Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

From the BBC: Complex organic molecule found in interstellar space



Iso-propyl cyanide has been detected in a star-forming cloud 27,000 light-years from Earth.

Its branched carbon structure is closer to the complex organic molecules of life than any previous finding from interstellar space.

It’s not an amino acid or anything, just the most complex molecule involving elements necessary to life that has been found to date.

Better not invest in advance alien civilizations or flying saucer technology based on this.

See also: Can all the numbers for life’s origin just happen to fall into place?

Origin of life: Could it all have come together in one very special place?

Maybe if we throw enough models at the origin of life… some of them will stick?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Eric Anderson, Yes, you have to ignore a lot of things in the name of gradualism, which leaves a lot of gaps. Convinced that gradualism has just gotta be true, some people invoke pure speculation based on either the "not--completely--understood--yet of the gaps" or the "Darwin of the gaps," and call it science. -Q Querius
Querius @17: From the cited article:
"Understanding the production of organic material at the early stages of star formation is critical to piecing together the gradual progression from simple molecules to potentially life-bearing chemistry," said Belloche.
Not really. It is interesting. Maybe even slightly relevant. But understanding the production of organic material isn't going to get you anywhere toward understanding "life-bearing chemistry," particularly if you think life came about through a "gradual progression" from simple molecules on up. Ignore the information problem, ignore codes and semiotics, ignore the specification aspect -- ignore those things and you will never understand how to go from simple organic molecules to "life-bearing chemistry." Eric Anderson
Querius @15: Great idea!
In support of this outrageous idea, I give you the Frankenstein-like genome of the platypus, which was obviously the result of some last-minute plagiarism, and the fact that someone didn’t wipe down one of the lab tables . . .
LOL! Eric Anderson
Apparently the BBC is staffed with simple people. 12 is apparently highly complex, especially to those who can only count to 11. ;-) Good point. Actually, I think a 12-atom molecule is among the largest ones, though not "complex" by any stretch of the imagination---although Science Daily does a lot of stretching! http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140926213634.htm -Q Querius
Is this a scam? Did somebody hack the BBC website to make them look like goofs? Here's isopropylcyanide: C4 H7 N1 12 atoms! That's what the BBC calls a "complex" molecule. chris haynes
Great posts all! It's interesting how Pascal's observation is as true today as then. Even with some of the Darwinists that post here, one can see an unwillingness to accept the slightest contrary evidence. So, while God's attributes are clearly seen in his creation, it also true that "For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false." Now for my speculation. Maybe God created the heavens and the earth in the same way that Alexander the Great conquered the known world (not by himself). God delegated his creation. God gave his six class project teams each a final grade: four teams received a rating of "Good," one team received a "Very Good," and one team did not receive a rating (they messed up so bad that God had to step in and fix it). In support of this outrageous idea, I give you the Frankenstein-like genome of the platypus, which was obviously the result of some last-minute plagiarism, and the fact that someone didn't wipe down one of the lab tables, leaving some stuff floating around in space. ;-) And yes, welcome wayne moss. -Q Querius
wayne moss:
Thank you, Mung..I am honored to be here. I assure you that I have no desire to appear intelligent, or provocative, or to advance my personal opinion of “what the world needs..”
I'm not so modest. :) The word needs more people like you! Mung
Wayne, you sound like someone with fresh thoughts, that would contribute to UD's dialogue. Welcome aboard. KF PS: You may find worldview musings here on also helpful whatever you finally conclude. kairosfocus
Oxytocin -- dangerous stuff! Maybe . . . addictive or habit-forming. Should be banned! There, fixed the prob! (Tongue firmly in cheek.) KF kairosfocus
Thank you, Mung..I am honored to be here. I assure you that I have no desire to appear intelligent, or provocative, or to advance my personal opinion of "what the world needs.." Probably just the opposite : I think what the world needs, is fewer voices spouting certainty. If anything, I want to advertise the still unknown, and embrace the remaining mysterious. I often worry that a "spell" has been cast on impressionable young thinkers, convincing them that All is Understood, that Time is an illusion; free-will is an illusion, consciousness is an illusion, design is an illusion, objective morality is an illusion -- and even Love itself, is just a steady drip of oxytocin, moderating 'kin selection'. We are allies, I believe, in the struggle against this depressing determinism. And if we happen to endorse the possibility that the cosmos is brimming with Life most fascinating, and brace it with the further claim that life's origin will not easily be uncovered, we offer an agenda of wonder, and purpose, and discovery. Perhaps it is just a delusion, but it's a delusion of Hope, and a wonderful weapon against the materialist's wall of illusion, and the nihilism that that denial of 'self' leads to. wayne moss
