Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site psivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!hao!hplabs!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Life came from clay, so there!
Message-ID: <485@psivax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 31-May-85 21:04:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: psivax.485
Posted: Fri May 31 21:04:42 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 3-Jun-85 00:17:13 EDT
References: <51@rtp47.UUCP>
Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA
Lines: 42

In article <51@rtp47.UUCP> throopw@rtp47.UUCP (Wayne Throop) writes:
>I was delighted to see in the June, 1985 Scientific American an article that
>maintained that life arose in clay, rather than in the more traditional
>"primordial soup du jour".  The article starts out raising several of
>the same arguments that have such currency in this group, but rather
>than just saying that "evolution can't explain x", the author goes on to
>give a stab at explaining x!  (Not a very convincing explaination to my
>way of thinking, but *something*.)
>
	Yes, it was a very interesting article, and yes the concept
as presented was rather weak. There may be two reasons for this.
First, it was being presented in a popular journal not a technical
one, and thus may have been enormously oversimplified as to the actual
supporting evidence. Second, it is apparently only intended as a first
aproximation of the *framework* of a new concept, much like Darwin's
"origin of the Species". And much like that work it needs the
discovery of new relationships and mechanisms before a realistic model
of the "full" theory can be produced. Darwin needed Mendel, this needs
a better characterization of the "living" clay that is proposed as the
original life form.  I find it fascinating, and a remarkable source
for new research ideas and approaches. If the new research it sugests
reveals the needed mechanisms then it may well become the new paradigm
for the origin of life, or if the results do not show up it will
simply fade away into oblivion. I will try to follow the research
and see where it leads.
	It is also interesting to note that the concept as presented
in no way reduces the importance of the Urey/Miller series of
experiments. In order for the "organic" takeover to occur with the
resulting shift from mineral "life" to "ordinary" organic life
ther must be pre-existing, naturally occuring, complex organic
compounds to be incorperated into the early life forms.
	However, this should be a warning to Creaionists about the
dangers of argueing from current limitiations on understanding, new
ideas and new research may always close these gaps. If this idea
should pan out it will invalidate almost all of the arguments about
the "improbability" of abiogeneses quite completely.
-- 

				Sarima (Stanley Friesen)

{trwrb|allegra|cbosgd|hplabs|ihnp4|aero!uscvax!akgua}!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
or {ttdica|quad1|bellcore|scgvaxd}!psivax!friesen