Walker and Davies, 2013: The manner in which information flows through and between cells and sub-cellular structures is quite unlike anything else observed in nature. If life is more than just complex chemistry, its unique informational management properties may be the crucial indicator of this distinction . Unfortunately, the way that information operates in biology is not easily characterized.
But then what are the chances that some of this stuff came from Earth in the first place? If there is indeed a road, the traffic might be going both ways.
From Unbelievable: Nanotechnology Prof James (Jim) Tour & Glasgow biology Lee Cronin debate contemporary Origins of Life research and whether Lee’s lab is on the way to discovering it.
Why is a mere science writer now allowed to dump on the gold standard of OOL theories? Stand by…
From ID the Future: On this episode of ID the Future, Robert J. Marks interviews Walter Bradley, co-author of the seminal 1984 ID book The Mystery of Life’s Origin, now being released in a revised and expanded edition with updates from multiple contributors discussing the progress (or lack of it) in origins science in the 35 years since the book’s original publication.
Friends doubt that the random polymerizing of nucleotides is going to explain the origin of information needed for “RNA genomes” to come into existence.
The slingshot of life? According to this version of the tale, the eukaryotes are descended from the Asgard archaea.
Interesting to see Denis Noble taking part in the discussion.
At ScienceAlerts: This particular mineral connoisseur loves to dine on far more exotic rocks – ones that come from space.
But when they do it, it doesn’t sound very random at all.
But the idea continues to exist in the world of half-ideas, the world of “if only.” Ideas that might work as fiction but we want them to be fact. Let’s call it Darwin’s “warm little pond”: “”But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond… ”
It’s just a conventional story in favor of hydrothermal vents for the origin of life. Some of us can remember back to when most such stories would begin by announcing that they had proven Darwin right. Funny how the rhetoric is changing.
Davis goes on to identify exploded science theories, for example, spontaneous generation of life. But stop, wait! The very doctrine of the natural origin of life from inanimate materials teaches precisely this. Is Davis saying that the one true doctrine of naturalism on the subject is wrong?
Sheldon: My best guess is that he has found something organically simple such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), if only because 3.5 billion years is a long time for organics to survive, and PAHs are the sort of keratonized (turned into keragen) that is stable.
This doesn’t leave a lot of time for Darwinian evolution (natural selection acting on random mutation). Not nearly enough, in fact.