In article <myers-0CFC7F.09032921122000 at news.info-link.net>,
pz <myers at mac.com> wrote:
> In article <91t5ic$6e5$1 at nnrp1.deja.com>, zOz
> <wissenschaftskritik at my-deja.com> wrote:
>> > My informal application to the $1.35 million prize of the
> > The Origin-of-Life Foundation http://www.us.net/life/ :
> >
> > [begin quote]
> >
> > In order to resolve the mystery of life, it is necessary
> > to go back to the time before materialistic reductionism
> > (Descartes, Bacon, Galilei) edged out panpsychism (Cusanus,
> > Kepler).
> >
> > Unfortunately materialistic reductionism is nowadays
> > confused with science itself and the explanation of
> > life within 'science' has become impossible.
> >
> > I have resolved the mystery of the origin of life in a
> > very simple and elegant way based on panpsychism.
> >
> > To try to publish a paper based on panpsychism "in a
> > well-respected, peer-reviewed science journal" is as
> > problematic as to publish a scientific refutation of
> > a basic premise of catholicism in a well-respected
> > publication organ of the Vatican.
> >
> > Here the abstract of my theory:
> >
> > "ABSTRACT: The psychon theory is a panpsychist evolution
> > theory based on a continuity from elementary particles to
> > human souls. Elementary particles are like very primitive
> > and basic organisms and we all (our souls) were elementary
> > particles billions of years ago. During evolution our
> > psychons (souls) have been responsible for the behaviour
> > of atoms, molecules, enzymes, living cells, primitive
> > neurons, primitive animals, ... , monkeys and of our
> > ancestors.
> >
> > The psychon theory has very concrete consequences, for
> > instance there must be a limit to the number of human souls,
> > which according to the latest demographic data could be
> > even less than 7 billion."
> > http://members.lol.li/twostone/E/psychon.html> >
> > A further extract ("Psychons and their Evolution"):
> >
> > "The maturation of a protein from the corresponding chain
> > of amino acids can happen in the following way:
> > <In important (evolutionarily older) sequences of the chain,
> > amino acids become active, that is they are animated by
> > psychons. Because of environment continuity these psychons
> > are the ones which have built up the same protein (or the
> > same sequence of different proteins) innumerable times.
> > These psychons build up protein parts which can be animated
> > as a whole by other psychons which then build up the
> > complete protein.>
> > So it also becomes comprehensible that RNA sequences
> > (introns) are able to cut out themselves or that order is
> > maintained during DNA recombination.
> >
> > During evolution, psychon animated molecules have been
> > joining together in always bigger units. Animated molecules
> > such as amino acids and nucleotides began sometime to form
> > chains. By specialization psychons emerged which dominated
> > such chains. Proteins are conceivable which replicate by
> > adding corresponding amino acids to one chain end, until an
> > identical protein can split off. Reproduction by base
> > pairing of two complementary strands is even more efficient.
> > The invention of translation, a complex symbiosis of various
> > ribosomal psychons, was certainly one of the most essential
> > steps during the evolution of life."
> >
> > I have not only successfully defended the theory on the
> > discussion forum talk.origins, but also efficiently
> > pointed out (more or less well-known) inconsistencies
> > of the currently prevailing neo-Darwinism.
> >
> > "According to the psychon theory, enzymes are like primitive
> > animals. At least proteins and RNA enzymes should have
> > evolved at first indepentently. Self replicating proteins
> > learned sometime to use short RNA templates in order to
> > accelerate the production of new proteins. This technique
> > was continuously improved not only by pure chance but also
> > by final laws of nature.
> >
> > The emergence of the genetic code can be compared with
> > the emergence of human languages, and the emergence of
> > the highly complex living cell with the emergence of modern
> > cities. All species and evolutionary innovations were
> > designed in a similar way houses, cars or ships have been
> > designed. But at the same time they have evolved by chance
> > in a similar way houses, cars and ships have evolved.
> >
> > If it is true that living cells using the modern genetic
> > code appeared very early on the earth, then it is highly
> > improbable that this very complex code evolved the first
> > time on earth. Such an information transfer from 'cosmic
> > ancestors' to the earth is possible, because an essential
> > part of the information of living systems is stored in the
> > immaterial psychons.
> >
> > We cannot reproduce the behaviour of enzymes of the early
> > earth because their behaviour depends on psychons which have
> > further evolved. So amino acid sequences which would have
> > folded millions or billions of years ago, today do not fold
> > any more. In the same way, sequences which fold today did
> > not fold on the early earth."
> > http://members.lol.li/twostone/E/deja6.html> >
> > [end quote]
> >
> > I'm quite confident not to win the prize, nevertheless,
> > from a purely scientific point of view, I would merit
> > at least a substantial part of it.
> >
> >
>> There was no science at all in the above passage. You have no
evidence
> for psychons or souls, but you've spun out this entire unfounded,
silly
> scenario from them. You claim to have successfully defended this
theory
> on TO; I've missed that. I've only seen you spout dogmatic nonsense.
Well, he at least tried to come up with a theory. The creationist have
never even done that. (at least not in the last 100 years).
Rod #613
>> --
> pz
>>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
