Explaining the Cancer Information Calculation

Yes. And I would modify “not knowing for sure” into “basically having no clue”. When we basically have no clue what is required for life, we can’t make a judgement call about what it must be comprised of.

Yes, it would be pure speculation to say they possibly aren’t required, and it would be pure speculation to say they are required. The fact that they are used by life as we know it, doesn’t mean they are required for life.

And we have evidence that there are fundamental processes in life as we know it, that can function without complex protein machines and enzymes and modern cell membranes. Again, vesicles made of simpler fatty acids and related compounds are semi-permeable to small mollecules and ions. Some fundamental metabolic reactions have been shown to not require enzymes to catalyze them, as simple inorganic minerals, and metals, can catalyze them.

Our ignorance of what can and does happen in nature really is rather astounding. No, life using something now doesn’t mean life can’t exist without it, at all.

I do not think Tour is an apologist and ignorant. That should be clear.

Speaking more broadly, I’m concerned about the tone on this thread.


A post was merged into an existing topic: Regarding James Tour

Don’t you think it’s a bit naive to present life as a collection of molecules without metabolism?

What about metabolism-first hypotheses? Do either Meyer or Tour address them at all?


Tour doesn’t anywhere that I have seen. To be fair, I’m not actively hunting down every last thing he ever said or wrote.

1 Like

Yes, those are the questions. We don’t currently know what sequences are needed. We don’t know what type of sequences are needed. We don’t even know whether a particular type is needed, or if there are lots off possible types of sequences that would work. So your earlier claim that:

… is unjustified.