welcome wayne, all viewpoints are welcome here at UD. Mung
and let's also not forget the soon to be released 'privileged species' video, that is based on Michael Denton's research, which provides solid support for Gonzalez's overall thesis:
Privileged Species - Trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAHPTwGZSP4 Dr. Michael Denton Interview Excerpt Question 14: 14. Q: ,,,you also detail that nature isn’t fine-tuned for just any kind of life, but life specifically like human life. Would you expound on this for our readers? A: there are certain elements of the fine-tuning which are clearly for advanced being like ourselves.,,, http://successfulstudent.org/dr-michael-denton-interview/ The Place of Life and Man in Nature: Defending the Anthropocentric Thesis - Michael J. Denton - February 25, 2013 Summary (page 11) For complex beings of high metabolic rate, the designs actualized in complex Terran forms are all that can be. There are no alternative physiological designs in the domain of carbon-based life that can achieve the high metabolic activity manifest in man and other higher organisms. http://bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/article/view/BIO-C.2013.1/BIO-C.2013.1
Verse and Inspirational Music Video:
Isaiah 45:18-19 For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens, who is God, who formed the earth and made it, who established it, who did not create it in vain, who formed it to be inhabited: “I am the Lord, and there is no other. I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth; I did not say to the seed of Jacob, ‘seek me in vain’; I, the Lord speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.” View from the ISS (International Space Station) at Night - inspirational video https://vimeo.com/45878034#
tjguy, sorry to be so broad in my definition of 'friendly for life' (I should have known it would be picked up on). Of course biological life can hardly exist in the hostile conditions of outer space, nor inside the interior of stars. Nor on any other planet that does not meet a host of qualifying conditions for habitability. To illustrate this point,,, Astronomer Frank Drake (1930-present) proposed, in 1961, advanced life should be fairly common in the universe. He developed a rather crude equation called the 'Drake equation'. He plugged in some rather optimistic numbers and reasoned that ten worlds with advanced life should be in our Milky Way galaxy alone. One estimate of his worked out to roughly one trillion worlds with advanced life throughout the entire universe. In the following video, Carl Sagan, again using rather optimistic numbers, calculates that 10 technologically advanced civilizations may exist in the milky way galaxy alone.
Carl Sagan - Cosmos - Drake Equation - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlikCebQSlY
Much to the disappointment of Star Trek fans, the avalanche of recent scientific evidence has found the probability of finding another planet with the ability to host advanced life (or even bacterial life) in this universe, when ALL factors are considered, is not nearly as likely as astronomer Frank Drake had originally predicted.
Linked from Appendix C from Dr. Ross's book, 'Why the Universe Is the Way It Is'; Probability for occurrence of all 816 parameters approx. equals 10^-1333 dependency factors estimate approx. equals 10^324 longevity requirements estimate approx. equals 10^45 Probability for occurrence of all 816 parameters approx. equals 10^-1054 Maximum possible number of life support bodies in observable universe approx. equals 10^22 Thus, less than 1 chance in 10^1032 exists that even one such life-support body would occur anywhere in the universe without invoking divine miracles. http://www.reasons.org/files/compendium/compendium_part3.pdf Hugh Ross - Evidence For Intelligent Design Is Everywhere (10^-1054) - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4347236
,,,and let's not forget the 'privileged planet' principle, which holds that any life supporting planet in the universe will also be 'privileged' for observation of the universe,
The very conditions that make Earth hospitable to intelligent life also make it well suited to viewing and analyzing the universe as a whole. - Jay Richards Privileged Planet - Observability Correlation - Gonzalez and Richards - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5424431 The Privileged Planet - The Correlation Of Habitability and Observability - book “The same narrow circumstances that allow us to exist also provide us with the best over all conditions for making scientific discoveries.” - Guillermo Gonzalez - Astronomer http://books.google.com/books?id=lMdwFWZ00GQC&pg=PT28#v=onepage&q&f=false The Privileged Planet – video playlist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ohuG3Vj_48&list=PLbzQ4aXdqWD-9kjFsSm-cxNlzgrkJuko7
