Abiogenesis

Author: Goldtop

Posts

Total: 334
#121
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@ravensjt
Biologic life is specific pattern of molecules via atomic elements.

Biologic life is connected just not in any direct evidence that the atoms led to biologic life.

If biologic life is eternally existent --see Cosmic Ancestry https://www.panspermia.org/

Then we have to ask, what is the rational, logical common sense scenario for that conclusion.

The coding for RNA-DNA, if not specifically for most complex humans, is eternally produced somewhere with our eternally existent, finite, occupied space Universe.

VIa Jacob Bekenstiens black hole mathematics, that led to holographic scenarios, and Leonard Susskinds holograhic ideas, as associated with string theory, we are left to consider that;

1} blacks holes are 3D,  ---see info-bits contained on area of four{ 4 }  bisecting planes of spherical cubo{ 6 }-octa{ 8 }hedron---

2} info-bits inside black holes is expressed on 2D outer surface { event horizon }, -- a spherical surface---,

3} those info-bits transposed to environment outside black  hole event horizion.

We know one possibilty is related to Hawkings radiation, wherein virtual particles created at even horizon split in two one goes in the other goes out.

If the one partilce goes out carries info-bits { via entanglement } from event horizon, then that is one possible avenue of trans-positioning of event horizon to outside environment.

..."But that energy isn’t free! Where did it come from? It must be subtracted from the mass of the black hole, something that can happen thanks to the infalling virtual particles from the original “in” part of the “out-in” pair and the “in-out” pair, respectively. So in the end, we have escaping radiation and a lower mass for the black hole!"....

Why is the spherical cubo-octahedron  a rational, logically common sense conclusion to be associated with RNA-DNA coding?

 Because of 7, or more, spatially exotic, transformable { operating system } configurations the Euclidean cubo-octahedron and because of its 8 surface triangles.

Some of the configurations are specific to quadra-pedic fish { perpendicular } and cetacceans { parrallel }

Biologic life is 70 - 85% water and water is based on 8 electrons and most common in a tetrahedral arrangement.

Ive given many more of the specifics to the above in other threads here ad DArt, DO and many other forums over lat 8 years.





#122
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@ethang5
And have seen since time began

That's not at all truthful.



#123
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
There exists no infinite source.  Such a belief follows no shred of any rational, logical common sense.


We live in an eternally existent, finite occupied space Universe. No shred of  rational, logical common sense to direct us elsewhere.

Eternally existent macro-infinite non-occupied space exists outside of our finite, occupied space Universe.

Metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts exists,  complementary to our finite, occupied space and macro-infinite non-occupied space.

If biologic life is eternally existent --see Cosmic Ancestry https://www.panspermia.org/

Then we have to ask, what is the rational, logical common sense scenario for that conclusion.

The coding for RNA-DNA, --if not specifically for most complex humans--, is eternally produced somewhere within our eternally existent, finite, occupied space Universe. 

VIa Jacob Bekenstiens black hole mathematics, that led to holographic scenarios, and Leonard Susskinds holograhic ideas, as associated with string theory, we are left to consider that;

1} blacks holes are 3D,  ---see info-bits contained on area of four{ 4 }  bisecting planes of spherical cubo{ 6 }-octa{ 8 }hedron---

2} info-bits inside black holes is expressed on 2D outer surface { event horizon }, -- a spherical surface---,

3} those info-bits transposed to environment outside black  hole event horizion.

We know one possibilty is related to Hawkings radiation, wherein virtual particles created at even horizon split in two one goes in the other goes out.

If the one particle goes out carries info-bits { via entanglement } from event horizon, then that is one possible avenue of trans-positioning of event horizon to outside environment.

..."But that energy isn’t free! Where did it come from? It must be subtracted from the mass of the black hole, something that can happen thanks to the infalling virtual particles from the original “in” part of the “out-in” pair and the “in-out” pair, respectively. So in the end, we have escaping radiation and a lower mass for the black hole!"....

