your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Thanks Eden for explaining in detail why Perry's quotes are not credible. This is probably why my credulity was unbalanced yesterday, and I needed something very specific. People like Perry cause problems for people looking for credible information.
Can someone start a thread please. Perhaps you Eden if you are available. Discussing the best ways to check the credibility of we have read or heard. I would really like a thread like that.
Cofty, still working on the challenge nearly complete.
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Perry,
Ok I couldn't resist, I took a peak. You have proved something on this thread though. Not all University researchers are credible. That's why they are peer reviewed. If you're going to post a quote with extreme views you need to provide the peer reviewed paper it came from. Like cofty did.
Plus Soai views are not extreme, he said he solved the puzzle not "The idea of creation rests on pure belief" No credible peer reviewed paper would say that in my opinion, but if anyone can find one great.
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Sam......
Nature is a British interdisciplinary scientific journal, first published on 4 November 1869.[1] It was ranked the world's most cited scientific journal by the Science Edition of the 2010 Journal Citation Reports, is ascribed animpact factor of approximately 38.1, and is widely regarded as one of the few remaining academic journals that publishes original research across a wide range of scientific fields.[2]
Yes it's a credible source
Angus,
Fair enough you said on the phone something to the effect of my credulity is unbalanced. The need for me to see a quote on the 1995 paper itself is also because I want to read the paper again. But obviously it's not available for free anymore and no one seem's to be able to get it without spending £40.
I do feel it's credible now, because you told me it is and I trust and respect you and I find you credible. I also checked the homepage of the journal this morning http://www.nature.com/nature/index.html. Which it didn't cross my mind to do yesterday, and I found some interesting credible looking articles and I even went to the job search. Sadly they don't advertise any type of analytical jobs or careers, mainly research related careers at universities. I don't have the experience or PhD qualifications to apply for any of them, they even have 2 posts at Liverpool university in the department I used to work in as a chemical analyst. It's quite annoying really because the researchers used to employ analysts to do their testing but with cutting costs they have to do the chemical analysis themselves now. http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/jobs?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=Chemistry+research&where=Liverpool&commit=Find+Jobs
So cofty I apologise for not checking the credibility thoroughly before righting it off as not credible.
Viv, yes you're right I have no formal organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry, physical chemistry or industrial qualifications. I am lying well done for catching me out.
Outlaw cool. But evolution and belief in God are not mutually exclusive.
Perry, I have you on my ignore setting. I didn't read your post. Every time I have asked you a question or sent you a PM you have ignored me. So there is no conversation. If you want me to read your post send me a PM.
Cofty I am posting my response to your challenge, Soai saying he solved the puzzle is not relevant to the challenge you assigned me.
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v378/n6559/abs/378767a0.html
I also find is suspicious that this link doesn't work, but all my links referenced from this page work. I am not suggesting anything by it because I don't understand how links work or how Simon does stuff related to links. Simon, could you shed some light?
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Cofty and K99 Thanks for the link. I read it and checked some references and this is what I found.......
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v378/n6559/abs/378767a0.html
I don’t find this source credible. The website is called nature publishing group. Is this group run by chemists or other people who don’t have scientific credentials?
Cofty, I asked you to go back and reread the paper and quote directly from the paper where he stated he solved the puzzle but you didn’t do that. Why not?
So I went to every cited Soai reference and this is what I found
Abstract
Optically active 1-(3-pyridyl)alkanols, chiral self-catalysts, produced themselves of the same configuration in the enantioselective addition of dialkylzinc reagents to pyridine-3-carbaldehyde.
http://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/1990/C3/c39900000982#!divAbstract
The PDF was almost £40 so I didn’t read it.
Abstract
Chiral diols, bis[2-(1-hydroxyalkyl)phenyl]ethers, with very high e.e.'s are synthesized by catalytic enantioselective alkylation of bis(2-formylphenyl)ether. Zinc alkoxides of chiral diols were found to work as asymmetric autocatalysts in the reaction between bis(2-formylphenyl)ether and dialkylzincs.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095741660086228X
PDF almost £40
Isopropylzinc alkoxide of 1-ferrocenyl-2-methylpropan-1-ol was found to be a catalytic chirally self-replicating molecule which produces itself with the same configuration from ferrocenyl aldehyde and diisopropylzinc with 35–39% e.e. in good yields.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/095741669500047S
Note: In lieu of an abstract, this is the article's first page.
