every day science gains knowledge that pushes belief of the supernatural further back. dont worry though. i am sure people like you will always find a gap in our knowledge to shoehorn your "god did it" superstition in. How did life originate from lifeless matter? It's a question that has long puzzled scientists - and fueled the doubts of those who question the overwhelming scientific evidence that evolutionary processes explain the origins of life. But chemists at England's University of York and University of Nottingham are reporting what they call a significant advance toward our understanding of the chemistry of a pair of sugar molecules that are essential for life. Their research, published in Organic & Biomolecular Chemistry, essentially recreates the process that may have led to the formation of two sugars, threose and erythrose. "There are a lot of fundamental questions about the origins of life and many people think they are questions about biology," University of York researcher Dr. Paul Clarke said in a written statement. "But for life to have evolved, you have to have a moment when non-living things become living - everything up to that point is chemistry." Biologists have long known that the sugar molecules in living organisms occur in the so-called "right-handed" form. Paradoxically, the amino acids that make up proteins - another major building block of life - are "left-handed." But the chemists found that left-handed amino acids could be used to prompt the formation of right-handed sugars. The finding seems to explain how the sugars originated and why only the right-handed forms dominate in nature. "What we have achieved is the first step on that pathway to show how the simple sugars threose and erythrose originated," Clarke said in the statement. "We generated these sugars from a very simple set of materials that most scientists believe were around at the time that life began http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/25/origin-of-life_n_1230631.html
interesting... a sweet concession to the fact I have been correct in our arguments for the last 5 years. do you know how many times you, stu and brass have embarrassed yourselves on this subject? Confirmation that there is no known pathway from non life to life.
i have never claimed we knew exactly how it happened. there are likely a lot of steps in the pathway. one thing we know for sure it was not some old greyhaired deity in the sky saying"let there be life". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BS5vid4GkEY&noredirect=1
you are then as big a troll as stu. you have been arguing against the science and the scientists I presented on this subject for years. Now you are saying... you knew that there is no proof we evolved by random chance?
is there something wrong with you mentally? you have never presented anything more than speculation and even that was only because you twisted the words of the scientists to mean what you wanted to hear. not what they actually said. stu and others have destroyed your credibility on these threads reducing you to a redfaced namecalling juvenile. "I wonder if it bothers the religious that atheists have brilliant physicists, biologists, mathematicians arguing for the atheist side, while they have, really, no one of credible intelligence."
read your article from the huffpo you moron. You just presented proof that science does not have a pathway (proof) that life evolved from non life. Which is what I have been arguing to you and stu for years. Your article stated they hope sugars are the first step in the pathway. I really had know idea your science comprehension was that low. Your ignorance is breathtaking.
I think the fact that people can't agree on whether viruses and bacteria are alive or not pretty much indicates that they are "bridge" entities.
I can honestly say I have no idea at all why jem's arguing with you about this kind of thing or why you're arguing with him. Actually I do: you're insecure in your atheism, and he's insecure in his theism. Both of you are raising strawmen, and appealing to authority. To say you look silly would be an understatement in the extreme. It would take me more time than I'm willing to spend to set you both right, but really, you both should stop; neither of you are doing anything other than making spectacles of yourselves. With that, sayonara baby. Y'all are welcome to your strawmen and your authorities, whomever they might be. Neither of you have any idea what you're talking about. A small bit of news to both of you: it's been a real long time since the Catholic Church opposed evolution, or even tried to oppose the stuff science was finding out about the metaphysical (look it up) and the physical. Rilly. I swear (oh my! a mortal sin! what will I ever do?) every day I spend on ET is another day I wonder where God went wrong.