islam is growing in the west

[Syed]

The question of exactly how DNA arose (and how many times) is not yet resolved; There are a number of hypotheses that have supporting evidence, and that have not yet been shown to be incorrect, all of which involve simpler chemical precursors. None of them include a 'who', much less a God, as there is exactly zero evidence for such a thing, and to postulate one would raise far more questions than it would answer.

Our best hypotheses for the origin of DNA is that it evolved from RNA precursors:

The first step in the emergence of DNA has been most likely the formation of U-DNA (DNA containing uracil), since ribonucleotide reductases produce dUTP (or dUDP) from UTP (or UDP) and not dTTP from TTP (the latter does not exist in the cell). Some modern viruses indeed have a U-DNA genome, possibly reflecting this first transition step between the RNA and DNA worlds. The selection of the letter T occurred probably in a second step, dTTP being produced in modern cells by the modification of dUMP into dTMP by thymidylate synthases (followed by phosphorylation). Interestingly, the same kinase can phosphorylate both dUMP and dTMP. In modern cells, dUMP is produced from dUTP by dUTPases, or from dCMP by dCMP deaminases. This is another indication that T-DNA originated after U-DNA. In ancient U-DNA cells, dUMP might have been also produced by degradation of U-DNA.

The origin of DNA also required the appearance of enzymes able to incorporate dNTPs using first RNA templates (reverse transcriptases) and later on DNA templates (DNA polymerases). In all living organisms (cells and viruses), all these enzymes work in the 5' to 3' direction. This directionality is dictated by the cellular metabolism that produces only dNTP 5' triphosphates and no 3' triphosphates. Indeed, both purine and pyrimidine biosyntheses are built up on ribose 5 monophosphate as a common precursor. The sense of DNA synthesis itself is therefore a relic of the RNA world metabolism. Modern DNA polymerases of the A and B families, reverse transcriptases, cellular RNA polymerases and viral replicative RNA polymerases are structurally related and thus probably homologous (for references, see a recent review on viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerases.) This suggests that reverse transcriptase and DNA polymerases of the A and B families originated from an ancestral RNA polymerase that has also descendants among viral-like RNA replicases.

(source)

The emergence of DNA is therefore a result of progressively more simple precursor molecules, via simple chemistry. DNA comes from RNA, which comes from simple Phosphates and simple sugars, such as Ribose. Phosphate is just Phosphorous and Oxygen, and will form spontaneously if these two elements are present; similarly Ribose can form spontaneously where water and carbon are present, particularly in reducing conditions where energy is available, but carbon is relatively scarce. Both Phosphate and a variety of simple monosaccharides, including Ribose, have been observed in interstellar dust clouds - they form by atoms simply sticking together. The atoms themselves are generated by nuclear fusion in the cores of stars, from Hydrogen. So the origin of DNA is:

Hydrogen -stars-> Carbon, Phosphorous, Nitrogen and Oxygen
Phosphorous, Oxygen and Hydrogen -simple chemistry-> Phosphates and simple sugars; Amino acids
Phosphates and simple sugars -simple chemistry-> RNA
RNA and Amino Acids -RNA catalysed chemistry-> Proteins
RNA -Protein catalysed chemistry-> DNA
DNA -Protein catalysed chemistry-> all of modern biochemistry

Each step starts with something simpler, and leads to something a little more complex; And so, from very simple beginnings, we can explain the existence of the complexity we see today.

The alternative hypothesis - that complex systems can only derive from systems that are more complex than themselves - runs into a logical dead-end. If humans are so complex that only a hugely complex and powerful God could have made them, then God requires an even more complex and powerful creator; which in turn requires an even more complex and powerful creator, and so on forever. The only way to break this death-spiral of logic is to assume that at some point, something just exists without cause. There is exactly zero reason to imagine that this 'uncaused cause' would be highly complex. I can stomach the idea of a few simple particles spontaneously arising from nothing, or having simply existed eternally, far more easily than the idea that something sufficiently complex as to have intelligence could do so. And all the evidence points towards simple origins. We know that the universe gets simpler, the further back in time we look. A handful of quarks, plus a few billion years, leads to everything we observe today without any need for intelligent intervention of any kind, prior to the (relatively recent) spontaneous evolution of intelligence.

.

all the thing you wrote above is some body eyewitness to that or just somebody imagination?

All of this chemistry can be directly observed in the laboratory. Imagination doesn't come into it.

do you think in the future human able to create living creature?

 

[Keith&Co.]

do you think in the future human able to create living creature?

Future?

I created a living creature 26 years ago. And twins 22 years ago!

 

[Syed]

w

what is the mechanism behind that life appeared on earth?

Complex chemistry powered by some energy source. It can be volcanic vents (tectonic), solar energy or both.

we have complex chemical and energy sources PLUS BRAIN POWER could we create life? if not why not?

 

[Syed]

are we evolving NOW?

Yes, we (as in humanity, not as individuals) are still evolving, and will continue to do so as long as DNA copying is an imperfect process.

.

do you think in future human will be free from ALL sickness from cold to cancer?

if evolution--survival of the fittest was / is true we should not have sickness by NOW

 

[Syed]

do you think in the future human able to create living creature?

Future?

I created a living creature 26 years ago. And twins 22 years ago!

can you create bird?

