It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: dusty1
a reply to: Phantom423
You think no one is watching. Let me tell you, you never know who you're talking to.
I think I do.
Do you have anything intelligent to actually talk about, or are you going to just continue with insults?
Did you say that or did you not? Where in any of Crick's work did he ever say that it was IMPOSSIBLE for DNA to have formed on its own. He never said that. You made it up. You're a liar and a fraud.
Did you not read any of my responses?
For the last time, the statement came from a pro Crick/ Directed Panspermia website. If you dispute the statement take it up with them.
Why did Francis Crick come up with the theory of Directed Panspermia if he was satisfied with the natural origins of life on earth?
Directed Panspermia Hypothesis
Directed Panspermia suggests that the seeds of life may have been purposely spread by an advanced extraterrestrial civilization, or can be spread from Earth to other planets by humans.
The probabilities of creating a chain 200 amino acids long is "approximately equal to a one followed by 260 zeros!" "This number is quite beyond our everyday comprehension" he goes on to say that this number is greater than all the atoms in the visible universe, ( 10 followed by 80 zeros)
Abstract
The formation of well-ordered nanostructures through self-assembly of diverse organic and inorganic building blocks has drawn much attention owing to their potential applications in biology and chemistry. Among all organic building blocks, peptides are one of the most promising platforms due to their biocompatibility, chemical diversity, and resemblance with proteins. Inspired from the protein assembly in biological systems, various self-assembled peptide structures have been constructed using several amino acids and sequences. This review focuses on this emerging area, the recent advances in peptide self-assembly, and formation of different nanostructures, such as tubular, fibers, vesicles, spherical, and rod coil structures. While different peptide nanostructures are discovered, potential applications will be explored in drug delivery, tissue engineering, wound healing, and surfactants.
Abstract Self-assembly of biomolecules has gained increasing attention as it generates various supramolecular structural assemblies having potential applications principally in biomedical sciences. Here, we show that amino acid like tryptophan or tyrosine readily aggregates as nanotubes via a simple self-assembly process. These were characterized by FTIR, scanning electron microscopy, and by fluorescence microscopy. Nanotubes prepared from tryptophan are having ~200 nm inner diameter and those from tyrosine are having the same around ~50 nm diameter.
Abstract
In recent years there has been increasing interest in nanostructure design based on the self-assembly properties of proteins and polymers. Nanodesign requires the ability to predictably manipulate the properties of the self-assembly of autonomous building blocks, which can fold or aggregate into preferred conformational states. The design includes functional synthetic materials and biological macromolecules. Autonomous biological building blocks with available 3D structures provide an extremely rich and useful resource. Structural databases contain large libraries of protein molecules and their building blocks with a range of sizes, shapes, surfaces, and chemical properties. The introduction of engineered synthetic residues or short peptides into these building blocks can greatly expand the available chemical space and enhance the desired properties. Herein, we summarize a protocol for designing nanostructures consisting of self-assembling building blocks, based on our recent works. We focus on the principles of nanostructure design with naturally occurring proteins and synthetic amino acids, as well as hybrid materials made of amyloids and synthetic polymers.
Abstract
Self-assembling systems play a significant role in physiological functions and have therefore attracted tremendous attention due to their great potential for applications in energy, biomedicine and nanotechnology. Peptides, consisting of amino acids, are among the most popular building blocks and programmable molecular motifs. Nanostructures and materials assembled using peptides exhibit important potential for green-life new technology and biomedical applications mostly because of their bio-friendliness and reversibility. The formation of these ordered nanostructures pertains to the synergistic effect of various intermolecular non-covalent interactions, including hydrogen-bonding, π–π stacking, electrostatic, hydrophobic, and van der Waals interactions. Therefore, the self-assembly process is mainly driven by thermodynamics; however, kinetics is also a critical factor in structural modulation and function integration. In this review, we focus on the influence of thermodynamic and kinetic factors on structural assembly and regulation based on different types of peptide building blocks, including aromatic dipeptides, amphiphilic peptides, polypeptides, and amyloid-relevant peptides.
Abstract We report the formation of both right- and left-handed chiral nanopores within a single domain during the self-assembly of an amino acid derivative on an inert Au(111) surface using STM. DFT calculations employed to rationalize this unusual result identified that intermolecular interactions between chiral, windmill-shaped tetramers are crucial for self-assembly.
So is Ejaz a liar and fraud?
In conclusion, to give a purpose to his extensive effort to explain replication, Crick states that by understanding the complexity of the process of replication, the proposed idea of life originating in a primitive soup appears to be an unlikely and miraculously slow one that could not have sprung forth in such an elaborate manner, so as to produce a higher race capable of thinking in less than 2 billions of years.
Crick found it impossible that the complexity of DNA could have evolved naturally.
originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: cooperton
B. Crick never said...
originally posted by: Phantom423
About peptide self assembly...
originally posted by: dusty1
a reply to: Phantom423
His point is this astronomical number was for a modest length polypeptide chain. Imagine how big the number would be for a longer chain!
The beginning of life has no bearing on it and attempting to marry 2 disparate fields of study is intellectually dishonest.
"But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity etcetera present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes [..] "
originally posted by: dusty1
a reply to: peter vlar
The beginning of life has no bearing on it and attempting to marry 2 disparate fields of study is intellectually dishonest.
So was Darwin or the writers of this article intellectually dishonest?
Did Life Evolve From A Warm Little Pond ?
"But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity etcetera present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes [..] "
Link
D. I read Crick's book and quoted pertinent portions of it in an above reply and in Crick's own words he admits that it's an hypothesis with no supporting evidence
E. His hypothesis was formulated in the 1970's, 40 years before proof of molecular self assembly was found
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
You can't have the evolution of species through natural selection without first having life to begin with. I mean, without species, then what's to evolve?
originally posted by: cooperton
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
You can't have the evolution of species through natural selection without first having life to begin with. I mean, without species, then what's to evolve?
This is a good point. Which is why anyone claiming evolution to be true, must inherently believe in some sort of abiogenesis event.
Yet this entire question is shoved aside because it is a monumental leap, especially considering the base requirements of even the most rudimentary prokaryote.
originally posted by: dusty1
a reply to: peter vlar
D. I read Crick's book and quoted pertinent portions of it in an above reply and in Crick's own words he admits that it's an hypothesis with no supporting evidence
E. His hypothesis was formulated in the 1970's, 40 years before proof of molecular self assembly was found
Richard Dawkins is specifically asked about Francis Crick and Leslie Orgel who came up with Directed Panspermia.
Why didn't Dawkins dismiss the question in the context of the individuals mentioned?
originally posted by: dusty1
a reply to: cooperton
Cooperton
What these guys refuse to acknowledge is this forum is called Origins and Creationism, and yet they feign outrage that someone dares to actually mention origins and creation.
Oh, and Peer Review? Give me a break.
Most Scientists 'cant replicate studies by their peers'
To act like Science is filled with nothing but altruistic individuals searching for truth is naïve at best.
Not all, but most people, are motivated by getting laid, money, and status.