Nothing in any of the papers you have referenced supports these conclusions. You are literally just making all that up.
This is at best an extremely unfair and untrue statement. First I need to review what it is that I have actually said.
“Stated simply it would would be much less efficient in using the energy available to it ,because of wasting much of the energy that it has on side reactions that at best don’t help it survive but more likely actively work against its ability to survive, while simultaneously actively consuming the available reagents that it needs to even exist at all.”
Which part of this conclusion is unjustified the fact that ribozymes are less efficient than enzymes? In a paper entitled “The RNA world hypothesis: the worst theory of the early evolution of life (except for all the others)” the author notes:
The majority of naturally occurring ribozymes catalyze phosphoryl transfer reactions – the making and breaking of RNA phosphodiester bonds [51]. Although the most efficient of these ribozymes catalyze the reaction at a comparable rate to protein enzymes – and in vitro selection has isolated ribozymes with a far wider range of catalytic abilities [9,51] – the estimate of proteins being one million times fitter than RNA as catalysts seems reasonable, presumably due to proteins being composed of 22 chemically rather different amino acids as opposed to the 4 very similar nucleotides of RNA [12].
So it is safe to say that they are very inefficient, so I am obviously not making that up. This probably is why ribozymes are only used to catalyze some reactions in the cell, while protein enzymes can catalyze most of the reactions that happen in a cell, with the notable exceptions of the ribosome and the spliceosome, but even in these two cases these ribozymes need proteins to self assemble and function. So neither of these highly functional ribozymes would actually exist in an hypothetical RNA world, instead something like the artificial ribozymes which have yet to independently reproduce and which present no evidence of being able to control cellular respiration much less build it.
Then there is the problem of energy cells actually need energy to function and in real cells DNA encoded protein enzymes convert generalized energy from the environment into specific work. Naturally occurring ribozymes surely do no such thing so how did it work in primordial RNA world cells? Is it logical to assume that those reaction would no tcreate a wide variety of products and since RNA is unstable (think about the shipping requirements of the vaccine) many of those products would be able to destabilize it? I don’t think so, but if you claim that such a conclusion is baseless I would sure like to understand what evidence you are basing that on.
Chiral based spin selectivity is a real process that has not been integrated into origin of life speculations, I think it will hurt them but I realize that you may have never even heard about it so if you like here’s a video made by James Tour on the subject:
I have shared my thoughts about why the purely speculative RNA world cells likely would not function sorry that upsets you. I also feel obliged to point out that all OOL speculations are actually the product of someone just making something up and are most likely incorrect.