The first page is just a list of contents
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/cr00013a004
So I went to download the PDF and it stated that I do not have the credentials
Note: In lieu of an abstract, this is the article's first page.
This first page was an interesting read, nowhere did Soai state it was a puzzle or a mystery. It was very interesting though that he used the term design when describing a molecule. I am not reading anything into it as I feel the whole page is impartial. Just think it’s interesting.
“On the other hand from the standpoint of the design of chiral catalyst a chiral alcohol with a sterically bulky secondary substituent isopropyl shows higher asymmetric induction……..”
When you read the whole page in context, I would be interested to know if you do, it’s clear he is not suggesting there is a designer for the molecule, he is not talking about God or Atheism. He is talking about specific research and it’s application. So I sincerely don’t want to mislead any believers into thinking Soai believes in God or a creator.
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jo00104a057
Japanese religions are very interesting . I got a little distracted and had a read. Sorry to go off topic.
http://www.japan-guide.com/e/e629.html
Bact to topic. All of these are abstracts from different papers doing different research to develop different products. I can’t find anything where Soai states the following
THE homochirality of natural amino acids and sugars remains a puzzle for theories of the chemical origin of life1–18. In 1953 Frank7 proposed a reaction scheme by which a combination of autocatalysis and inhibition in a system of replicating chiral molecules can allow small random fluctuations in an initially racemic mixture to tip the balance to yield almost exclusively one enantiomer. Here we show experimentally that autocatalysis in a chemical reaction can indeed enhance a small initial enantiomeric excess of a chiral molecule. When a 5-pyrimidyl alkanol with a small (2%) enantiomeric excess is treated with diisopropylzinc and pyrimidine-5-car-boxaldehyde, it undergoes an autocatalytic reaction to generate more of the alkanol. Because the reaction involves a chiral catalyst generated from the initial alkanol, and because the catalytic step is enantioselective, the enantiomeric excess of the product is enhanced. This process provides a mechanism by which a small initial imbalance in chirality can become overwhelming.
That’s what the website states there is no proof Soai wrote it in any of his research yet. I have tried to find the links Cofty sent me with the actual paper on JWN but neither of us started the thread, so I am having problems finding that specific paper. I also tried to google it and I mustn’t be very good at finding stuff because I can’t find this 1995 paper that I have read multiple times.
What is CAS reference linking? Cofty is it Your way of seeking the best possible argument against your position, or confirming your position / bias? Semantics.
Cofty, I am going to respond to your challenge. I have a response that’s not complete in writing. But you have not responded to my challenge properly have you?
I asked you to go back and reread the paper and quote directly from the paper where he stated he solved the puzzle or mystery but you didn’t actually do that did you?
So
I am requesting respectfully that you do this for me please. I am happy for you
to prove me wrong. I respect Soai more than Dawkins, so knowing what respected
chemists believe may influence my thinking and I could change my opinions with
new facts I learn.
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Cofty,
I have read all the links, I have started writing a response to your challenge but it's incomplete. So when I get a chance I will post the complete response.
Landy,
Your questions are relevant and sensible and I will respond when I get time
It is striking that it needed steel beams. It doesn't have to float, be filled with animals, or cope with the pounding of waves, and yet he could not build it as a copy of what is outlined in Genesis - jwfact
Exactly, and God left instructions for everyone to follow with measurements galore.
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Good point snare.
Cofty still can't get the link on my device. On my lunch now. But will respond to your challenge when I get to my laptop.
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Cofty,
You're right there was no need to compare you to a pigeon. I am sorry.
There is no need for you to be publicly rude to me and predict I will refuse the challenge.
Jookbeard, yes you're right I am sorry.
A high post count on a thread is not a badge of honour it can be an indication of waste of time posts.
I am at work now. It's really sunny today so I am going on a date after work. But I will find time today to respond to your challenge Cofty and prove my chemistry is correct.
By the way I can't access the links on my phone today. Anyone know why?
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Cofty,
Thank you for your posts. Much better you're not shitting all over the chess board now. You're asking me how to play chess.
After work I will explain what I mean by racemic mixtures have an imbalance of enantiomers and autocatalysis does not occur.
Thank you for your direct quote from Soai's paper. When I read the multiple links you've put up this abstract wasn't in any of them. Can you provide the link so I can check the credibility myself please. I appreciate you going back and getting it. I have also researched his paper myself using Google and I have never seen this abstract.
It's also confusing that you claim to understand the abstract but not my word salad. I use the same terms. I will explain though.
Off to work now
- cantleave