Posted: Apr 15, 2010 11:39 am
rainbow wrote:Newmark wrote:rainbow wrote:Preparative synthesis of 2-aminooxazole 11 using phosphate catalysis
To a solution of glycolaldehyde 10 (1.2 g, 20 mmol) in sodium hydrogen phosphate
buffer (1.0M, 10 mL, pH = 7.0) was added cyanamide 8 (840 mg, 20 mmol). The
solution was stirred at 60°C for 3 h, cooled to r.t., and extracted with EtOAc (5 × 20
mL). The combined EtOAc extracts were concentrated in vacuo to give 2-
aminooxazole 11 (1.2 g, 75%) as a white powder.
Now besides the problematic concentrations, pH and temperatures, has anybody got an idea how a vacuum pump got to be there in the PreBiotic Earth?
Now, rainbow, this is becoming a far too common error on your part. Do you really think that a real scientist like Sutherland would postulate an environment required for his hypothesis that includes a vacuum pump, and then be stupid enough to claim that the environment containing a vacuum pump represents "prebiotically plausible conditions"? If you've heard the term "straw man", that is exactly what you set up here. I can only think of two explanations for this inane comment:
How silly of me. Of course you are correct, there couldn't have been a vacuum pump.
How do you suggest that the vacuum was obtained under prebiotically plausible conditions?
I don't suggest that that vacuum was obtained under prebiotically plausible conditions, and as far as I can tell, neither does the paper. Certain concentrations were made in vacuo during the course of the experiment, but this is as relevant as claiming that you need a stove to boil water just because such an experiment can be preformed on one.
The paper has passed peer review (unlike your unfounded opinions), so I'm very certain that it motivates why the conditions it simulates can be considered "prebiotically plausible". If you find a mention of vacuum there, I'm sure it will be explained to you. Until then, I'm still not sure if you don't know squat about scientific experiments, or if your straw men are intentionally duplicitous. Either way, your credibility just keeps sinking...
EDIT: rainbow, your tag about you being "
by Moderator Intolerance" is blatantly false, which was explained to you here.