Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail From: Bob Casanova Newsgroups: talk.origins Subject: Re: Modeling the origins of life: New evidence for an 'RNA World' Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 20:59:43 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 125 Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org Message-ID: References: <86v85s8tcm.fsf@example.com> <86jzm88msl.fsf@example.com> <4b667001-d772-4aa1-b53d-123859b8c1cc@gmail.com> <0g1vuilfsaar2th1agr28uls56gm8re7mg@4ax.com> <2c64baf1-2afb-4690-a086-c166fafa4aba@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89"; logging-data="23927"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org" User-Agent: ForteAgent/7.20.32.1218 To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:X3HmAzTaZKvg49Oc+6J0nLUaGF8= Return-Path: X-Original-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org Delivered-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org id EE0E522976C; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 23:56:18 -0400 (EDT) by beagle.ediacara.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0F9E229758 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 23:56:16 -0400 (EDT) id B96B45DCE2; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 03:59:47 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org by mod-relay-1.kamens.us (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 994925DCBE for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 03:59:47 +0000 (UTC) id 24460DC01BA; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 04:59:45 +0100 (CET) X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX196w1bl2bN0/B+7vdSq7fT6oiUTI143jmc8+H/uZnyFFW0iAjLUOxe+ Bytes: 7827 On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 16:01:51 -0700, the following appeared in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson : >On 3/11/24 3:33 PM, Bob Casanova wrote: >> On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 15:08:01 -0700, the following appeared >> in talk.origins, posted by erik simpson >> : >> >>> On 3/11/24 2:46 PM, Richmond wrote: >>>> erik simpson writes: >>>> >>>>> On 3/11/24 12:24 PM, Richmond wrote: >>>>>> JTEM writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Pro Plyd wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://phys.org/news/2024-03-life-evidence-rna-world.html ... But >>>>>>>> how did all of this begin? In the origins of life, long before >>>>>>>> cells and proteins and DNA, could a similar sort of evolution have >>>>>>>> taken place on a simpler scale? Scientists in the 1960s, including >>>>>>>> Salk Fellow Leslie Orgel, proposed that life began with the "RNA >>>>>>>> World," a hypothetical era in which small, stringy RNA molecules >>>>>>>> ruled the early Earth and established the dynamics of Darwinian >>>>>>>> evolution. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Darwinian Evolution," besides making things difficult when everyone >>>>>>> later claims that they're not "Darwinists," is just plain >>>>>>> wrong. Darwin believed that if an animal ran a lot, their leg >>>>>>> muscles would grow and produce "Bigger, running-around-a-lot" >>>>>>> Gemmules which would flow to the gonads and be passed on the the >>>>>>> next generation, who would be born with the bigger, running around a >>>>>>> lot muscles. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As i pointed out many times, and will point out many more times >>>>>>> because, let's face it, the last thing anyone in this group ever >>>>>>> wanted was science but... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Darwin REJECTED evolution. He didn't believe in it. Oh, he did >>>>>>> eventually use that word but this is the internet. We're all quite >>>>>>> accustomed to people misusing terms, and Darwin was a pioneer. In >>>>>>> fact, later, in the Communist world, Stalin and then Mao banned >>>>>>> evolution, and in it's place promoted Darwin's ideas. Renamed, of >>>>>>> course. But they were all copying the exact same source material, >>>>>>> Lamarcksim... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Darwin was an idiot. And he certainly never invented or discovered >>>>>>> evolution. Evolution was already quite old by the time that Darwin >>>>>>> sabotaged science with his inability to grasp it. No, sorry, >>>>>>> evolution was always part of "Common Descent," and if you do the >>>>>>> Google you'll find sources pushing THAT idea back into the thousands >>>>>>> of years.. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Darwin's single biggest impact on science -- REAL science, as >>>>>>> opposed to the British aristocracy glorifying itself -- was HOLDING >>>>>>> BACK science in the English speaking world for 20 years by becoming >>>>>>> the face of Naturalism and throwing aside Mendel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, it took that long -- 20 years -- for some Brit with a stick up >>>>>>> his ass to pretend that he made Mendel's discoveries... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is important. It's not a small error. When someone spews an >>>>>>> oxymoron like "Darwinian Evolution" it's not because they're so >>>>>>> meticulous in their work. No. It's because they are hitting >>>>>>> buckets. They're communicating. They are invoking things that the >>>>>>> layman will recognize as familiar. They are, as the saying goes, >>>>>>> "Putting lipstick on a pig." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "I said DARWINIAN evolution! That's cus I is edu ma kated. I know >>>>>>> stuff." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Again, not a small error. It makes the piece as being meant for "The >>>>>>> un edu ma kated"... the only people who might find "Darwinian" >>>>>>> evolution sciency! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Demand accuracy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Don't you think you're worth it? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Don't you think the promotion of science is worth it? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Demand accuracy. Don't tolerate being dummed down by your efforts to >>>>>>> learn and grow. It's not an unreasonable request, demanding >>>>>>> publications that are accurate. >> Darwin didn't know about genes, >>>>>>> but then his book was published >> before >> Mendel, so you can't >>>>>>> really blame him for that. As for rejecting >> evolution, well the >>>>>>> last line in 'The Origin of Species' is: >> ", from so simple a >>>>>>> beginning endless forms most beautiful and most >> wonderful have >>>>>>> been, and are being, evolved." >> I demand accuracy. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> JTEM has for many years trolled many newsgroups. Whether he is a >>>>> genuine fool or just plays one on the net is probably impossible to >>>>> tell. Almost everything is this gem is rubbish. >>>> >>>> But what's the point in replying to it just to say it is rubbish? I >>>> wouldn't have even noticed it if no one had replied to it. >>>> >>> Sometimes he just ticks people off. Thunderbird has a little trash can >>> icon that I use to reply to him. >>> >> Even better to never see his posts at all; my "Special >> Childrens' File" sees to that quite nicely, so I only need >> to ignore responses to him, which cuts the time I waste on >> him by quite a bit. >>> >Thunderbird also has filters that can eliminate obnoxious posters, but >I've found that sometimes it effectively clogs the pipe to the >newsgroup. If I delete the filters, lots of stuff shows up immediately. > Has anybody else observed this? > That doesn't happen with Agent; it can filter on specific posters. of course, nymshifting by a**holes gets around that, but some things are impervious to solution. > -- Bob C. "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'" - Isaac Asimov