write my essay

Life less” is more advertizing speak, hair is not actually alive.

I’m not trying to imply that the template have a particular meaning. The code, the function, follows later. I can live with the term gibberish so long as we both understand that the gibberish happens to be a pattern that produces a workable replicating system as you just described.

If you shower daily and wash your hair with shampoo everytime you shower, try only using shampoo every other day. Sadly we don’t have much by way of a solid theory on this.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis Originally Posted by cypress Sadly I don’t think there are any concrete facts. Zendra, you may also find the wikipedia article on abiogenesis informative. Contrary to what some might say, these are strengths of the fact of evolution itself, not weakness (not that anyone here stated otherwise). That sounds like turtles all the way down. Those follow broad chemical rules. Originally Posted by TheBiologista Originally Posted by cypress Sadly I don’t think there are any concrete facts. What we do know, in concrete terms, is that evolution occurred and continues to occur. There are few concrete facts indeed, but this stuff about encoding is certainly not the consensus.

Another place to look for clues to the beginning of life might be off-planet on Mars, Europa, Titan, Callisto, or other bodies in our solar system.Through this sort of research as well as genetic and protein studies, researchers have put together some very solid hypotheses regarding several ways in which life could “begin.” One of these, none of these, or a combination of these might be how it started on Earth millions if not billions of years ago. The questions being asked are how polymers come to be self-replicating and which ones did it first. As most of you are probably already aware, I’m not convinced there even is a “pause” (read this, and this, and this, and this, and this). There are a lot of concrete facts about evolution as well as much to be debated and discovered.

About the only consensus that is emerging is that the problem of origins of life is largely a problem of explaining the origin of encoded biological systems and ultimately DNA. I agree with you that self-replication is a large part of the issue as you state.What do you think about this though biologista? In order to replicate we have to have a template or a plan. Hair will look dull and “life less”. “Life less” is more advertizing speak, hair is not actually alive. When deniers see something scientists don’t understand, they use it as an excuse to claim that “natural variation has been in control, not CO2.” Next bits, portions omitted, breaks inserted for clarity of the points that strike home with me. There’s nothing to be encoded (or naturally selected) at that point beyond very basic traits like stability and replication efficiency. Scientists study the existence of life and how they make their way on this planet in extreme localities ranging from deep water, “black smokers” to the highest, most arid and anaerobic peaks, as well as the most caustic or acidic geothermal outcrops and deep-underground petroleum pockets where bacteria have been found completely cut off from the rest of the planet. About the only consensus that is emerging is that the problem of origins of life is largely a problem of explaining the origin of encoded biological systems and ultimately DNA.

It could be Shakespeare or gibberish, it just needs to replicate. Certainly you’ll get to the point when things are indeed being “encoded” by their ancestors, but it all starts from replicating gibberish that merely happens to be stable enough to generate a large population of replicators whilst not being so stable as to squash variation. You might say I’m genuinely skeptical. It gives a nice summary of various current hypotheses. Function follows form. You could try just using less of it. A list of the possible ways of the origin of life on earth would be appreciated. Your homemade hair product feels oily because it contains oil.

Function follows form. Whether the encoding is within the individual molecules (a self-replicating polymer) or not, encoding the system seems to be the central issue. I don’t understand how you see it as circular. Anything. Originally Posted by cypress I agree with you that self-replication is a large part of the issue as you state.What do you think about this though biologista? In order to replicate we have to have a template or a plan. The best we can do is create or find analogs of what we can infer conditions between 4.5 billion to 500 (or so) million years to have been like and then study them.

Who came up with it? Um…. yeah well anyway. We may never know, but at least we know for sure how it happened here, but at least we can explore ways it *could* have happened or *can* happen elsewhere in the universe.I’d recommend Genesis: the Scientific Quest for Life’s Origin by Robert Hazen (2005 Washington D.C.: Robert Henry Press). I think we are saying the same thing. About the only consensus that is emerging is that the problem of origins of life is largely a problem of explaining the origin of encoded biological systems and ultimately DNA. Certainly you’ll get to the point when things are indeed being “encoded” by their ancestors, but it all starts from replicating gibberish that merely happens to be stable enough to generate a large population of replicators whilst not being so stable as to squash variation.

