Brendan:
All that is needed for complex life is time.

Brendan:
They have already found some of the basic elements of RNA are self assembling - e.g. life is a result of chemistry found all over the universe.

Hammerer:

Brendan:
They have already found some of the basic elements of RNA are self assembling - e.g. life is a result of chemistry found all over the universe.

LOL, "self-assembling" is an interesting term. That makes it sound like placing the chemicals in the right right milieu is enough. At present, "self-assembling" RNA is the equivalent of a "self-assembled" cake. If you mix the chemicals together in the right sequence you produce RNA. If you don't get the recipe right then you don't get RNA.

Hammerer:

Brendan:
They have already found some of the basic elements of RNA are self assembling - e.g. life is a result of chemistry found all over the universe.

LOL, "self-assembling" is an interesting term. That makes it sound like placing the chemicals in the right right milieu is enough. At present, "self-assembling" RNA is the equivalent of a "self-assembled" cake. If you mix the chemicals together in the right sequence you produce RNA. If you don't get the recipe right then you don't get RNA.

Skolink:

Hammerer:

Brendan:
They have already found some of the basic elements of RNA are self assembling - e.g. life is a result of chemistry found all over the universe.

LOL, "self-assembling" is an interesting term. That makes it sound like placing the chemicals in the right right milieu is enough. At present, "self-assembling" RNA is the equivalent of a "self-assembled" cake. If you mix the chemicals together in the right sequence you produce RNA. If you don't get the recipe right then you don't get RNA.

That's right, if you shake a bag of Lego for long enough, you will get a pirate ship, complete with the little cannons on the decks and the captain waving his cutlass.

Brendan: What you are describing is a completely random process producing a fantastical result. 

DravidDavid: I wouldn't doubt life outside of Earth for a second.

Ancient alien theory isn't totally out of believable bounds, although heavily reliant on interpretation.  I'm looking forward to future voyages to distant planets.  You never know what you might find.

An ancient Mayan temple perhaps?

Skolink:  it seemed to me that people believe in magic.

BurningBeard:

DravidDavid: I wouldn't doubt life outside of Earth for a second.

Ancient alien theory isn't totally out of believable bounds, although heavily reliant on interpretation.  I'm looking forward to future voyages to distant planets.  You never know what you might find.

An ancient Mayan temple perhaps?

By ancient alien theory do you mean the idea that life may have been seeded by meteorites or the  thoroughly debunked hilarity the likes of which its played on History Channel? (Von Daniken, Lloyd Pye et al.)

Brendan:

Hammerer:

Brendan:
They have already found some of the basic elements of RNA are self assembling - e.g. life is a result of chemistry found all over the universe.

LOL, "self-assembling" is an interesting term. That makes it sound like placing the chemicals in the right right milieu is enough. At present, "self-assembling" RNA is the equivalent of a "self-assembled" cake. If you mix the chemicals together in the right sequence you produce RNA. If you don't get the recipe right then you don't get RNA.

No.

Your 'at present' is out of date.

More recent experiments have found that certain nucleotides can spontaneously form from pre-existing molecules - all made by common, un-sophisticated chemical reactions. Some of these form half the nucleotide, and others form the other half. It can then combine. Research still goes on to complete the picture for all RNA nucleotides, but this is progress.

It is not a matter of just tossing it all into a bowl and adding energy. It's a progression of different simple mixtures.

Once the first replicant - or autocatalyst - was generated, natural selection could then play a role. The entire process is not unlike a cellular automata, as is far from requiring complexity from the outset. 

As i say, the process was not unique to physics or to this world, and we see many of the same conditions elsewhere in the universe. There does not seem to have been any statistically unlikely events occur.

Anyway: I am not prepared to debate such details as I am no expert on this matter; however it seems neither are any others here.

I welcome some published molecular biologist to declare itself however....
 

tristanb: A creationist on Geekzone?!

Evolution is merely logic. If something reproduces and survives, then more of it exists. So things that are better at reproducing and surviving exist more. This happens with chemicals, prokaryotes, single-celled eukaryotes, multicellular organisms, ideas, cultures, religions - anything.

Most random changes are negative - if the change doesn't help reproduction or survival then the thing 'dies' out, but on the rare occasion the mutation is beneficial then that organism will be able to outcompete the other organisms. This is evolution.

But, if you want to believe it's all due to the command of some angry bearded Arab man who lives in the Sky from a few thousand years ago that's okay. There's enough evidence out there, but it's obvious you don't want to know. Give your Elim minister a double tithe this Sunday for me okay?

Personally, I think there's definitely going to be intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. The universe is huge. I don't know if we'll ever get to see any though.