End of mysteries, please give me a few minutes of your time.......
DNA and its sister molecule RNA are simply sugar and nucleic acids.
Deoxy-ribose (the sugar) + Nucleic Acid = DNA
Ribose (the sugar) + Nucleic Acid
RNA is simpler to form so we believe it came first. But how do you get sugar and nucleic acids? Simply as I said, stars make all the atoms such as hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, helium, nitrogen..... all of them, all are made in stars and get churned out into space. They all have charges, and so interact without any will or design, they literally have +v and -ve charges.
Sugar for example is made of Carbon, Hydrogen and Oxygen hence we call them carbohydrates. This is what sugar is made of... (each letter represents an atom, carbon, hydrogen and oxygen)
These are so simple, that they form in space, the molecules come together because of the charges of the individual atoms, like magnetic poles.
SO going back to DNA, sugars can form themselves depending on the enviroment, just like everything else does.
Nucleic Acids (D-NA) are likewise compunds, take a look at them....
Guess what, see all those letters... they are all atoms, nitrogen, hydrogen, oxygen and are also made in stars too... These are the NUCLEIC ACIDS that form RNA and DNA (notice the DNA 'code' that was mentioned in the OP, each one is the representive of A C T G). The question that is so difficult is... in what enviroment ....did they come together?
The scientists are not scratching there heads with an impossible puzzle, they are just looking for the enviroment and circumstances that best explain how these atoms came together. It isn't that we don't know how, it is that we have to work it out, then prove it before we can call it a fact.
Just to give you a perspective of how these things come together, if you imagine the building blocks of a human starting at atoms, then making sugars and nucleic acids (DNA and RNA) the next stage is to have those nucleic acids join together and make AMINO ACIDS, these amino acids join together and make proteins. Everything in our body is made of proteins. So the stage before proteins and AFTER dna/rna is amino acids ok...
In 1953, a science undergraduate made an experiment, he made several reconstructions of what early life on earth was potentially like. The gasses in the atmosphere, the amount of water, the level of electronic charge etc. Left to its own devices with nothing but the replication of earths early atmosphere and enviroment...guessed what formed spontaneously in the beakers out of 'thin air'? Amino Acids !!!!
So please, keep in perspective, that quoting literature from 50 years ago is very different to the literature and knowledge we have now AND it is important to understand the science to know what is being debated and discussed. JW's refer to infighting amongst evolutionary biologists as to what colour skin the early homo-erectus had, to say that there is inconsistency, infighting and lack of unity and varied opinions in the science community on evolution. Out of context it can seem like they are empty handed.
To say we have no knowledge, no understanding, no idea, no theories and no evidence of how this 'code' came about, is simply untrue.
We could make and replicate the formation of dna and rna no problem in a lab, but that is useless, we have to work out how it happened originally, this is a branch of science all of itself, ABIOGENESIS. We need to find evidence for WHERE DNA and RNA formed. Was it here or on another planet and in what enviroment? If it was here, we have lots of theories as to how and by what means and they look for evidence of earths enviroment at that time to confirm it, but that is no easy task. Some believe it happened elsewhere (panspermia) and that simple life evolved in another enviroment in space, quite possible, you could just dial the conditions to make it more favourable. But whilst scientists are dedicating there LIVES to figure this out. Somone is posting literature from someone 50 yearsa ago, and claiming we are hopelessly ignorant, with implications of a deity and some magical creation.
Hopefully you appreciate that the situation presented is not accurate at all.
As for the rest of Perry and Prologo's comments, I am not here for them. Bill gates did not study biology, he made minesweeper, also this isnt my knowledge, its Bill Gates OR Biological Science, it is very disingenous to present it any other way. As for the word ignorant, it isnt an insult, it is a fact. I am ignorant in how to make DOS or Windows 98 or Microsoft Paint work. Perry is ignorant of biology 101, it isn't an insult, it is self evident. I am also ignorant of american football rules, much of physics, most of math, most literature, a lot of chemistry, much of history... etc etc.. however I did attend biology 101 and passed with distinction. It isn't a competition, it is just the literal reality of it.... ignorant or informed.
