Posted: Apr 13, 2010 8:44 am
by rainbow
Darwinsbulldog wrote:
Wrong, you're making a common mistake of confusing the two.
Abiogenesis and Evolution are not the same, and would not be a result of the same mechamisms.

Please present some fossil evidence of Abiogenesis.

Also wrong. Although the mechanisms for evolution and abiogenesis are not the same [as you correctly point out], there are somewhat similar.

Evolution is about mutations being selected or deselected by natural selection to change gene frequencies in a population due to the differential success of genes and gene combinations [and recombinations] in bodies where there is phenotypic expression.

Abiogenesis is thought to work by massively parallel chemical "experimentation" [subject to chemical laws] that give rise to a replicator. This replicator must have the ability to copy itself, and was probably auto-catalytic. In other words, some natural selective process [Not Natural Selection in the exact sense of evolution, as there were no genes in the beginning] ] was acting on variation in the chemical soup to produce that replicator.

OK, lets stop here for a moment.
Up to the point where the Replicator was formed, there could not have been any selection. Please describe this Replicator.
What was it made of?