Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
God is not RiboNucleic Acid. I know you used a lower case g in god. Fragments of RNA is not complete RNA. RNA cannot exist outside of already living cells.
"!=" is a programming term for "does not equal." Fragments of RNA are still significant since codons are created in this process.
Originally posted by AngryManatee
I already have.
Fragments of RNA are not living cells. Second, RNA does not exist in nature outside of living cells. Macromolecules (i.e. proteins, RNA, and DNA) are aptly name so because of their size and complexity, but neither of them exist outside of already living cells.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Fragments of RNA are not living cells. Second, RNA does not exist in nature outside of living cells. Macromolecules (i.e. proteins, RNA, and DNA are aptly name so because of their size and complexity, but neither exist outside of alreday living cells.
I don't believe you because you cannot provide proof.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I don't believe you because you cannot provide proof.
First, your whole reverse psychology thing has failed. Second, your disbelief is of no consequence to me. Third, if you really wanted to know the truth about RNA all you would have to do is conduct a little research on your own. Finally, it is basic knowledge that RNA cannot exist outside of living cells so why do you need proof?
😄
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Fragments of RNA are not living cells. Second, RNA does not exist in nature outside of living cells. Macromolecules (i.e. proteins, RNA, and DNA) are aptly name so because of their size and complexity, but neither exist outside of alreday living cells.
And as I have so stated before (countless times now), RNA fragments have been shown to self-assemble in a neutral/ reducing atmosphere. In other words, THEY FORM TOGETHER RANDOMLY AND ARE EXPOSED TO THE ENVIRONMENT SINCE THEY ARE NOT IN A CELL, which is possible when in a neutral/ reducing atmosphere. The fact that codons are formed in these RNA fragments further proves it.
Edit: where do you get your information from?
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
First, your whole reverse psychology thing has failed. Second, your disbelief is of no consequence to me. Third, if you really wanted to know the truth about RNA all you would have to do is conduct a little research on your own. Finally, it is basic knowledge that RNA cannot exist outside of living cells so why do you need proof?😄
I really don't know, but I would have to say that AngryManatee has provided enough proof to convince me. However, you have provided no proof.
Originally posted by AngryManatee
And as I have so stated before (countless times now), RNA fragments have been shown to self-assemble in a neutral/ reducing atmosphere. In other words, THEY FORM TOGETHER RANDOMLY AND ARE EXPOSED TO THE ENVIRONMENT SINCE THEY ARE NOT IN A CELL, which is possible when in a neutral/ reducing atmosphere. The fact that codons are formed in these RNA fragments further proves it.Edit: where do you get your information from?
It proves nothing. RNA cannot form outside of living cells. I will admit that scientists are able to produce amino acids in a laboratory, but not proteins or nucleotides (the building blocks of RNA and DNA).
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
It proves nothing. RNA cannot form outside of living cells. I will admit that scientists are able to produce amino acids in a laboratory. But not proteins or nucleotides (the building blocks of RNA and DNA).
Just because we simple humans cannot duplacate nature, does not mean that RNA evolution is not natural.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
It proves nothing. RNA cannot form outside of living cells. I will admit that scientists are able to produce amino acids in a laboratory. But not proteins or nucleotides (the building blocks of RNA and DNA).
Are you just plain moronic, or do you just not choose to listen? RNA fragments have been OBSERVED to self-assemble. Not just the nitrogenous bases, not just the pentose sugars, and not just the phosphate groups. The whole deal, codons included.
Edit: Where oh where do you get your information from?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Just because we simple humans cannot duplacate nature, does not mean that RNA evolution is not natural.
RNA does not form outside of already living cells (when is this going to sink in?). Shakyamunison, do chickens form outside of eggs? Do human babies form into a human being outside of the womb? Well, neither does RNA, DNA, or proteins form outside of cells (which are living by the way).
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
RNA does not form outside of already living cells (when is this going to sink in?). Shakyamunison, do chickens form outside of eggs? Do human babies form into a human being outside of the womb? Well, neither does RNA, DNA, or proteins form outside of cells (which are living by the way).
Your examples are nonsense.
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
RNA does not form outside of already living cells (when is this going to sink in?). Shakyamunison, do chickens form outside of eggs? Do human babies form into a human being outside of the womb? Well, neither does RNA, DNA, or proteins form outside of cells (which are living by the way).
Funny you once again compare two different processes, yet the one you brought into comparison (formation of babies from gametes) also has compelling evidence that supports evolution, primarily concerning the mitotic cell-cycle and the division of the mitochondria within the cells.
Please stop comparing two things that have nothing in common.