Well, considering that the most single-minded passion of all
critters smaller than a breadbox (and most larger) is wolfing
down food so that they can reproduce more hungry critters, the
idea of having nutrient-rich building blocks lying around long
enough to even ponder the possibility of assembly is about as
likely as the idea of a box of Twinkies (tm) growing mold at a
diet-camp cafeteria.
Steven P Crawford writes
in message <20000807.095458.-170045.0.stevenpcrawford@juno.com>:
>
> Here's a question that I've been pondering, and I was wondering what kind
> of answers are given to it:
>
> In today's environments, there is a rich and ready source of biochemical
> and genetic raw materials. As organisms die and decay, carbohydrates,
> lipids, amino acids, and even nucleic acids are filtered into the
> surrounding environs. These may not remain intact for long, but at least
> fragments of them are constantly being spread around. Even the floors of
> our homes and work areas are literally covered with a biochemical film,
> due to our continual shedding of dead skin cells.
>
> So, then, why is it apparently true that no one is looking for or
> expecting abiogenesis to occur today? With such a rich diversity of
> ambient biomolecules, why is it seemingly unreasonable for us to go into,
> say, a swamp and see if lifeforms or proto-lifeforms are developing?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 07 2000 - 17:27:26 EDT