That is something atheists and assorted Bible-rejecters cannot answer in scientific terms. Without intelligent design at the beginning DNA would have never become the essential part of life on earth that it is. But God-rejecters have no scientific clue where the intelligent design came from which created DNA. Francis Crick was awarded a Nobel Prize for his research into DNA, and he suggested DNA came to earth on spaceships piloted by aliens. I guess Crick refused to believe God designed and created life on earth just like the Bible says.
-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
How did DNA originate?
- Thread starter marke
- Start date
Or an intelligent Being.
That's right. God created DNA which was essential for DNA to provide reproduction of different life forms maintaining their different species through the reproductive genetic code.
Right Divider
Body part
Kinds and not species. Kinds is more general.
It's semantics. I read once that there are dozens of different classifications of species which researchers call "the species" problem because none of them completely agree among themselves. Wikipedia once had an article titled "The Species Problem." That was later changed to read "The Species Concept." Here is what is said:
Species - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Right Divider
Body part
No, it's not.
Yes, there is a significant different between KIND and SPECIES.I read once that there are dozens of different classifications of species which researchers call "the species" problem because none of them completely agree among themselves. Wikipedia once had an article titled "The Species Problem." That was later changed to read "The Species Concept." Here is what is said:
The species problem is the set of questions that arises when biologists attempt to define what a species is. Such a definition is called a species concept; there are at least 26 recognized species concepts.[1] A species concept that works well for sexually reproducing organisms such as birds may be useless for species that reproduce asexually, such as bacteria. The scientific study of the species problem has been called microtaxonomy.[2]Species - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
There are different species of elephant, but they are all clearly the elephant kind.
Last edited:
Again, you are right but not completely. Human classifications of "species" are muddled at best, but the Biblical designations of "kinds" are not muddled at all.
Right Divider
Body part
Just pointing out that kind and species are different levels of classification and that species is quite a bit more vague and changing.
Where is the designation of "kinds" defined in the Bible?
Species are not clearly defined in secular textbooks and kinds are not clearly defined in the Bible. I think it is common sense to believe kinds in the Bible pertain to different kinds of creatures that have maintained certain distinctions among themselves since the beginning. There is no evolution, especially from plant to animal or from animal to human.
Amino Acids are found on meteorites. Amino Acid molecules readily link together in a tight bond. RNA is a single strand of amino acids. Areas of the RNA strand has weak attraction that will form weak bonds with anther strand. DNA is two strands wound together with weak bonds. This is the stuff of a chemical computer.
Miller and Urey created amino acids of sorts in the lab, but their experiment has done more to cause researchers to believe the abiogenesis of life on earth without input from outside earth is impossible. Making amino acids that cannot create life is nothing to brag about. It is like making robots that cannot reproduce through intercourse.
Right Divider
Body part
Yes, since the meteorites came from the earth to begin with.
Indeed, God's creation has many "computers".
Miller and Urey attempted to re-create the conditions of primordial Earth. In a flask, they combined ammonia, hydrogen, methane, and water vapor plus electrical sparks (Miller 1953). They found that new molecules were formed, and they identified these molecules as eleven standard amino acids. From this observation, they posited that the first organisms likely arose in an environment similar to the one they constructed in their flask, one rich in organic compounds, now widely described as the primordial soup. This hypothesis is further extended to the claim that, within this soup, single-celled organisms evolved.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
I can show you a mass of amino acids that is in the exact proportion, along with the mass of proteins and carbohydrates and all of the other goodies that we know are 100% essential for life. And we still are unable in the lab to generate life from it.
Spoiler
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
New life is precluded from emerging in an environment where other living creatures will usurp the resources.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
So you're saying a corpse isn't the ideal conditions for new life to emerge. There must be better conditions.
Existing microbes must be kept from gobbling up stuff.