John Moonstroller


This conversation is closed.

Which came first, the chicken or the DNA.

Evolution for TED dummy's 101.

"Abiogenesis is the study of how biological life could arise from inorganic matter through natural processes. In particular, the term usually refers to the processes by which life on Earth may have arisen". ~ wikipedia.

We are seeking to demonstrate how the process got started and how it continued to function, leading to the first single cell animal capable of replicating itself and became more complex by forces of nature impinging on its structure.

We must: (with citations included)
1. Establish the basic conditions for life to form from scratch;

2. Detail the reactions necessary to create the most primitive form of life.

3. Detail how those reactions contributed to the development of a mechanism that led to single cells capable of replicating their selves.

4. Demonstrate how evolutionary forces (dynamic conditions of environment) continues to impact all complex forms of life inducing them to evolve to more complex lifeforms.

This is not a debate about how gods or aliens created life on our planet. It is a demonstration of how an evolutionary process can establish a primitive from of life that ultimately evolves into a single cell animal that is capable of replication. This is done to answer the basic question implied by the question above.

Citations are required. Posts should follow the order of
Suggestion, Demonstration, Citation.
Followed by commentary reply's to support, alter or delete each suggestion.

This is a challenge to indirectly make the case that using the Internet, we can cooperatively work out solutions to the most complicated of problems without demeaning ourselves in the process.

If you don't have a profile, please don't comment because we have no way to weigh your argument. The formats must be in a context to enlighten the most uninformed of minds on TED. PM me if you have questions, to avoid clutter.

Closing Statement from John Moonstroller

Well, I'm convinced that most of the commenters Just don't get it, then wonder why people take them out of context and or just can't understand the why to got that response.

Even if you give directions, most of the TED crowd will fail to follow directions and get it wrong.
Perhaps they are too much into what they want to say instead of what needs to be said.

I'm also convinced they have no friends who are employees of Wallymart.

Most TEDsters are 0010-110-0101-0101 111-0010 000-0000-00-1.

  • Sep 26 2012: The amino acids that DNA consists of are among the many amino acids that form more or less spontaneously from water and carbon when a heat or radiation is added, it even happens on comets in space. From there it's just waiting for a long time until you get molecules that can replicate themselves, they will be subject to evolutionary laws and may eventually become DNA, RNA or whatever systems alien lifeforms use.
    • thumb
      Sep 26 2012: I see you've taken the lead John Smith. I think you should introduce yourself (you have no profile. why should we trust your words? To save us from clutter, you cold qualify yoursle by creating a profile. If you don't want to do this then I further suggest:

      I think your suggestions are a bit over the head of most people; what is an amino acid?
      I think you should delete you post and copy this one instead to put things in perspective.

      "Hypotheses about the origins of life may be divided into several categories. Most approaches investigate how self-replicating molecules or their components came into existence" ~ wikipedia

      Afterwards, I can delete my reply and we can continue this discussion.
  • thumb
    Sep 27 2012: Nether the chicken or the DNA came first but the idea. I think that makes better sense than trying to contemplate what came first. You could find Nobel Prize winning work on RNA and DNA discoveries. Scientists now have created XNA which I'm not %100 comfortable with. In natural life on Earth, the nucleic acids DNA and RNA are formed by sugar molecules — deoxyribose in DNA and ribose in RNA — that link to phosphates to form a backbone onto which the four nucleotide bases attach to form a chain.Reading guys like Edwards' post make me think a defensive stance is taken when not all that necessary. We shouldn't look at things as absolutely right or wrong. Isaac Asimov' Relativity of Wrong may be lengthy but illustrates a great point in my opinion.
    • thumb
      Sep 27 2012: It all makes sense to me.... what is deoxyribose?
      • thumb
        Sep 27 2012: C_5 H_10 O_4
        • thumb
          Sep 27 2012: Gee Justin you are one smart person.. ;)

          That almost looks like Morse code to me. ;)
          000 10 1011 11 1111 010 0 < can you decipher this?

          That's how your chemical formula looks to the average person. ;)

          That's an actual Morse code message if you can decipher it you will get my message.
  • thumb
    Sep 27 2012: Edward, as a former practitioner of Judaism, I have special feelings for Christians, especially when I read the History of the Jews.

    ThIs is not about the bible or Christians. It's about evolution.
  • thumb
    Sep 26 2012: Hi there John,

    Quite an interesting topic. In my view, the short answer is that DNA came before the chicken, from a creature very similar to a chicken but not quite one yet...

    It is hard to make an abstract here of a topic that is still being researched actively today. I include a link below... Basically The idea is that RNA was probably self replicating before DNA existed... and even other simpler molecules (TNA : threose nucleic acids, that can actually bond to both RNA and DNA) may have carried genetic information even before RNA and DNA

    The usual interpretation from non-scientists is that since Miller was not able to create life as a random process in his lab, then it must not be possible.

