How Did RNA & DNA Come Into Existence ?

If they said it once they said it a thousand times semantically evolution does not address this topic, however it has also brought quandary and confusion to evolutionist scientists. If they cared to admit the full implications of DNA, it would also bring total destruction to their theory.

Yet the very title of this forum says "Origins" so in this thread we will be discussing what is theorized as the origins of RNA & DNA ?

The honest educated science people will say we simply don't know, others will attempt the "I have studied this and I think this is what happened".
Other may have a more hardened view because that's their personality, but really their theories are no stronger than the next scientists.
It would be like fighting over science fiction lore about what is more plausible given our current knowledge.

“Prebiotic processes naturally randomize their feedstock. This has resulted in the failure of every experimentally tested hypothetical step in abiogenesis beginning with the 1953 Miller-Urey Experiment and continuing to the present. Not a single step has been demonstrated which starts with appropriate supply chemicals, operates on the chemicals with a prebiotic process, and yields new chemicals that represent progress towards life and which can also be used in a subsequent step as produced. Instead, the products of thousands of experiments over more than six decades consistently exhibit either increased randomization over their initial composition or no change.

A Natural Origin of Life(book)

TRANSLATION PACKAGE NEEDED AT BEGINNING

The amount of information in the genetic code is so vast that it would be impossible to put together by chance. But, in addition, there must be a means of translating it so the tissues can use the code. Not only did the DNA have to originate itself by random accident, but the translation machinery already had to be produced by accident—and also immediately! Without it, the information in the DNA could not be applied to the tissues. Instant death would be the result.

"The code is meaningless unless translated. The modern cell’s translation machinery consists of at least fifty macromolecular components which are themselves encoded in DNA; the code cannot be translated otherwise than by products of translation. It is the modern expression of omne vivum ex ovo [‘every living thing comes from an egg’]. When and how did this circle become closed? It is exceedingly difficult to imagine."

- Chance and Necessity(book)

This translation package has also been termed an "adapter function." Without a translator, the highly complex coding contained within the DNA molecule would be useless to the organism."The information content of amino acid sequences cannot increase until a genetic code with an adapter function has appeared. Nothing which even vaguely resembles a code exists in the physio-chemical world. One must conclude that no valid scientific explanation of the origin of life exists at present."

Self Organization Origin of Life Scenarios and Information Theory - Journal of Theoretical Biology


DNA is Code.

Codes require intelligence.

That’s empirical.

Meditate on those facts of reality.

This might be a bit technical, but it may help answer your question...

The origin and evolution of DNA

And, a surprisingly thourough explanation of DNA from Wikipedia, look tt the evolution part.

Just because DNA is complicated, does not mean that it was created by an intelligence and coded, rather than jut evolved as part of nature and the past.

What I find surreal is the amount of atheists who say creationists don’t understand science, how can anyone so easily dismiss codes, the equal to written messages being transferred and translated from nothing
There are just so many questions that go begging

People can say aliens and that’s fair but where did the aliens come from?

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Mediate on those facts of reality.

Surely you meant meditate my good man.


Just curious. What if you're right? What if there is a creator, and evolution isn't quite right?
Then what?
What have you actually proven, in your opinion?

a reply to: paraphi

Reading through that, these terms are used describing the science bridging it all together.

" most likely "

" possibly reflecting "

" might have been "

" this suggests "

" whose origin is obscure "

" possible to imagine "

" have suggested "

" logically implies "

Translation - we think we know, but really we don't.

originally posted by: paraphi


Just because DNA is complicated, does not mean that it was created by an intelligence and coded, rather than jut evolved as part of nature and the past.

Added bold.
Talk about understatement of the century.

If I said my PC happened to appear one day in a muddy puddle in my back yard you would call me crazy.
Yet my PC is infinitely more simple than a single 'simple' cell.

Something designed us, period.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33


Well I feel the universe was trail/error
of frequency creating vibration
(I like to call Gods voice)
thus creating energy.. and eventually
life as we now know it...

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Mediate on those facts of reality.

Just curious. What if you're right? What if there is a creator, and evolution isn't quite right?
Then what?
What have you actually proven, in your opinion?

Very good question, all these threads I either create or comment on are just to break people from 100% dependence on the evolutionary theories and it's concepts of the origins of our existence which is in my opinion is like a drug that is trapping the mind and it's very addictive. It panders to those of the highest intellect and education making it extremely hard for them to break free from.
However if they do experience the epic epiphany(red pill) it becomes their own spiritual journey to discover.
You can only defeat one major lie at a time, the next ones belong in another forum altogether.

