How could prebiotic information-bearing DNA sequences survive in the face of competition from a vast excess of shorter molecules with random sequences? Scientists now show that a relatively simple mechanism could have done the trick.
How could a self replicating organism survive without error correction?
How do you get error correction in a step by step process as it requires the simultaneous appearance of amino acids, proteins and DNA?
It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee. The simple to complex Darwinian model is broken.
Arguments from ignorance.
It’s time to smell the coffee: Your position is based entirely on fallacious reasoning.
I am not the first to come with this. This problem has been surfaced over 50 years ago. The environment is constantly causing DNA to mutate. Your not a coffee drinker
I completely agree, creationists have been making fallacious appeals to ignorance since the dawn of thought.
It is ironic that you are arguing from ignorance, in direct defiance of published scientific work demonstrating the opposite of what you are arguing.
Can you even offer any other arguments than your mere insistence that this isn’t possible and that you just don’t believe it? What’s wrong with the paper published in the OP?
It’s not creationists Rum its a Nobel prize winning scientist.
In 1971, for example, he posed the paradox that without error-correction enzymes, the length of a nucleic acid would be limited because, in larger molecules, mutations would destroy the information content of subsequent generations. But this maximum size (or error threshold) was too small to encode an error-correcting enzyme.
So you didn’t read the OP. How unsurprising.
Bill, this is the very problem they are proposing to have a solution for. Eigen (your “Nobel prize winning scientist”) and Schuster proposed a solution in 1978. Which oddly enough is also referenced in the paper the OP is based on.
How about you go read it?
I read it Rum. Why do you think this solves the problem of error correction and self replication?
This is idiotic. Why do you ask a question they are answering in the paper you are claiming to have read?
Clearly, you either didn’t read it, or didn’t understand it. Which one is it Bill?
This information has accumulated and been successfully transmitted over billions of years of evolution
This is the assumption in most scientific papers on this subject. It is in reality an unsupported claim. There is no answer to the origin of this information.
How do you know you understood it Rum? Please in your own words show you understand how the paper shows the problem of replication and error correction.
Do you really think that a discussion of sequences alone even scratches the surface of this issue?
Whether you agree with common descent, it is not an aspect of their experiment or model, so has zero bearing on their results. So no, this shitty and brainless excuse of yours also doesn’t work.
This has nothing to do with common descent. It is related to an information generating mechanism.
No, I’m not going to hold your hand and explain it to you. By now it is absolutely obvious that you didn’t read the paper, and are now just flailing wildly because you tried and didn’t understand any of it.
I’m not convinced you have even tried to read it yet.
Ok, you cannot defend your claim. This is not like you Rum what gives?
Wrong Bill, the sentence you quoted has to do with common descent.
The paper is about the origin of self-replication of polymer sequences, that is the origin of stable inheritance of sequence information. So it is about both subjects, and you’re wrong on both counts. So no, you can’t just brainlessly dismiss it. You have to read and understand it.
How do they self replicate?
Bill it is obvious you don’t understand it and want me to explain it to you.
If you will just admit to that instead of your silly prideful blustering, I will do it. You admit you don’t understand it, then I will help you by explaining it.
Rum I understand it, the concept is pretty simple. You made a claim that this solves the harsh environment error correction problem. It does not even address it.
Then explain to me what the “dilemmas” in this sentence refers to:
The hypercycle proposed by Eigen and Schuster is a
theoretical concept that can overcome both dilemmas .
A hypercycle is a ring-shaped network of replication
reactions in which the product of a replication cycle
catalyzes the reaction of the following replication cycle.