KateWild

Joined

• started 154 topics
• posted 6,385 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by KateWild

• 
  84

  Why I'm not agnostic

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think the time to be agnostic is when you have evidence on both sides of a claim.

  for example, i'm agnostic about the existence of a historical jesus.

  i think a reasonable case can be made that jesus was a man who was turned into a legend over a period of a couple of decades.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Here we go again with the bucket chemistry comment lol xx

  Cofty,

  I really do understand your perspective but you fail to understand mine. The difference between an autocatalyst and a catalyst is that the catalyst is a chemical used to speed up or guide the reaction and does not get used up in the reaction and does not change it's molecular configuration. An auotocatalyst is a molecule that is part of the reaction and steers the reaction to produce the end products.

  You say that because these are naturally occurring this is evidence of no guidance, because it happened spontaneously when amino acids evolved. This is a valid perspective. You have done the research and drawn this conclusion and you strive to think for yourself.

  I have a different perspective, I read papers with diagrams of the chemical reactions that Soai did. It is very interesting and I am grateful that you and cantleave (Angus) informed me of these experiments. But what I see is intervention when looking at the diagrams. The autocatalysis that occurs is for samantics sake spontaneous, but this reinforces my theory that the reaction is guided. The following paper has the diagrams to show that the the reaction from raw material to product is guided in a particular direction.

  http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ar5003208

  Scheme 3 is simply a discovery of what occurs in nature without the intervention of a chiral substance, and then the further reaction of the autocatalysis.

  This is evidence to me that in nature the chemical reaction is guided. But it's proof to you it happened without intervention. Just different perspectives.

  Kate xx
• 
  84

  Why I'm not agnostic

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think the time to be agnostic is when you have evidence on both sides of a claim.

  for example, i'm agnostic about the existence of a historical jesus.

  i think a reasonable case can be made that jesus was a man who was turned into a legend over a period of a couple of decades.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Codedlogic,

  You are wrong about what the article shows. It does not state the organic molecule forming a homochiral solution without a catalyst. You misunderstood it as you are seeing only what you want to see to prove your own confirmation bias.

  Now unless you're also a chemical analyst which I doubt, this paper shows clearly what I already know about the formation of amino acids in nature.

  The article is clear about asymmetric reactions. All unguided attempts will always form a racemic mixture in the lab. That is a fact. It's science. It's chemistry. It's why the mistake of thalidomide happened and scientists have learned from their mistakes. This is one if the pharmaceuticals the article is referring to.

  Your elephant pictures are great but you're changing the subject. I don't think you have read the article properly or understood all the chemistry in it.

  Kate xx
• 
  84

  Why I'm not agnostic

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think the time to be agnostic is when you have evidence on both sides of a claim.

  for example, i'm agnostic about the existence of a historical jesus.

  i think a reasonable case can be made that jesus was a man who was turned into a legend over a period of a couple of decades.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Landy,

  I understand the point you are making and the article cofty has posted is a scientific advance that is evidence for my theory.

  But if the opposite existed I would change my view.

  How about you Landy, could you apply that to yourself? Cofty is providing scientific research that shows the process of evolution at an amino acid level was probably a guided process.

  Have you read it and do you accept it?

  Kate xx
• 
  84

  Why I'm not agnostic

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think the time to be agnostic is when you have evidence on both sides of a claim.

  for example, i'm agnostic about the existence of a historical jesus.

  i think a reasonable case can be made that jesus was a man who was turned into a legend over a period of a couple of decades.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Landy,

  Scientific advancement calls it autocatysts in nature and catalysts in the lab.

  This is all evidence of a guided process for me....perhaps not for everyone...but it is satisfactory.

  Kate xx
• 
  84

  Why I'm not agnostic

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think the time to be agnostic is when you have evidence on both sides of a claim.

  for example, i'm agnostic about the existence of a historical jesus.

  i think a reasonable case can be made that jesus was a man who was turned into a legend over a period of a couple of decades.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Today, chemists regularly make catalysts that will steer a reaction towards products in one particular left or right form. Known as asymmetric reactions

  Cofty, codedlogic. This passage comes from the article and is totally supporting my point.

  To steer a reaction is exactly the same as to guide. Don't even try to convince me otherwise.

  Kate xx
• 
  84

  Why I'm not agnostic

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think the time to be agnostic is when you have evidence on both sides of a claim.

  for example, i'm agnostic about the existence of a historical jesus.

  i think a reasonable case can be made that jesus was a man who was turned into a legend over a period of a couple of decades.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Codedlogic,

  My post to cofty 5 mins ago answers you exact questions.

  It's about needing to use catalysts that makes it guided.

  Kate xx
• 
  84

  Why I'm not agnostic

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think the time to be agnostic is when you have evidence on both sides of a claim.

  for example, i'm agnostic about the existence of a historical jesus.

  i think a reasonable case can be made that jesus was a man who was turned into a legend over a period of a couple of decades.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Landy,

  Thanks for being honest. But scientific advancement is sure of the process. We are just free to conclude our own ideas from this advancement, about what is more probable.

  Kate xx
• 
  84

  Why I'm not agnostic

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think the time to be agnostic is when you have evidence on both sides of a claim.

  for example, i'm agnostic about the existence of a historical jesus.

  i think a reasonable case can be made that jesus was a man who was turned into a legend over a period of a couple of decades.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Cofty scientists most definitely do guide the process.....I pasted a quote from the paper a few posts ago.

  To form a homochiral solution in the lab catalysts are required and extreme pressure and temperatures that are different to earth's natural temperatures and pressures are required.

  I disagree, there is no way you are going to convince me that the scientists conducting all these experiments do not guide the process of homochirality. A racemic mixture is what results from no guidance by scientists.

  Kate xx
• 
  84

  Why I'm not agnostic

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think the time to be agnostic is when you have evidence on both sides of a claim.

  for example, i'm agnostic about the existence of a historical jesus.

  i think a reasonable case can be made that jesus was a man who was turned into a legend over a period of a couple of decades.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Codedlogic,

  You're nearly there. But not quite.

  Enantionmers form a racemic mixture in the lab, but form a homochiral solution in nature.

  In the lab scientists have to catalyse the experiment to form the homochiral solution. They guide the process.

  Hence I conclude it's more probable that the process in nature had to be guided too

  Kate xx
• 
  84

  Why I'm not agnostic

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i think the time to be agnostic is when you have evidence on both sides of a claim.

  for example, i'm agnostic about the existence of a historical jesus.

  i think a reasonable case can be made that jesus was a man who was turned into a legend over a period of a couple of decades.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  KateWild

  Cofty I respect that you have done all the research into independent studies, but I think they demonstrate the process was guided.

  I understand why you draw the opposite conclusion to me, but I disagree.

  Good for you for talking chirality with me though. I am impressed with your consideration of the facts and your understanding of chemistry.

  I love you cofty

  Kate xx