Re: OOL III - Connecting the Blocks

From: Anthony Cerrato (tcerrato_at_optonline.net)
Date: 03/06/05 

Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 19:10:12 -0500 (EST)

"Larry Moran" <lamoran@bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca> wrote in
message news:d0adof$1v4c$1@darwin.ediacara.org...
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 01:15:06 -0500 (EST),
> Perplexed in Peoria <jimmenegay@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > I probably WILL sound like a kook before I finish this
series of
> > postings. However, in this case, you have simply
misread me (mostly
> > my fault). I did say "These kinds of bonds between
building blocks",
> > not "this kind of reaction".
> >
> > As far as your comment regarding the hubris of attacking
OOL armed
> > with only textbooks...
> >
> > I admit that I have never chopped rat's liver, measured
Michaelis
> > constants, or performed a pulse-chase experiment. But I
have read
> > many of the articles in Annual Reviews of Biochemistry,
puzzled
> > through Koshland's papers on enzyme mechanism and
Yarus's papers
> > on proofreading, etc. I am at least a little bit better
prepared
> > than most of the people who discuss OOL in this group.
>
> Have you noticed that the people who know the most about
biochemistry
> and molecular biology are the ones who are *least* likely
to propose
> grandiose schems on the origin of life? Why is that?
>
> A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
>
>
>
> Larry Moran

Sounds like you are making a more general statement than one
just about OOL and biochemists/molecular biologists--one
about any thinkers in a field, on its fringe or even from
another field. For the general case even, perhaps your
conclusion is true because they fear that they have too much
to lose in being proved wrong or even just rediculed by
their established peers. Sometimes it is the braver thinkers
who have less baggage to carry come up with the greatest
seminal ideas (e.g., Watson and Crick--unless of course you
consider chemists not to count or DNA's structure not
grandiose enough...patent officer, Einstein, might be too
unique an example, but I would also count great inventors
like Edison and Bell, and many others with little experience
in the various fields in which they worked, in this category
also.) A little knowledge is not always a dangerous thing!
...tonyC

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OOL I - Manifesto and metatheory
    ... finally finished my 5-part reply to OOL X, so now I have time to catch ... > The problem is to explain how life as we know it came to be. ... successful replicator to be the most difficult to solve. ... Only the biochemistry running day-to-day ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: OOL III - Connecting the Blocks
    ... > grandiose schems on the origin of life? ... biochemist I have met personally - Harlan Wood - produced no grand schemes, ... most OOL theorizing is done by non-biochemists. ... be claimed that biochemistry has nothing useful to say about OOL. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: OOL III - Connecting the Blocks
    ... >> Have you noticed that the people who know the most about biochemistry ... >> grandiose schems on the origin of life? ... Another reason is that, of all the sciences, biochemistry is ... I don't follow OOL much, but you are starting to make me ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)