Why is the spherical cubo-octahedron  a rational, logically common sense conclusion to be associated with RNA-DNA coding?

 Because of 7, or more, spatially exotic, transformable { operating system } configurations the Euclidean cubo-octahedron and because of its 8 surface triangles.

Some of the configurations are specific to quadra-pedic fish { perpendicular } and cetacceans { parrallel }

Biologic life is 70 - 85% water and water is based on 8 electrons and most common in a tetrahedral arrangement.

None of this to say abiogneisis does not occur, we just have no laboratory proof of such.


Topic's author
#124
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@ravensjt
Fail response, I'm not a Creationist.

As I stated, your OP shows no connection between non-life and life.
Of course, it does, based on the definition. Is there another answer for the existence of those fossilized organisms? 

Abiogenesis - the original evolution of life or living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances.
Topic's author
#125
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
1. If abiogenesis is true, why are there no instances of it anywhere or anytime in the known universe?
2. If abiogenesis is true, why can it not be replicated?
3. On what evidence is the idea that a group of organic material can become alive?
4. Other than the inductive conclusion from the universe having a start, what makes anyone think abiogenesis is a valid idea?

1. This ludicrous question makes the assumption that we've tested every planet in the universe for life. We have barely scratched the surface of our own solar system, let alone anywhere else in our own galaxy.
2. Another ludicrous question. How does one create an experiment that usually takes millions of years in nature to accomplish?
3. You've dismissed out of hand everything place in front of you, so you'll have to ask a scientist who is working on abiogenesis research.
4. See answer #3.

#126
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@ravensjt
Are you claiming that calling someone a creationist is an ad hom? Wow, some are very sensitive, ooh that might be an ad hom.
#127
ravensjt
ravensjt's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 123
0
1
5
ravensjt's avatar
ravensjt
0
1
5
-->
@disgusted
Are you claiming that calling someone a creationist is an ad hom? Wow, some are very sensitive, ooh that might be an ad hom
Of course it is, Remember that an Ad Hom is attacking the motives of the person for making a claim..... His assumption was that my skepticism towards Abiogenesis was because I hold a Theist point of view, He's done this multiple times in the past.


And been corrected everytime.....


#128
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
Eternally existent,  macro-infinite non-occupied space exists outside of our finite, occupied space Universe.

If God existed outside of our finite, occupied space Universe, and created our finite, occupied space Universe, then there would have to be a line{s}-of-relationship between the external God and our finite, occupied space Universe that existed then and now.

There exists no infinite source.  Such a belief follows no shred of any rational, logical common sense.

We live in an eternally existent, finite occupied space Universe. No shred of  rational, logical common sense to direct us elsewhere.

Metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts exists,  complementary to our finite, occupied space and macro-infinite non-occupied space.

If biologic life is eternally existent --see Cosmic Ancestry https://www.panspermia.org/

Then we have to ask, what is the rational, logical common sense scenario for that conclusion.

The coding for RNA-DNA, --if not specifically for most complex humans--, is eternally produced somewhere within our eternally existent, finite, occupied space Universe. 

VIa Jacob Bekenstiens black hole mathematics, that led to holographic scenarios, and Leonard Susskinds holograhic ideas, as associated with string theory, we are left to consider that;

1} blacks holes are 3D,  ---see info-bits contained on area of four{ 4 }  bisecting planes of spherical cubo{ 6 }-octa{ 8 }hedron---

2} info-bits inside black holes is expressed on 2D outer surface { event horizon }, -- a spherical surface---,

3} those info-bits transposed to environment outside black  hole event horizion.

We know one possibilty is related to Hawkings radiation, wherein virtual particles created at even horizon split in two one goes in the other goes out.

If the one particle goes out carries info-bits { via entanglement } from event horizon, then that is one possible avenue of trans-positioning of event horizon to outside environment.