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: paraphi

Reading through that, these terms are used describing the science bridging it all together.

" most likely "

" possibly reflecting "

" might have been "

" this suggests "

" whose origin is obscure "

" possible to imagine "

" have suggested "

" logically implies "

Translation - we think we know, but really we don't.

Exactly.
Giving something a fancy name and pretending that you now understand what "it" is and why "it" exists no more explains the origin and circumstance of "its" creation than randomly typing words onto a screen in the hopes the answer might find itself....

quote]originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
Translation - we think we know, but really we don't.

Taking a paper apart to concentrate on the detailed use of words is fraught with danger. What about I posted is incorrect, or less likely than the DNA was coded by an alien, or some other omniscient God?

The accepted origins of DNA are well understood and can be articulated and explained, unlike intelligent design, or coding. BTW I am no atheist, so not arguing from an anti-whatever position.

originally posted by: paraphi
quote]originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
Translation - we think we know, but really we don't.

The accepted origins of DNA are well understood

Are they really, they might be within some in the scientific community, but it ties into abiogenisis and right here on ATS the most ardent supporter of evolution have said we really don't know, but that doesn't matter because evolution has nothing to do with it anyways.

RNA deteriorates quickly in a normal watery environment. In a hot environment it deteriorates very quickly. Any DNA or RNA that accidentally formed would break up quickly. DNA and RNA need cellular protection or they become muck very quickly. The notion that they accidentally formed is one horrible scientific fable. The notion that they accidentally formed with a usable code that would somehow then allow proteins to accidentally form is beyond preposterous.

Yet I read a report that one biochemist felt they were created in 400 degree water at the bottom of the ocean.
It seems that proteins get cooked pretty good in just stove top boiled water. These idea's are great science fiction lore for Star Trek that is all.

DNA doesn't really do anything unless it's already in a viable living structure like a cell. As for how it originated, it was sucked in the form of a tiny bacterial-like cell from some distant point in future (or maybe it was just yesterday) through a micro vacuum conduit back in time to around 4 billion years ago -- a least in this neck of the universe. Well, you say, how did that life come to be? The answer of course is that it grew from a cell that came from the future. Because that's the way time works.

Just because DNA is complicated, does not mean that it was created by an intelligence and coded, rather than jut evolved as part of nature and the past.

I think something as incredibly complicated as DNA does require a designer or intelligence. It is not happening randomly, even if we suppose a billion years was involved.
JMO, but I think pure materialism falls short with the supposition that almost literally anything can happen, given enough time.

a reply to: Blue Shift

I see you have a toroidal picture
otherwise know as
the shape of the EMF
that on metaphysical
level we all have
DNA isn’t in our soul...
Or is it...
Do we create our own creation?

originally posted by: stosh64

If I said my PC happened to appear one day in a muddy puddle in my back yard you would call me crazy.
Yet my PC is infinitely more simple than a single 'simple' cell.

Something designed us, period.

Exactly. Imagine if I told someone a hybrid combustion-hydrogen-fuel cell generator developed in a muddy puddle in my back yard. No one would believe it. But that's exactly what mitochondria are... They metabolize food into hydrogen gas carried by co-enzymes to form an electrical gradient in the membrane which turns a turbine that generates energy for the cell



No way this could form by random chance. It humbles the work of even the best industrialists and robotics engineers.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Do you just get randomly emotional at times and feel the need to start several fallacious invalid dishonest threads at once talking about the same nonsense?

WTF, this is old stuff, there are already 20 threads in this section talking about this. You people are the biggest liars on earth. Just stop already. Holy #.

a reply to: cooperton

Well that's original, you've never posted that before. LMFAO!!!!

originally posted by: Barcs
a reply to: cooperton

Well that's original, you've never posted that before. LMFAO!!!!

haha and this^ is always your rebuttal. Blind mockery. You are incapable of holding a scientific discussion.

Don’t mind me, I’m just here to be
ignored that’s all.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Evolution does nopt adress it, because its not part of evolution.

Simple Nucleic acids have been seen in space, and after simple experiments with basic atmospheres and electrical discharges. Nucleic acidcs (which includes RNA and DNA) are not that complex chemicals, and their behaviours are simple chemical reactions.