 

[whichphilosophy]

Yes, we (as in humanity, not as individuals) are still evolving, and will continue to do so as long as DNA copying is an imperfect process.

.

do you think in future human will be free from ALL sickness from cold to cancer?

if evolution--survival of the fittest was / is true we should not have sickness by NOW

Evolution is a constant battle. As we develop antibodies to combat viruses and germs etc, so these (viruses and germs etc) also evolve to combat the antibodies. They like us have an urge to survive and perpetuate their species. I think it is very unlikely we will ever have a world completely free from sickness.

 

[Keith&Co.]

if evolution--survival of the fittest was / is true we should not have sickness by NOW

No, Syed.
If evolution is true, then diseases are evolving just like the animals they infest. So as we evolve immunities, they evolve to defeat them.

And, again, Evolution is not a move towards perfection, but just enough of an advantage to get by a little better than the competition.

If survival of the fittest were true, it would probably not mean what you think it means.

- - - Updated - - -

Future?

I created a living creature 26 years ago. And twins 22 years ago!

can you create bird?

Yes, although after one small digital amputation when I was 12, the one on my right is not deep enough to satisfy.

 

[skepticalbip]

All of this chemistry can be directly observed in the laboratory. Imagination doesn't come into it.

do you think in the future human able to create living creature?

We can already create the amino acids and have created self replicating organic molecules so we are getting closer. It took life a few billion years to get started in nature. Humans have only been working at it for about a hundred years.

 

[DBT]

what is the mechanism behind that life appeared on earth?

Complex chemistry powered by some energy source. It can be volcanic vents (tectonic), solar energy or both.

we have complex chemical and energy sources PLUS BRAIN POWER could we create life? if not why not?

3 billion years of microbial life prior to the Cambrian ....and not a brain in sight. Then another 500 million years before we evolve, and then we nearly went extinct during the last ice age... Allah dragging His feet on creation? Or does this paint a picture of natural evolution? I'd say the latter is far more likely.

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

what is the mechanism behind that life appeared on earth?

Good question, Syed? So tell us, what is the mechanism behind Allah creating life on Earth? Magic?

 

[Syed]

why do we evolved ?

why do any living thing evolve ?

Because DNA replication is not 100% successful and there can be slight differences between generations. A small percentage of those slight differences are positive traits for the environment the organism is in. Over the course of thousands of generations, those slight differences add up.

.

so without DNA there will be no life correct?

 

[Keith&Co.]

Because DNA replication is not 100% successful and there can be slight differences between generations. A small percentage of those slight differences are positive traits for the environment the organism is in. Over the course of thousands of generations, those slight differences add up.

.

so without DNA there will be no life correct?

Define how you mean 'life' in this context, Syed.

 

[Syed]

so we evolved to became better from our imperfection ? correct ?

No.

Evolution isn't about getting better; it's purely about survival and reproduction. If you don't have descendants, then your traits vanish, no matter how 'good' they might have been. If you do have descendants then your traits persist.

why does chemical or our body care about that we have descendant ?

 

[Keith&Co.]

No.

Evolution isn't about getting better; it's purely about survival and reproduction. If you don't have descendants, then your traits vanish, no matter how 'good' they might have been. If you do have descendants then your traits persist.

why does chemical or our body care about that we have descendant ?

It doesn't CARE, Syed.

You've been told this in no uncertain terms, many times, in many ways.

And yet, you persist in doggedly sticking to a cartoon understanding of biology.

It makes it impossible to take you seriously, Syed.

 

[Syed]

why do we evolved ?

why do any living thing evolve ?

Because, like thieves in American capitalism, some are better suited to current conditions than others, so are in a better position for successful breeding, obviously.

are you sure

we human evolved from fish to what ever else to human just to successful breeding?

 

[Syed]

islam is growing in the west

why white western christians converting to islam?

I just noticed that those are two different things, Syed.
The number of muslims in Britain is growing, but the nation's trend overall is actually towards religious indifference. Not towards islam. Which would make sense if the biggest thing going for Islam is immigration, rather than conversion.

So many Muslims are crowding in, but the conversions are towards atheism, or apatheism.

i am ONLY saying is islam is spreading in among white people ... i know atheism is spreading faster among white people

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

Every time I see a thread started by the OP, I get the feeling we're violating the Prime Directive.

 

[skepticalbip]

No, we are not currently evolving. Our children and their children and so on, however, will evolve slightly from us as we evolved from our ancestors.

why do we evolved ?

why do any living thing evolve ?

Just to demonstrate to religious folk how foolish they are for believing the folklore in their holy books.... god works in mysterious ways..

 

[bilby]

No.

Evolution isn't about getting better; it's purely about survival and reproduction. If you don't have descendants, then your traits vanish, no matter how 'good' they might have been. If you do have descendants then your traits persist.

why does chemical or our body care about that we have descendant ?

It doesn't care. But those of us who don't have any will not be represented in future generations. And those who do, will. Everyone alive today had great great grandparents who had children. That's not because people CARE about having great great grandparents; It's not because we made a choice to have them. It's just a simple and obvious fact that people who have no children, don't have any great great grandchildren either.

 

[Keith&Co.]

i am ONLY saying is islam is spreading in among white people ... i know atheism is spreading faster among white people

As most of your threads demonstrate, Syed, what you KNOW has little to do with the world we LIVE IN.