
RNA, the Epicenter of Genetic Information by John Mattock and Paulo Amaral, from CRC Press/Taylor and Routledge:
Book Description The origin story and emergence of molecular biology is muddled. The early triumphs in bacterial genetics and the complexity of animal and plant genomes complicate an intricate history. This book documents the many advances, as well as the prejudices and founder fallacies. It highlights the premature relegation of RNA to simply an intermediate between gene and protein, the underestimation of the amount of information required to program the development of multicellular organisms, and the dawning realization that RNA is the cornerstone of cell biology, development, brain function and probably evolution itself. Key personalities, their hubris as well as prescient predictions are richly illustrated with quotes, archival material, photographs, diagrams and references to bring the people, ideas and discoveries to life, from the conceptual cradles of molecular biology to the current revolution in the understanding of genetic information.
Key Features
Documents the confused early history of DNA, RNA and proteins – a transformative history of molecular biology like no other.
Integrates the influences of biochemistry and genetics on the landscape of molecular biology.
Chronicles the important discoveries, preconceptions and misconceptions that retarded or misdirected progress.
Highlights major pioneers and contributors to molecular biology, with a focus on RNA and noncoding DNA.
Dramatically glowing reviews include:
“This book is really disruptive and presents a coherent view of our understanding of biology in terms of the genetic molecules, the nucleic acids, DNA and RNA. It covers an immense territory of molecular biology and its history of discoveries, all presented with a clear-cut intellectual thread.
… It is very timely by its breadth and emphasis on the role of RNA in biology. It makes a strong case for RNA and its late acceptance… the fight uphill, like that of Sisyphus, was tough and demanded a lot of perseverance. It is really rather complete.”
Eric Westhof, University of Strasbourg
Remember the people who used to say, of their DNA, “This is me”? Didn’t wear well, that.
off topic
THE WATER PARADOX (a 2020 paper)
https://media.nature.com/original/magazine-assets/d41586-020-03461-4/d41586-020-03461-4.pdf
PS: RNA world, just another miracle among many other miracles Darwinists have to believe in …
quote from preceding video
Or to put it more bluntly, “The RNA world hypothesis: the worst theory for the early evolution of life (except for all the others)”
A couple of more notes:
BA77
thanks for the Robert Shapiro video, especially the part commenting on Miller-Urey experiment… was funny … here is it:
https://youtu.be/ku9wUbbPVYg?t=140
As Genetics advance the Origin of life from mud , soup or any other materialist method is moving further away. 😆
“At a recent meeting in Chicago, a highly distinguished international panel of experts was polled. All considered the experimental production of life in the laboratory imminent, and one maintained that this has already been done-his opinion was not based on a disagreement about the facts but on a definition as to just where, in a continuous sequence, life can be said to begin.” (George Gaylord Simpson [Professor of Vertebrate Paleontology, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University], “The World into Which Darwin Led Us,” Science, Vol. 131 (3405): 966-974 (April 1, 1960).
This statement was made 60 years ago; such a statement would definitely not be made today, as nothing close to life has ever been produced in the laboratory.
The materialist hypothesis of the Origin of life being not proved scientifically is accepted BY FAITH and is the official dogma in scientific world. Who would think that is possible that an unproved fact to be imposed as truth in science?
Same thing with darwinism . People study already created forms of life and genomes and have no clue about total complexity in a simple bacteria otherwise WHY would perform experiments over experiments anymore? Because they can’t break the intrinsic code of life and don’t have the full understanding of life.
LCD
You are definitely wrong. Never underestimate a Darwinist.
A very similar statement was made in 2014.
Here you go:
Jack Szostak, (Harvard, Nobel laureate) a famous OOL researcher in a 2014 interview announced he’d have “Life in the lab in 3-5 years, more likely in 3 years” :)))))))
It is 2022, and what he got ? Nothing. Dreams and fantasies. :))))
the full 2014 interview with Szostak:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jack-szostak-life-in-the-lab_b_5540478
PS: In that interview, Szostak is mentioning the same what i posted above, the water paradox
🙂 Well I’m not wrong in 1960 they announced the life in lab is imminent. In 2014 they said 3-5 years. In 2050 they will say :in 50-60 years and so on. The time gap became bigger.
Are they not ashamed to keep a belief that nobody proved as serious scientific argument ? This is not science is metaphysical materialism=religion.
“Inanimate nature possesses no ability to exercise the foresight, choice contingency, integrative engineering intent, or metabolic motivation necessary for programming a triplet codon
sign system.” (David L. Abel)