Are there any questions in particular that you wish to ask? That’s a very broad topic to discuss without having something specific in mind.

I think I remember reading something about that but it was years ago and my memory’s rusty. I have read a very interesting theory that life originated with completely RNA-based organisms, in which the RNA strands served all the necessary functions now performed by not just RNA but also DNA and proteins. I’ll have to dig out one of my books on it but it was fascinating how RNA might be able to take on those additional roles.

Fascinating article, and it set me off on a whole trail of reading about the moons of Saturn and Jupiter and whatnot. Great stuff. good post. If could boost your points on this forum somehow I would.

As of 2005 biologists believe that very early in Earth’s history the simple chemicals: Carbon Monoxide, Carbon Dioxide, hydrogen, ammonia, water, and nitrogen were present in the atmosphere. Sunlight produced energy for these chemical compunds to undergo redox reactions with each other. As a result, more complex chemicals such as Formaldehyde and Hydrogen Cyanide formed. As the compounds were heated further they reacted to form even more complex chemical molecules such as acetaldehyde, glycine, and ribose (a sugar). Inestingly, as you may know, some of these molecules are essential to life and are found in our bodies. Eventually, these chemicals were dissolved into rainwater and then fell into oceans.

At this point, biologists believe these chemicals reatced to form a strand of RNA. RNA is known to self replicate. So there is the most important aspect of the first living entity. It is replication. Movement, consuming food particles, and cellular life was not the first living entity. The single ability to self-replicate defined the RNA chemical strand to be alive. This idea of chemicals changing through time and eventually producing a self-replicaitng chemical compund is called chemical evolution. Oddly, biologists don’t know how chemical evolution led to the creation of RNA. They do however believe that it did, and they are also certain about the formation of the previous chemicals I mentioned.

I hope you found my rant informative! Please let me know what you think.

I do believe this theory to be plausible because chemical reactions do form these molecules in the laboratory. Further scientific evidence regarding lipids and nucleic acids also makes this theory sensible. The major flaw is how chemical evolution created RNA.

I just read the discover article and I must say it is fascinating! Interestingly, it refutes everything I just said in my last post! How could have the molecules react in the sea ice without a heat source in the ice?

So according to the article a heat source was not needed. It was the close proximety of particles that allowed them to react with each other. That is a sensible theory. The information I told you was from my college Biology textbook copyrighted 2005 so it is accurate to a certain extent. But you are correct because most theories are just theories! Obviously no one has proven the true origin of life… yet. I think that as long as scientists have explanations for the orgin of life that can be tested and proven to a certain extent it is probably a plausible theory, which obviosuly means there are many.

I don’t think we’ll ever know for certain how life originated on Earth, so discussing theories and possibilities is probably all we can ever do.

Morgyn, you keep mentioning your lack of a scientific background. If you don’t mind my asking, exactly how far along are you in your education?

I don’t have that much formal schooling either, just a year at university, but I’m about to be going back to finish a biology degree and then work on a doctorate. Of course that still doesn’t mean I know what I’m talking about any better or worse than you do.

What about the Divine Creation Theory? Recently, a friend of mine talked about it. In the case of Cain when he left after killing his own brother, he married a woman definitely. Some people asked, "if we came from apes, how come that Adam and Eve weren’t that hairy ? Now, would it be right to say that we did came from Adam and Eve or the other way around? Still human, however not being directly from them?