Re: Which Came First


"Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:domuha$20ue$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "gareth" <garethcn2@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dok7u9$15uf$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Of course an energy source would have to exist before
replication, no
> > one in their right mind would disagree with that. Didn't
I answer this
> > for you before? Is this some thinly veiled trick to try
and convince us
> > that a god exists?
>
> Gareth,
>
> You are too suspicious. Tom has been posting his origin
ideas
> to this group for a long time. Few here would praise
Tom's logic
> but no one would call him a Creationist. He is promoting
a purely
> physical explanation of life. The only eccentricity is
that he
> is absolutely convinced that the sun is involved - whether
as a
> source of uv rays, or a diurnally periodic source of heat
for
> driving a PCR-like reaction, or in some other way.
>
> Tom's views are 'religious' only if you classify fuzzy
new-age
> sun worship as an organized religion.
>
> Lighten up.
>
> PiP

Yes, I agree. I suspect Tom is seeking not just a direct
physical explanation of OOL (as we know it,) he is looking
for the smallest
set of minimal criteria needed for such life--his conclusion
seems to be that only a sun's various direct heat cycles is
required for this task (plus appropriate availability of
"chemical resources/
raw materials.") While I would say that restricting his OOL
criteria to that single idea is somewhat simplistic and
appears eccentric, I consider it more of an "idée fixe"
which he appears unable to sacrifice at any cost.

While I have generally agreed that it's obvious an energy
source is needed for OOL, I think it's wrong to exclude
energy sources different than stellar energy from contention
for this purpose (e.g., volcanic or thermal vent heat
sources, planetary radioactivity or internal frictional
tidal heating, or even just
electromagnetic sources.) Besides the fact that energy
sources other than direct seller radiation may possibly work
for OOL, Tom also seems to take a simplistic view of the
complexity of the
question of stability criteria that need to be considered
for those earliest, sensitive and vulnerable pre-life
chemicals and proto-life forms. He seems to depend only on a
sort of metaphorical principle of "survival of the fittest"
in the face of sun heat cycles. That such proto-life must
survive for more than fleeting instants under many other
assaults than thermal variations seem out of Tom's serious
consideration.

No offense to Tom, but for the above reasons, I had stopped
trying to propose any new or unusual ideas to Tom in his
heat cycle threads, or even to just respond to them; I
simply don't think he will accept anything other than his
one stop/shop OOL concept of sun heat cycles explaining
everything. ...tonyC


.