Who brainwashed who? 2

Bullying or brainwashing…As mentioned in the previous post, we certainly wouldn’t want either to be a part of our unbiased scientific process would we.

Personally I would consider any purposeful deletion of information or manipulation of information that makes one’s position seem more credible, a form of brain washing. Failing to include relevant information that would change conclusions would definitely be a form of brainwashing.

Let’s see…

When I was doing research about the previous post about bullying or brainwashing , I came across the page on Wikipedia that I footnoted concerning abiogenesis/ spontaneous generation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation

Since this issue of the origin of life is fundamental to the creation/ID vs. evolution debate I have researched it some in the past. As I read over the Wikipedia article about spontaneous generation I found a good bit of information being ignored in the article. Further study on Wikipedia did show the information was not unavailable, but it had to be dug up by someone serious about the subject. The casual reader who stops at one article would be totally “disinformned”.

First of all, they use the example of the famous Miller Urey experiment and leave you thinking that this experiment was truly groundbreaking and is today still considered to be. Let me add a few facts that have been left out, I hope inadvertently.

First, the value of the experiment itself is now in doubt, because many scientists feel Miller-Urey may have been mistaken about the basic composition of the atmosphere used. Miller-Urey assumed a reducing atmosphere (rich in ammonia), rather than an oxidixing (rich in free oxygen) atmosphere was necessary, and adjusted their experiment accordingly.

Here we find the first evidence of brainwashing. Miller and Urey knew that an OXYGEN rich atmosphere would eventually destroy their precursors to life. “Rust” is just one form of oxidixation. However to support the life that spontaneously generates, you MUST have oxygen…quite a fact to inadvertently leave out. I hope it was inadvertent.

The fact IS mentioned on the following Wiki post:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment#Earth.27s_early_atmosphere for anyone willing to search for more information.

I hope you noticed this sentence “In practice gas mixtures containing CO, CO₂, N₂, etc. give much the same products as those containing CH₄ and NH₃ so long as there is no O₂.”

And this sentence further down in the section “when oxygen gas is added to this mixture, no organic molecules are formed.”

“As long as there is no O2”? “When oxygen gas is added…no organic molecules are formed.”

The major life sustaining gas in our environment had to be ABSENT for abiogenesis to occur?

Secondly, the products of the experiment were incompatible with the formation of life.

All amino acids have something called chirality. This is represented by a “D-“ or an “L-“. Although this is sometimes compared to a “right or left handedness”, due to the three dimensional structure of amino acids there is no actual “left” or “right”. Amino acids in the proteins of living organisms are L- amino acids. The opposite amino acid is often detrimental to life, (i.e. poisonous).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_isomerism#Chirality_in_biology

The products of the Miller-Ulay experiment, were approximately a 50-50 D- and L-mix.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment#Experiment_and_interpretation

As have been any other amino acids produced “spontaneously” by scientists working in laboratories.

Thirdly, for all the hubbub, only very miniscule amounts of the amino acids were generated. The idea of life spontaneously generating in a “pre-biotic soup”, requires a very dense concentration of these amino acids, as well as hundreds or thousands of other “materials”. The tiny percentage of amino acids created could never become a “dense soup” in a world engulfed in water. Of course this is the basis of the current “better” theory that this soup was created in a pond or lagoon allowing for the necessary concentrations. (reference same as above)

Fourthly, the acids formed were removed by Miller and Urey, because the electrical spark would have destroyed them! How close is that to a naturally occurring atmosphere? Who would have done this in the primitive earth? God? http://www.theunjustmedia.com/The%20molecular_impasse_of_evolution.htm

Another experiment listed in the abiogenesis article was by Joan Oró, a celebrated Spanish scientist. To quote the article “One of his most important contributions was the prebiotic synthesis of the nucleotide adenine (a key component of nucleic acids ) from hydrogen cyanide. This was achieved during the period 1959-1962 and stands, together with the Miller-Urey experiment, as one of the fundamental results of prebiotic chemistry.”

Hydrogen cyanide is described at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_cyanide as “...highly poisonous... commonly listed amongst chemical warfare agents…”. Am I the only person that finds it odd that the nucleotide, pre-cursor to an amino acid, was formed from hydrogen cyanide? How much life could be sustained in an atmosphere that is rich in hydrogen cyanide? How brainwashed do you have to be to have your hope of life without a Creator based on an atmosphere of poisonous gas?

I have one final criticism. Does it strike anyone other than me as odd that some of the best results in “prebiotic” chemistry are more than 4O years old? Shouldn’t we have gotten something more exciting than a miniscule amount of nucleotides created in a poisonous atmosphere or half poisonous amino acids produced in an environment not fit for life in the last 40+ years?

Mr. Dawkins, if these two experiments are the best evidence for life spontaneously generating without a Creator, I have to ask you, who is being bullied and brainwashed here?