Literature on this point seems to be coalescing around this idea though the terms used are not always consistent. thanks for that link inow Who came up with it? There are few concrete facts indeed, but this stuff about encoding is certainly not the consensus. Hello zendra,Perhaps this will give you something to explore and perhaps allow you to find some traction on this interesting subject:http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abio…ginoflife.html But I really liked a couple of Grant Foster’s observations. I didn’t come up with that title, it’s from a blog.

There’s nothing to be encoded (or naturally selected) at that point beyond very basic traits like stability and replication efficiency. No, we just need to have something. Originally Posted by cypress Whether the encoding is within the individual molecules (a self-replicating polymer) or not, encoding the system seems to be the central issue. Originally Posted by TheBiologista Originally Posted by cypress Whether the encoding is within the individual molecules (a self-replicating polymer) or not, encoding the system seems to be the central issue. Originally Posted by zendra thanks for that link inow My pleasure. I’m here to ask if there’s a way to spread it out more but showing (0,0). on the graph still.By default, excel starts my data from the first Y coordinate according to my data.

Related Discussions:Excel speed problemhow to populate a database.MS excel VS originQuestions on graph of time against displacement of free fallAustralia will be greener throughout 2012.How much time did it really take?what’s the name of the graphInfinite acceleration dilemma.Graph Theory Diestel Book: Question on Proposition 1.2.2Is nature just another Equation? Of course it’s possible — but I’m quite confident that there is not sufficient evidence to establish its existence….. What concrete facts do we have about how life started and evolution?

Its annoying how there only seems to be a purely scientific way or a purely church way. Literature on this point seems to be coalescing around this idea though the terms used are not always consistent.Do you find this point valid? First part I liked.When scientists who are genuinely skeptical see something they don’t understand, they try to understand it. So initially you’re talking about an external catalyst- the sequences do not need to encode anything because they just need to be chemically amenable to replication by the catalyst and stable enough to do it more quickly than they break down in solution. Making some graphs on some experiments through physics.

The key is lots of copies of the polymer and enough variation and stability to allow selection to do its work. Not everybody agrees with me that the “pause” isn’t real, not everybody accepts that it’s just already-well-known natural variation on top of the global warming trend, so the scientific community is exploring a wide range of explanations for something that we don’t agree on and a lot of people are genuinely skeptical about.Some of the comments are worth reading as well. Originally Posted by cypress Do you find this point valid? No, it’s circular.

Not exact but something close like 2.000 opposed to my data 2.034Thank you for your time. Originally Posted by cypress Do you find this point valid buy cheap essay in uk
? No, it’s circular. If this is a topic you want to pursue further, I recommend this text for the bibliography alone. A list of the possible ways of the origin of life on earth would be appreciated. It’s a very interesting read, well-written, and well-sourced with good notes and a very complete bibliography.

Originally Posted by zendra What concrete facts do we have about how life started and evolution? Its annoying how there only seems to be a purely scientific way or a purely church way. That sounds like turtles all the way down.

Self-replication will eventually be “encoded”, if you want to call it that, though that suggests a template encoding it, which we don’t need. Those follow broad chemical rules. Another approach is to reduce the amount of soap you expose your hair to. Help me with that one. Related Discussions:Do aliens existWhy do we assume the first life form had amino acids?Start of lifeThe Beginning of EvolutionOrigin of LifeWould evolution follow completely different pattern now?Crustacean really first life on land?What do you believe.crackpotsStart Coming On – Song for Katy Perry The questions being asked are how polymers come to be self-replicating and which ones did it first. It has much to do with Microsoft excel 2007 than the data.I wish to plot the data starting from the origin, therefore showing (0,0) but none of my data will be displayed close to it.The data is clattered together, and it doesn’t present a neat trend at all. Sadly I don’t think there are any concrete facts. I have a technical problem which I can’t figure out.

Literature on this point seems to be coalescing around this idea though the terms used are not always consistent. I hope it’s what you were after. Mostly because of the temporal distance between us, the observers, and the point at which life and the precursors of life took hold on our planet. The code, the function, follows later.

There are various debates about speciation and driving forces of evolution; whether evolution is just gradual changes over time or punctuated “spurts” of evolutionary change after periods of equilibrium within biological niches, or some combination of these.As far as concrete facts on how life started, this becomes a realm of science where such things are much fewer and further between.

essays onlineterm paperresearch paper writercustom term paper writingresearch paper writingbuy essays papersbuy essays onlinebuy essay