>I'm fuzzy on the origins of life and why organisms became driven to
>reproduce in the first place.  I expect everyone is but I would like to
>see some of the modern logic on the subject.
>
>Bearing in mind that natural selection depends on reproduction and
>tends to take a while to make significant change (hundreds of
>generations?  Thousands?  surely dozens?)--what current thinking on the
>origin of life logically explains the following chain of events.
>
>1)No life  2)Beginning of Life 3)Life reproduces itself 4)Life driven
>to reproduce itself.


IMO all steps were forced by the sun's heat/uv cycle.

What didn't survive burned up.

What did survived and survived in variant forms - the more successful
variants were able to reproduce, use the energy,
have cells, etc.
Life is not an emerged magic, or fluke creation,
or 'goal oriented to get to us' - its a reaction to an environmental sun cycle.
Take the sun out and see how far you get in any
origin scenario.
(I have numerous posts here to explain these ideas)
Good luck,


>
>Steps three and four in particular. What I'm looking for is solid
>logic/thinking/theorizing not a videotape (or some "factual"
>equivalent) of the first lifeform.  Layman's terms would be appreciated
>although I have a decent vocabularly and don't mind the occasional use
>of a dictionary.
>
>A reference to a book (and why it's the best one to read),  or a simple
>link or a six-page response will be appreciated.  Posts about how
>stupid evolution is (unless shockingly above the norm in logic and
>factual references) will be ignored.
>
>Thanks to anyone who helps,
>Argos


Tom Hendricks,  Musea zine ed.
http://musea.digitalchainsaw.com"
www.hunkasaurus.com ( "30" - CD now available)
Hunkasaurus & His Pet Dog Guitar
Musea Review Service (see Musea)
---
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 10/18/04 10:15:55 PM