that is not true.
You mean according you science required Oxygen. In reality science has known for a long time that oxygen was a late addition to the mix.
For those incapable of opening and reading a link...

These days, scientists generally agree with the idea that the original recipe for life was pretty simple, but they’re not sure what ingredients were necessary for those early life forms to make the leap into complex forms of life, like animals. Many scientists theorize that, since all complex life — involving cells that have multiple components — now relies on oxygen to breathe, it must have happened at a time when there was plenty of oxygen in the air. But the scientists behind a 2018 study published in Nature report that oxygen in the atmosphere didn’t rise to significant levels until after complex life arose — suggesting that oxygen wasn’t all that important after all.
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,240
Reaction score
1,216
Points
245
Location
Virginia

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
You seem to be the one who got it wrong:
Haldane introduced the modern concept of abiogenesis in an eight-page article titled The origin of life, in the Rationalist Annual in 1929,[51] describing the primitive ocean as a "vast chemical laboratory" containing a mixture of inorganic compounds – like a "hot dilute soup" in which organic compounds could have formed. Under the solar energy the anoxic atmosphere containing carbon dioxide, ammonia and water vapour gave rise to a variety of organic compounds, "living or half-living things"​
Too bad that life is not made of randomly forming organic compounds. Life is made by organic compounds that are created and organized to do specific jobs by DNA
Which according to science required Oxygen in large enough quantity to do it. They now know that is not true.
You mean according you science required Oxygen. In reality science has known for a long time that oxygen was a late addition to the mix.
Obviously you did NOT read the damn article.
I did read it and she knows as little as you do.
 

Chuz Life

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2015
Messages
7,771
Reaction score
1,873
Points
275
Location
USA
How can scientists ever agree on when an unseeable, UN-reproducible act like the events that lead to the first organisms and LIFE in the general sense. . . When they can even provide a clear message to the world on when and how a human child's life begins?

Easily observed, re-producible, easily verified as that is.

The fucktardz won't do it.

WHY do you suppose that is?
 

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2017
Messages
43,484
Reaction score
4,833
Points
1,870

They have been claiming for hundred years or more life needed oxygen to evolve into complex forms. Turns out they were mostly wrong, Very little oxygen was present when the first complex life forms evolved. If they got that wrong what else have they gotten wrong?
Probably lots of stuff. But this is a tweak to a slider on a football stadium sized machine that is biology. . Not in any danger are ideas like abiogenesis, or evolution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top