..."But that energy isn’t free! Where did it come from? It must be subtracted from the mass of the black hole, something that can happen thanks to the infalling virtual particles from the original “in” part of the “out-in” pair and the “in-out” pair, respectively. So in the end, we have escaping radiation and a lower mass for the black hole!"....

Why is the spherical cubo-octahedron  a rational, logically common sense conclusion to be associated with RNA-DNA coding?

 Because of 7, or more, spatially exotic, transformable { operating system } configurations the Euclidean cubo-octahedron and because of its 8 surface triangles.

Some of the configurations are specific to quadra-pedic fish { perpendicular } and cetacceans { parrallel }

Biologic life is 70 - 85% water and water is based on 8 electrons and most common in a tetrahedral arrangement.

None of this to say abiogneisis does not occur, we just have no laboratory proof of such.

#129
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@ravensjt
It's quite reasonable to conclude that your argument is an argument in support of creationism and that is not ad hom it is a natural consequence of your argument unless you have an alternative to abiogenesis other than creationism?
Topic's author
#130
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@ravensjt
An Ad Hom (of an argument or reaction) is directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

Saying your position appear to be Creationism is not an Ad Hom.
#131
Paul
Paul's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 470
1
2
2
Paul's avatar
Paul
1
2
2
-->
@Goldtop
Is there any question that abiogenesis isn't true?
It can't NOT be true because here we are after all!

There are a number scientific theories of abiogenesis.


And there may be a verity of ways that life can form.

Given the makeup and history of the planet life was inevitable here.

This would be true on any other planets like our own as well.

#132
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Paul

There are a number scientific theories of abiogenesis.
Exactly, theories. Biologic life has not been created from scratch ---i.e. where before there was none---  anywhere by humans, even with all of their metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/conceptual abilities.

When we see occur in the lab, then we say we have direct observational evidence of such.




#133
Paul
Paul's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 470
1
2
2
Paul's avatar
Paul
1
2
2
-->
@mustardness
Two Related, Yet Distinct, Meanings of Theory

There are many shades of meaning to the word theory. Most of these are used without difficulty, and we understand, based on the context in which they are found, what the intended meaning is. For instance, when we speak of music theory we understand it to be in reference to the underlying principles of the composition of music, and not in reference to some speculation about those principles.

However, there are two senses of theory which are sometimes troublesome. These are the senses which are defined as “a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena” and “an unproven assumption; conjecture.” The second of these is occasionally misapplied in cases where the former is meant, as when a particular scientific theory is derided as "just a theory," implying that it is no more than speculation or conjecture. One may certainly disagree with scientists regarding their theories, but it is an inaccurate interpretation of language to regard their use of the word as implying a tentative hypothesis; the scientific use of theory is quite different than the speculative use of the word.

#134
Paul
Paul's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 470
1
2
2
Paul's avatar
Paul
1
2
2
-->
@mustardness
You don't believe in evolution either, do you.
#135
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Paul
You don't believe in evolution either, do you.
IVe never ever stated such comments. In fact Ive been aware of directly observed, real time evidence of evolution with bacteria since mid 90's and I posted an even newer version of that by scientist in lab with bacteria.

Dman offers other observations of eveolution outside of lab in some other thread.

Fred Hoyle pointed out that, if bacteria left unchecked, proliferate so fast that they would equal the mass of the known Universe ---1990--- within 6 months.

Bacteria survive time on moon, in pure sulphur pools and been found in intense radiated cooling water around nuclear plutonium rods.

Abiogenesis is a theory and not a fact of observation, and no mentally stable humans suggest otherwise.

Fuller in 1970' suggested a cosmic egg scenario where more complex biologics exist and what we have is complex-to-simple  ---less frustrated--- evolution leading to some simple-to-complex --more frustrated-- evolution on Eaerth or elsewhere.

Ive expanded on those ideas in this thread and others via black holes and specifically their relationship to cubo{6}-octa{8}hedral geometric facts.
#136
Paul
Paul's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 470
1
2
2
Paul's avatar
Paul
1
2
2
-->
@mustardness
Just so I can get a feel for your position, can you tell me what you do believe and don’t believe?

