Intelligent Design Origin Of Life

Maybe messiness somehow jiggered life into existence?

Spread the love

Neatness doesn’t work, it seems:

But research is beginning to show that starting with the right kind of mess is not only more realistic, but more effective at generating the materials vital to life, while also doing away with problems that have plagued purer systems. “There are times when we have mixtures, rather than just the isolated reactants that people typically use, and we get better results,” said Nicholas Hud, a chemist at the Georgia Institute of Technology. When mixtures are taken into consideration, the emergence of life on Earth in some ways “is not as hard as we might think it is.”

In the most compelling evidence to date, Krishnamurthy and a postdoctoral researcher in his lab, Subhendu Bhowmik, looked at how a system of chimeric RNA-DNA molecules — molecules built from the chemical units of both RNA and DNA — produced pure RNA and pure DNA more easily than systems that started out pure. The work, published today in Nature Chemistry, highlights just how essential a diverse, complex blend of ingredients may have been to life’s earliest evolution. …

It also eliminates certain theories: Perhaps it’s time to bid farewell to hypotheses based on a linear, progressive path from the primitive soup to today’s biology, in favor of ideas that embrace the complex mixes of systems chemistry. “If you think of the transition between day and night,” Lazcano Araujo said, “you never go from purely bright shining sun into a dark moonless night. You go through dusk.”

Jordana Cepelewicz, “Origin-of-Life Study Points to Chemical Chimeras, Not RNA” at Quanta

Deep: “If you think of the transition between day and night,” Lazcano Araujo said, “you never go from purely bright shining sun into a dark moonless night. You go through dusk.”

True, but the planetary rotation system already exists, right, governed by gravity? One stage does not invent the next.

It’s not so clear that simple complexity can produce anything. What is the organizing principle? If there is a goal, how does it come to exist?

Paper. (paywall)

See also: The Science Fictions series at your fingertips – origin of life What we do and don’t know about the origin of life.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

7 Replies to “Maybe messiness somehow jiggered life into existence?

  1. 1
    EDTA says:

    Just for sake of argument, if this did succeed, how would they then find out what path was actually taken?

  2. 2
    EDTA says:

    …because, as you all know so very very well: If you can’t show the “how”, then you have absolutely nothing. Just demonstrating that it could have happened that way is insufficient. If you can’t specify _the exact method_, then you gots nothin’!

    {waits to see if people will apply this consistently when the argument falls on the other side…}

  3. 3
    vmahuna says:

    The last I read, the problem with getting DNA out of soup is that any reasonable NATURALLY produced soup is NEVER gonna get you to the magical, self-replicating DNA. And if the magic was possible (1 in a gazillion?), then there is the problem that COMPLETELY unrelated DNA strings should have popped up around the world in a hundred isolated tidal pools. Instead, the last I read, ALL Life on Earth is closely related. The complex Life has more complex DNA, but someplace in there is The Mother of All Earthly DNA.
    So I’m stickin’ with “Life was designed and constructed by an Intelligent Agent. And then that Agent caused that Life to be installed on a VERY carefully designed and constructed Earth.”
    And then, following Behe, “There were then at least 4 separate interventions in which notably more complex Life was installed.”
    And of course WHALES. If you can’t offer SOME explanation for whales, which appeared POOF!, messing about in muddy puddles is just a game. (See the authoritative documentaries in the “Peppa Pig” series.)

  4. 4
    martin_r says:

    “When mixtures are taken into consideration, the emergence of life on Earth in some ways “is not as hard as we might think it is.”

    “is not as hard as we might think it is”

    “is not as hard as we might think it is”

    that is so funny… nothing is as hard as we might think,
    but after 150 years of Origin-of-life research, you romantics has nothing but just-so-stories…

    and it is getting worse with every new discovery ….

    “Move over, DNA. Life’s other code is more subtle and far more powerful”

    “It turns out that every type of cell in our bodies has a unique sugar coating. And whenever anything interacts with a cell, it must recognise that sugar code and use the appropriate secret handshake.”

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24132230-300-move-over-dna-lifes-other-code-is-more-subtle-and-far-more-powerful/

    SO, WHO BELIEVES IN MIRACLES ???

    for more miracles visit my blog at http://www.StuffHappens.info

  5. 5
    Somerschool says:

    I’m so old I can still remember when scientists tried to replicate experiments. I can replicate “messiness” any time I want, but what are the odds I can replicate the EXACT messiness that magically yields life?

    Come to think of it–the Shannon information of a messy room is much higher than the Shannon information of a clean room. So if you need information to get information, messiness IS going to be a better path.

    But which KIND of messiness? Perhaps the initial “chaos” we imagine “in the beginning” was intelligently designed to be exactly the right mess to spontaneously erupt into life? In which case, we need another word for “chaos.”

  6. 6
    Axel says:

    Madness isn’t it ? Just madness. Love the way you framed the question, News !

  7. 7
    Axel says:

    @your #3, Vmahuna,
    Start off with a mad premise and you embark upon a journey into a whole world of madness, don’t you, though I suppose it could be fun exploring the possibilities.

Leave a Reply