[thechat] Stupidity should be cured, says DNA discoverer

Erik Mattheis gozz at gozz.com
Sun Mar 2 15:42:01 CST 2003


On Sunday, March 2, 2003, at 03:10  AM, aardvark wrote:
> presuming that assertion is correct, (the chicken/egg one), which i
> don't buy (but it's late and i just don't have the brainpower or
> strength to start pulling books off the shelf over there), ;et's just
> pull a number out of the air...

The RNA/DNA thing is fundamentally different than the chicken/egg thing:

The similar assumption with RNA/DNA would be:

A female chicken came first, and it came pregnant and gave birth to a
male. Or that two eggs came first, one male and one female. Or a female
egg came first and it hatched on it's own and the resulting chicken
experienced an immaculate conception and gave birth to a male.

So the chances of life originating by chance are: probability that DNA
spontaneously appeared multiplied by the probability that RNA
spontaneously appeared multiplied by the probability that DNA and RNA
spontaneously appeared close enough together for the RNA to duplicate
the DNA.

Or maybe a precursor to DNA which could reproduce without the aid of
RNA spontaneously appeared and evolved into the DNA/RNA thing.

Nonetheless, a google search for "directed panspermia" +crick yields
some interesting reading.

-----------------------
Erik Mattheis
GoZz Digital
<http://goZz.com/>
Flash and ColdFusion Development
Minneapolis, MN
-----------------------




More information about the thechat mailing list