#137
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Paul
Just so I can get a feel for your position, can you tell me what you do believe and don’t believe?
IN regards to what specifically?  Ive made many of my beliefs very clear in this thread and others, including a thread titlle what do you believe.

IF you were at DDO then you may have observed I did the same there for a year or more.

There is no shortage of my stating what I believe in DArt.

Go back through this thread and read my posts if you want to know more. For starters.

Topic's author
#138
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@mustardness
Go back through this thread and read my posts if you want to know more. For starters.

Unfortunately ,ebuc, your posts are often incomprehensible gibberish, so there's not much to go on.
#139
Paul
Paul's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 470
1
2
2
Paul's avatar
Paul
1
2
2
-->
@mustardness
Oh, so you are a Buckminster Fuller fan!

That was just what I needed to know.

Your username mustardness, does that mean you like mustard?

#140
Paul
Paul's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 470
1
2
2
Paul's avatar
Paul
1
2
2
-->
@mustardness
Or are you a mus tard?
#141
Paul
Paul's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 470
1
2
2
Paul's avatar
Paul
1
2
2
-->
@disgusted
If I were to call you a creationist would that be an ad hom attack?

#142
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Paul
No it would just be stupid.
#143
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Paul
If I were to call you a creationist would that be an ad hom attack?
PLease share when you want to address the specifics of any of my comments with any rational, logical common sense.

Ive laid out clearly the a rational, logical common sense pathway to the feasibility ---in this thread, others and at DDO for year or more---  of one or more kinds of eternally existent, black holes ---or other extra-ordinay celestial phenomena--- as a cosmic egg for RNA-DNA coding of most complex humans, or other less complex critters.



#144
Paul
Paul's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 470
1
2
2
Paul's avatar
Paul
1
2
2
-->
@disgusted
Do you find creationists offensive?

#145
Paul
Paul's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 470
1
2
2
Paul's avatar
Paul
1
2
2
-->
@mustardness
What?

#146
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Tejretics
What is the alternative explanation for the origin of life, that isn't abiogenesis?
What do you think caused the origin of life?
The reason why there is a rejection of abiogenesis (the origin of life from nonliving matter) is because it is proposed "Theistically" that first it was a conscious, living Creator/reality that created and manifested the environment (and all within it) in which life forms or embodiments could develop and that souls and awareness could inhabit and carry out their purposes. Even energy itself, which is present with conscious activity, is manipulated and utilized to create forms in creation. So technically speaking "life" and or conscious awareness (living things) in all forms never came about by any inanimate substance of itself or the results of a purely inanimate materialistic process......rather life came first from a living conscious intelligence, AKA "God" or the processes that were used to create this world were established by a living Reality not a non-living one.
So it is an animate, intelligent force that causes life as it exists which would include the evolution of our universe and all within it. While there is a process of creation to get from point A to point B, it is the process of first a living cause. The distinction is the awareness behind the process is what drives everything into being and various forms, it is what animates all living things and acts out its function and that awareness behind all processes and conscious activity comes from the Creator, a living first cause or first Source.
Ultimately matter is energy, and energy in and of itself is not a being per say but it has an awareness behind it driven by a conscious, formless reality and is manipulated to a desired outcome. So to sum it up, abiogenesis would be a misconception, not an accurate way of describing the cause and the origin of life.


#147
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Paul
No! They are just frightened, willfully ignorant children.
#148
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
The reason some others do not address my givens as stated, is that they have no rational, logical common sense that invalidates my givens, as stated.

They believe there is less damage to their ego if they run, hide irrational, illogical lack of common sense ridicule. 

So basically, save their ego *  i  * via immaturity.

Go figure.
Topic's author
#149
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@EtrnlVw
That's indeed one of the many fantasy versions out there, but it's not a reason, it's a rejection and denial of fact.
Topic's author
#150
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@mustardness
No, it's because your posts are incomprehensible gibberish. Go figure.