I read that. Explain how that disproves Miller-Urey.
When a lot of people use ad hominem, I really would rather do other things. I wanted this mod to tell me which other poster he was talking about.
That’s easily visible if you scroll back and look - our quote boxes have a little arrow button that will take you to the post that is being quoted. And in any case this is not the right place to discuss the moderation. Will you please drop it and return to the actual discussion?
Chirality is all left handed amino acids, to form a protein. Miller/urey made left and right handed. This alone precludes life.
They still made lefties. If the right handed AAs preclude life, why would that disprove the left?
You need ALL left handed. It sounds weird, but I didnt make this up.
Chirality has nothing to do with left handedness only Read it again.
No, I was right the first time. Take your own advice.
Enough.
You want a debate? Fine.
It is now time for you to state your case and present your evidence for Creationism. How about directly stating the evidence for the length of time life has existed on this planet..and yet another glib(and deliberately vague) “Read your Bible” is not acceptable.
It is now your turn to present your case.
chirality defeats miller/urey
Just look up the right handed aminos from miller/urey. Thats it.
How do you account for there being to different Creation stories in the Bible?
While there are flood myths throughout the world, there is no evidence for a universal flood that happened at once. Why?
Miller ureys experiments have been repeated many times, with oxygen present and chirality is not an issue, over time selective pressures cause one form to dominate.
I think this is all I need for now, sorry for the spam, bbl hopefully.
Are you aware there are right handed forms of AAs in nature?
How long ago did life begin on this planet?
Where is the evidence for a world-wide flood?
How many animals did Noah have in that ark?
Wow, now that was something to behold.
I could almost hear everyone’s “voices” when I was reading that.
I don’t think I’ve ever encountered the ‘chirality’ argument before.
Provide a link or reference to documentary evidence of vestigial leg bones being critical or important to the mating process in whales please.
Since this is still going on, but has settled down to a point where reef shark should be able answer a simple question, I’ll throw this one into the ring. How did the animals in the Ark get to their present positions? This is a difficult problem. The Americas and Australia are separated from West Asia not only by great distances but oceans. And all this is supposed to have happened in a few thousand years. Also, a great many animals are obligate consumers of things which exist only in their current locations. For example, koalas eat only eucalyptus leaves. How did koalas get from Mount Ararat to Australia, when there were no eucalyptus trees in Asia? How did they cross to the island? For bonus points, why is there no fossil record of them having existed anywhere else?