Is Random Assembly of a "Lee Peptide" More Probable than "1 in 10^41"?

 Is Random Assembly of a "Lee Peptide" More Probable than "1 in 10^41"?


***Under Construction***





xxx

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

THE "FATAL FLAW" WITH RICHARD CARRIER'S ABIOGENESIS ARGUMENT

Image
  The "Fatal Flaw" with Richard Carrier's  "1 in 10^41" Argument for Abiogenesis (See,  "Q's Response to Richard Carrier: About the Debate,"  for context) (See also,  "Q's Open Challenge to Richard Carrier" ) Q's Verdict (Summary)  Richard Carrier’s central, foundational “1 in 10^41” argument for abiogenesis that he has repeatedly asserted for twenty years is absolutely, indisputably, and unequivocally false, because it is based on a faulty understanding of how a "Lee peptide" self-replicates.  He believes, for example, that a "Lee peptide" once formed in the "right environment" will then  "start spontaneously creating copies of [itself]...as a consequence of known physical laws" by "attach[ing] amino acids" together.  But that is not how a "Lee peptide" self-replicates. It does not have the ability to chain amino acids together  at all in any  order, much less the corre...
Read more

Richard's First Mistake: a "Lee Peptide" is not a PNA

Image
Richard's First Mistake: a "Lee Peptide" is not a PNA   (See,  "Q's Response to Richard Carrier: About the Debate,"  for context) (See also,  "Q's Open Challenge to Richard Carrier" , and  "The 'Fatal Flaw' with Richard Carrier's '1 in 10^41' Argument for Abiogenesis" ) The first mistake Richard makes — before getting to any "Fatal Flaws" —is that  he conflates " Lee peptide " with Peptide Nucleic Acids (PNAs); writing, for example: "The probability of a self-replicating form of PNA arising by chance accident from just those kinds of mechanisms is now known to be at least 1 in 10^41." (" Oh No! Biogenesis is Impossible? ") "Simple self-replicating PNA strands are an established fact (the Lee peptide being just one of them...)." (" Biogenesis and the Laws of Evidence ") "A factor of 10^43 is 100-times more than the 10^41 odds against a spontaneous Lee ...
Read more

Q's OPEN CHALLENGE TO RICHARD CARRIER

Image
Q's Open Challenge to Richard Carrier  (See,  "Q's Response to Richard Carrier: About the Debate,"  for context) (See also,  "Q's Open Challenge to Richard Carrier" , and  "The 'Fatal Flaw' with Richard Carrier's '1 in 10^41' Argument for Abiogenesis" ) I recently wrote on "The 'Fatal Flaw' with Richard Carrier's '1 in 10^41' Argument for Abiogenesis,"  and around the same time issued a personal challenge to Richard, wherein I offered to "donate money to his website" if he could debunk said "Fatal Flaw" (as decided by "educated, neutral arbiters" "if the two of us can't agree"). "If, however, I'm declared the winner, then I want no money...I simply want to see accurate science taught (call it the pet peeve of a retired national science educator). I would be satisfied with a retraction and correction of [Richard's] long-standing erroneous c...
Read more