BA says:
That the universe is designed to be friendly for life is not controversial. That the universe can produce life on its own is:
I'm not so sure. The Bible tells us that God specifically created earth to be inhabited - Isaiah 45:18. And that's what we see, isn't it?
For thus says the Lord, Who created the heavens, Who is God, Who formed the earth and made it, Who has established it, Who did not create it in vain, Who formed it to be inhabited: “I am the Lord, and there is no other.
So that is what we know. God at least created our earth for that purpose and for all practical purposes, we see this to be true. At this point we know of no other life anywhere. We know the requirements for habitability are many and the chances of that happening by chance anywhere in the universe are quite low it would seem. I think at least 11 conditions have been mentioned for habitability so even if the planet lies in the habitable zone, that does not mean it is habitable. In fact, chances are it is not really habitable. And even if there are other planets that meet all 11 of the requirements by chance, does that mean that life would evolve there? People talk as if it is a cinch for life to evolve - like all we need is a habitable planet and wala! we get life. Really?!! Here I agree with BA. Could life evolve anywhere by chance? Knowing what we know about life, again it seems highly highly questionable. Wayne, you might believe that the Designer wants to hide, but actually the Designer said that just by looking at His creation, anyone should be able to discern His existence so that all are without excuse. Romans 1:19-20
"because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,"
Wayne Moss, no need for the designer to hide. Pascal said it best:
In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don't.
I think that goes for design in the universe also. RexTugwell
That the universe is designed to be friendly for life is not controversial. That the universe can produce life on its own is: Along that line: Simulations reveal an unusual death for ancient stars - September 29, 2014 Excerpt: Certain primordial stars -- between 55,000 and 56,000 times the mass of our sun, or solar masses -- may have died unusually. In death, these objects -- among the universe's first generation of stars -- would have exploded as supernovae and burned completely, leaving no remnant black hole behind.,,, "We found that there is a narrow window where supermassive stars could explode completely instead of becoming a supermassive black hole -- no one has ever found this mechanism before,",,, They found that primordial stars between 55,000 to 56,000 solar masses live about 1.69 million years before becoming unstable due to general relativistic effects and then start to collapse. As the star collapses, it begins to rapidly synthesize heavy elements like oxygen, neon, magnesium and silicon starting with helium in its core. This process releases more energy than the binding energy of the star, halting the collapse and causing a massive explosion: a supernova.,,, These simulations show that once collapse is reversed, Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities mix heavy elements produced in the star's final moments throughout the star itself. Depending on the intensity of the supernovae, some supermassive stars could, when they explode, enrich their entire host galaxy and even some nearby galaxies with elements ranging from carbon to silicon. In some cases, supernova may even trigger a burst of star formation in its host galaxy,,,, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/09/140929090559.htm The Elements: Forged in Stars – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-LXUHJmzzc bornagain77
Haven't they already found amino acids on meteorites? Unsure why this is news. Dr JDD
What I came here to say, is I think that ID proponents should not be averse to supporting the idea of prolific life, throughout the cosmos.
Absolutely correct. There is no logical reason why an intelligent designer would be limited to creating life only once in only one small part of the universe. We have discussed this several times here, but it is worth repeating. Eric Anderson
Not sure I'm completely welcome to comment here, but I feel a need to speak. I'm naturally agnostic, but I prefer to believe in a loving and active God. I support the notion of Intelligent Design, but only through a natural delivery mechanism like Panspermia. (I sincerely believe that a Designer would effectively HIDE all evidence of design, as a means of guaranteeing intellectual freedom, and righteous curiosity.) What I came here to say, is I think that ID proponents should not be averse to supporting the idea of prolific life, throughout the cosmos. wayne moss
The dirt worshippers strike again. Mapou

Leave a Reply