[moderator's note: Let's be very careful here; we don't want to
drag creationism, or crypto-creationist claptrap like "Design
Theory" into this group (since it's banned in the charter as well
as being dopey), but I think a discussion of plausible evolutionary
pathways for simple biochemistry (e.g. RNA, DNA and so forth) is
perfectly on topic. - JAH]

During a discussion about primitive forms of life, someone popped the ques-
tion why there is so little biochemical variation around. His argument ran
that most life on Earth has some form of DNA or RNA inside it, and that there
is little evidence for anything more primitive. He then proceeded to say that
regular biological evolution breaks down at the biochemical level, and that 
you would need a different theory (but not any form of creationism, he was 
quite emphatic about that) in order to explain all sorts of basic biological
structures, like for example DNA.

My first reaction was to dismiss the idea entirely, despite the fact I am
not a biochemist. Nevertheless, I decided to hunt around if I could find some
information on this particular subject. But most hits Google turns up 
(including those of the much more limited scholar's edition) are poisoned 
with creationism, and the library at my university does not have the necessary
literature for a biochemical search.

Is there any truth to what this person claims? Any links to informative 
articles would be most appreciated. (I vaguely recall that a recent edition
of the New Scientist featured an article about a quantummechanical spark of
sorts to begin it all, but I don't have the print edition at hand. Something
like that.)


Kind regards,
Maarten
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 12/15/04 5:36:08 PM