On 01-05-98 Andrew Cummins wrote to Day Brown... 
 AC>  DB> Even more primitive: the prion. 
 AC> 
 AC> Uh, what makes a prion primitive?  Do you equate simple with 
 AC> primitive?  Do you equate "not a life form" with primitive?  Or, 
 AC> are you passing off non-science assumptions as fact and assuming 
 AC> that prions are some sort of precursor to life????? 
 AC> 
 AC>  DB> Which, Mark, is not a life form; 
 AC>  DB> it has no DNA.  It *is* a molecule.  In the right circumstances, 
 AC>  DB> it is a catalyst... those circumstances now being recognized in 
 AC>  DB> the so-called 'mad cow disease', in which the catalysis creates 
 AC>  DB> even more prions, which continue to replicate, in, pardon my pun, 
 AC>  DB> but a very life-like way. 
 AC> 
 AC> Next time could you bother to tell us what your point is?????? 
If you are going to use Creationism or any other doctrine to 
explain 'life' it seems reasonable to define just what it is 
you think life is.  This sort of thing has been done as long 
as I have heard Creationism argued, and one of the arguements 
long promulgated, but less heard now from the pulpit, was the 
fact that life is such a miracle, that mankind would never be 
able to 'create' it. 
 
Well, now... we see where a particular molecule, which form 
is a function of quantum mechanics and sub-atomic physics, is 
exhibiting characteristics of 'life', just as predicted by the 
computer models of conditions on the primitive earth 4 billion 
years ago. 
 
If you do not see a relationship here Andrew, that is not my 
problem; but perhaps you can see how this observed phenomena 
would make some people think they had more evidence for the 
theory of evolution. 
 
 AC>  DB> Now, it does not look like Venus ever had, or ever will support 
 AC>  DB> any form of life we can imagine. 
 AC> 
 AC> Why not?  Is it because Venus is stuck in an open system, getting 
 AC> energy from the sun?  Just what principle or law leads you to 
 AC> the conclusion that Venus will probably never support any form 
 AC> of life????????????????? 
Because there ain't no free lunch.  To develop life as we 
have found it so far, demands a chemical activity level of 
a high order, such as in a liquid. Venus does not seem to 
have any liquid.  You also need a power source, either as 
light, or a constant supply of new chemical into a given 
location. Venusian rock is too inert to respond to the 
presence of light. 
 
If life did exist there, I would expect to see it high in 
the atmosphere; but that would also depend on some sort 
of diurnal change or weather to move molecules from one 
kind of condition to another, and the consequent chemical 
reactions that might take place. 
___ 
 * OFFLINE 1.58 
--- Maximus 3.01
---------------