Origin of life: Wanting to move on but sticking with Darwinian mechanisms?

The possible mechanisms to explain the origin of life http://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2515-the-possible-mechanisms-to-explain-the-origin-of-life Natural selection is not a possible mechanism to explain the origin of life, since evolution depends on DNA replication When we consider how life might have arisen from nonliving matter, we must take into account the properties of the young Earth’s atmosphere, oceans, and climate, all of which were very different than they are today. Biologists postulate that complex biological molecules first arose through the random physical association of chemicals in that environment. LIFE The Science of Biology, TENTH EDITION, page 3 Neither Evolution nor physical necessity are a driving force prior dna replication. The only two alternatives are either a) creation by an intelligent agency, or b) Random, unguided, undirected natural events by a lucky "accident". Koonin, the logic of chance, page 266 Evolution by natural selection and drift can begin only after replication with sufficient fidelity is established. Even at that stage, the evolution of translation remains highly problematic. The emergence of the first replicator system, which represented the “Darwinian breakthrough,” was inevitably preceded by a succession of complex, difficult steps for which biological evolutionary mechanisms were not accessible . The synthesis of nucleotides and (at least) moderate-sized polynucleotides could not have evolved biologically and must have emerged abiogenically—that is, effectively by chance abetted by chemical selection, such as the preferential survival of stable RNA species. Translation is thought to have evolved later via an ad hoc selective process. Did you read this ???!! An ad-hoc process ?? Without code there can be no self-replication. Without self-replication, you can’t have reproduction. Without reproduction, you can’t have evolution or natural selection. Heredity is guaranteed by faithful DNA replication whereas evolution depends upon errors accompanying DNA replication. ( Furusawa, 1998 ) We hypothesize that the origin of life, that is, the origin of the first cell, cannot be explained by natural selection among self-replicating molecules, as is done by the RNA-world hypothesis. ( Vaneechoutte M ) Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000;901:139-47. The scientific origin of life. Considerations on the evolution of information, leading to an alternative proposal for explaining the origin of the cell, a semantically closed system MARIO VANEECHOUTTE http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.sci-hub.bz/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb06273.x/full We hypothesize that the origin of life, that is, the origin of the first cell, cannot be explained by natural selection among self-replicating molecules, as is done by the RNA-world hypothesis. The hypothesis espoused here states that it is virtually impossible that the highly complicated system cell developed gradually around simple self-replicating molecules (RNA-hypercycles or autocatalytic peptide networks) by means of natural selection; as is proposed by, for example, the RNA-world hypothesis. Despite searching quadrillions of molecules, it is clear that a spontaneous RNAreplicator is unlikely to occur. Reports of nucleotide and peptide self-replication still depend upon human intervention (for instance, by changing the environmental conditions between two rounds of replication or by denaturing the double strands). The problem of denaturing the double-nucleotide strand in a nonenzymatic manner has been overlooked and has contributed to a failure to establish molecular self-replication. The first cell, life, was born and natural selection (selection among variations on the theme of autonomous duplication) commenced. Natural selection requires pre-existing life. https://creation.com/ns-origin-of-life Chance and necessity do not explain the origin of life https://www.academia.edu/1204161/Trevors_J.T._Abel_D.L._2004_Chance_and_necessity_do_not_explain_the_origin_of_life_Cell_Biology_International_28_729-739 Selection pressure cannot select nucleotides at the digital programming level where primary structures form. Genomes predetermine the phenotypes which natural selection only secondarily favors. Contentions that o?er nothing more than long periods of time o?er no mechanism of explanation for the derivation of genetic programming. No new informationis provided by such tautologies. The argument simply says it happened. As such, it is nothing more than blind belief. Science must provide rational theoretical mechanism, empirical support, prediction ful?llment, or some combination of these three. If none of these three are available, science should reconsider that molecular evolution of genetic cybernetics is a proven fact and press forward with new research approaches which are not obvious at this time. 5 Elshamah

“How can Darwinian evolution emerge?”

The better question is "will we give in?" When our skills and technology have increased, and the time is arrived, will we give in and add the symbol system, or will we hold steadfast and grow it instead? :) Upright BiPed

That "life will be produced in the laboratory within the next 2/5/20 years" must be true. They've been saying it for the last 50 years. aarceng