invert_nexus
taking the physical make up of life and the physical make up of an environmental factor amounts to zilch unless the physical thing is actually alive
“
nope you're wrong in that one“
my understanding is that all forms of life are conscious - ie they all exhibit some sort of will.
”
Nope. You'd be wrong in that one. The most basic forms of life simply react to their environment in a limited number of ways which are prescribed by their physical makeup.
taking the physical make up of life and the physical make up of an environmental factor amounts to zilch unless the physical thing is actually alive
since life itself cannot be determined on a molecular level, you are speaking something other than strict scienceIt all boils down to interaction at the molecular level.
“
big difference between something that is living and something that is dead - even on a molecular levelThere is a big difference between life and the chemicals that life utilizes
”
How fine can you split a hair? How many pieces can you cut a cell into before you can say that this bit is no longer alive?
sure - just contrast them to when they are deadAre viruses alive?
ever seen a dead crystal?Crystals?
consciousness is a symptom of life and an eluding factor of abiogenesisAnyway.
The topic of this thread is abiogenesis, not consciousness. I'd suggest sticking to topic, but I'm no longer moderator of this thread as I have moved it as per request of the thread starter. I will issue a formal request to cease and desist all religious ramblings and stick to a biological perspective to the opening post.
regressing dna doesn't make the suggestion of abiogenesis any more tenable.On the topic, I would like to say this. The bit that intrigues me most about the creation of life is the evolution of the genetic code. It is this little trick that makes a bunch of molecules that follow simple chemical rules into something greater than the sum of its parts. Everybody goes on and on about the wonders of DNA and, it's true, DNA is a wonderful storage medium (relatively speaking. From a design perspective, better choices could have been made, but I digress). It's not the DNA that is the magical part of the process. It's the tRNA. That's where the code lies. That's where the instructions for reading the code lies. That's where the assembly of proteins from the DNA becomes reality.
There's also all the epigenetic goings on which we learn more about every day, but the magic of magics is tRNA.
In fact the difficulties that surround the formation of the delicate sugars of tRNA seem to make the notion of life being cooked in some sort of biological oven even more absurd.