| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Bio Evolution Forum » Sun Cycle versus Chemical Fluke Even Scenario.
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Tom Hendricks |
 Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2008 8:49 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Some say I have to prove that life was a reaction to the sun cycle.
No you've got to prove you can do it without a sun.
And that simply cannot be done.
I've said that the sun sets up the 3 requirements for life.
Some constancy, a cycle, and variation within that cycle.
'All the other OOL scenarios are just variations
or subsets within the over riding sun/heat/uv cycle.
Some subsets may have been more important than others..
But they are all within the umbrella of the 3
requirements.
You with chemical scenarios have got to tell me how life can begin
outside of
those 3 conditions caused by the sun/uv/heat cycle.
We both know they cannot.
Perhaps you are downplaying the impact of the sun, as
something that may have started it all, but then takes
a back seat. The problem with every other scenario
is that they cannot keep the cycle going. they can
start this or that, a step here, a possible step
there. But there is no constant continual energy source.
Then there's the fluke replicator scenario. One fluke replicator
that though not adapted to the harsh environment it popped up in,
somehow lasts long
enough to replicate, over and over again, or enough to keep a magical
string of replicators going. All this without any of these superman
replicators having time to adapt
to a harsh environment Somehow they survive without a scratch? And
then the heavy bombardment
comes destroys all life, and the fluke event happens again?
Some take this nonsense seriously as if it
could possibly happen!
What's needed is an overrider - something that is
there always to keep pushing the reactions forward.
no one time fluke has that process within it.
The sun always does.
If you are hesistant to see the sun as all force,
then we must at least see it as the continual constant force
that is cyclical and has variation.
Remember even if a fluke scenario happened it would have to adapt to
its
environment to last.
After an unlikely fluke chemical event, that chemical system
in order to last would have to adapt to the greater sun cycle in
the environment.
Now we require TWO things from these pop and adapt scenarios:
The fluke event, and some magic time while it
adapts to the sun cycle.
In other words you push yourself into a corner of
improbabilities - that are now improbably squared.
But with my scenario, all life is that stable reaction to the sun/uv/
cycle.
So it is not a fragile fluke one time event, but the likely outcome of
forced chemical change in that early earth environment.
In other words your chemical scenario could never have happened and
life didn't happen.
My sun response scenario was the most likely response to what happened
and life was
almost inevitable in that environment.
Comment? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Tue Oct 07, 2008 12:38 am
|
|