    But I remember watching a science show where they talked about the original Miller-Urey experiment, comparing it to baking some fancy bread. However, there are hundreds of ways of mixing the ingredients and baking them, but only a few of those ways will result in the desired outcome.

    Turns out that by following the same principle as Miller, but breaking the process in two separate stages, they were able to synthesize some rna bases from non-living carbon compounds. I have to dig out to find you a link to that TV show (Nova Science in PBS or something like that)...

    In the mean time... if you have some free time, dig in:

    • thumb
      Sep 27 2012: "It is hard to make an abstract here of a topic that is still being researched actively today. I include a link below... Basically The idea is that RNA was probably self replicating before DNA existed... and even other simpler molecules (TNA : threose nucleic acids, that can actually bond to both RNA and DNA) may have carried genetic information even before RNA and DNA"~ Andres Aullet

      You are correct. That's why I was hoping to take it one step at the time. But..... you know how that goes in TED. :)

      I know it's hard, but if you could put together, in less than 2000 characters, a "from the beginning" process, it would help guide others.

      I'll be spending some time on my forum tonight and probably won't get to answer all the questions. So any help would be appreciated. My granddaughter gave me a cold and I'm chasing my nose around the house.
      • thumb
        Sep 27 2012: In the beginning, there was energy. Lots of it. As the universe cooled down, some of that energy actually was transformed to matter (yes e=mc2 is more than just a pop culture symbol). Most of the matter was protons electrons and neutrons. These cooled down to form hydrogen and helium, and gravity started pulling those together. When gravity compresses hydrogen beyond certain point, it starts fusing into helium, producing energy during the process. When the hydrogen is depleted, helium starts fusing into beryllium and carbon, then carbon into neon, then carbon and neon into oxygen, oxygen into silicon. The most massive stars end up at iron. Iron does not fuse. But when the massive star collapses, it can become a supernova, and the explosion creates all the other heavy elements

        In particular, the carbon atom is funny. If you remember, electrons can only occupy certain energy levels, and carbon has 2 in the inner layer and 4 in its outer layer. This creates a configuration that has a slight electric field (the electrons are not distributed as a perfect circle around the nucleus, but rather form some bumps) These bumps (negative) make carbon a very friendly atom, capable of "sticking" with many others, in particular with Hydrogen, Oxygen and Nitrogen.

        Just like lego's there is many ways to put these together, and some configurations are more stable than others. These "molecules" also have bumps all over their bodies, bumps that make them attractive or repulsive to other molecules. Some molecules stick to others easily and strongly (good candidates for making chains), other molecules stick to others and start dissembling them (good candidates for enzymes).

        From there, one can imagine all sorts of combinations of these molecules that stick together, meeting others that insist in dissembling them... and at some point, the dissembled molecules find a way to reassemble themselves over and over.

        etc etc etc
  • thumb
    Sep 26 2012: That' really cool Edward. Exactly how did DNA arise? How did it evolve? What were the actual chemical reactions that caused it to come into being?
    • thumb
      Sep 26 2012: I hope you are not asking me how DNA came into existence and what it is made of. I am a Christian who knows there is only one Creator who can make something out of nothing. Ask a scientist if you want a bunch of hypothetical formulas and recipes for biomatter.
      • thumb
        Sep 27 2012: I know it's hard Edward, but it is not impossible. God gave us brains for a purpose. (Others should not read too much into this statement).

        Or, If God gave us brains it was done for a reason. I would guess we are to use them.

        Give it a shot..... :)
        • thumb
          Sep 27 2012: I wonder if you find comfort in thinking that all Bible believing Christians are non-thinking morons. Some intelligent, insightful, inventive, open-minded folks are Christians. If you want to win friends and influence people you should avoid smug insinuations that thinking would be a new experience for them. I think, I reason, I consider, I am open to accepting positive proof that my understanding is fallacious. What do you have that is truth-based? Prove the Holy Bible is wrong John, I know it's hard but give it a shot.
    • thumb
      Sep 27 2012: One interesting thing about DNA is that it has evolved for some time and then it just stopped evolving, when it had become universal.
  • thumb
    Sep 26 2012: A living organism is not a requirement for DNA, but DNA is a requirement for a living organism.
    • thumb
      Sep 26 2012: Actually all living organisms have dna on them in the form of bacteria at the very least and bacteria is what makes most living processes work.
      • thumb
        Sep 26 2012: Your comment has what to do with my observation that DNA exisits independently of chickens, but chickens do not exist independently of DNA?
    • thumb
      Sep 27 2012: So your saying that dna can exist outside the living organism?
      I don't know. Can anyone answer this question?
      • thumb
        Sep 27 2012: DNA that encodes an organism only does so because it "needs" that organism in order to replicate.
        For DNA to survive outside a cell, it needs protection. It needs sunblock, for instance.
  • thumb
    Sep 26 2012: DNA and RNA are the very first thing that happen and that created bacteria, which you are more bacterial and bacteria DNA then human DNA