Genetic evolution

[AstusAleator]

Now I'm no biochemist but here's my unerstanding of the issue.
It might not have been RNA (or more specifically ribozyme) as we recognize it today, but something very similar. The important thing about RNA is that it's chemical properties allow it to self-replicate. Modern cellular replication requires a complex sequence of events involving proteins catalyzing the transcription of genetic material. Until the 60s it was thought that only proteins could catalyze the reproduction of genetic material, but scientific speculation of self-replicating RNA in the 60s led to the discovery of ribozymes in the 80s.
Anyway, the theory (or at least one of them) is that these ribozymes or something similar formed out of the primordial soup and were subsequently enveloped in basic lipid-bilayer vessicles.
That's my understanding of the issue. Some biochemist is probably going to blow me out of the water now, but that's ok.
Dave

[b_d_41501]

It's amazing how Springer can turn every single thread into an ID debate. I vote that he needs to be banned!!!! His posts have littered the entire forum! lol

[alextemplet]

bd wrote:

It's amazing how Springer can turn every single thread into an ID debate. I vote that he needs to be banned!!!! His posts have littered the entire forum! lol

In all honesty, at first I enjoyed debating with Springer. It was at least thought provoking, but now it's getting out of hand. So I think I'll second that suggestion.

[Poison]

No need for banning. We already warned him. And, I think he is clever enough to understand.