evidence of God, a rational belief

this forum has the goal to organize and unite information and compelling evidence for the existence of the God of the bible


You are not connected. Please login or register

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1 RNA, and the origin of life on Tue Aug 18, 2009 9:17 pm

RNA AND THE ORIGINS OF LIFE

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ei=0fyKSo7IO4GulAfF9IUp&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=rna+origin+of+life+creation&spell=1

the origin of life on earth
by Leslie E. Orgel

http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/lab/2948/orgel.html

Origin of Life: Critique of Early Stage Chemical Evolution Theories

http://www.icr.org/article/77/

The immensity of the problem is rarely appreciated by laymen, and is generally ignored by evolutionary scientists, themselves. The simplest form of life imaginable would require hundreds of different kinds of molecules, perhaps thousands, most of them large and very complex. With respect to this point, Van Rensselaer Potter states, "It is possible to hazard a guess that the number is not less than 1,000, but whether it is 3,000 or 10,000 or greater is anyone's guess."2 This statement not only acknowledges the immensity of the problem, but also is a tacit admission of how little is really known or knowable about the problem.

In addition to these many molecules, which would include the large and complex protein, DNA and RNA molecules, each with up to several hundred subunits arranged in a precise sequence, the origin of life would require many complex and dynamically functional structures, such as membranes, ribosomes, mitochondria (or energy-producing complexes of some kind), etc. Furthermore, life requires marvelous coordination in time and space, with many regulatory mechanisms. To believe that all of this came about by mere chemical and physical processes, does indeed constitute an immense exercise of faith.

Videos :

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=rna+&search_type=&aq=f





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml0OqAUzEXU



Last edited by elshamah888 on Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:45 pm; edited 3 times in total

View user profile

2 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:34 pm

Nucleic acid (RNA, DNA) first

http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/orignl04.html#orgnlfnclccdfrst

RNA first (RNA world)

"the early stages of the RNA world are too complicated to represent plausible scenarios for the origin of life"

"Once RNA is synthesized, it can make new copies of itself only with a great deal of help from the scientist, says Joyce of the Scripps Clinic, an RNA specialist. " It is an inept molecule," he explains, "especially when compared with proteins." Leslie E. Orgel of the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, who has probably done more research exploring the RNA-world scenario than any other scientist, concurs with Joyce. Experiments simulating the early stages of the RNA world are too complicated to represent plausible scenarios for the origin of life, Orgel says. "You have to get an awful lot of things right and nothing wrong," he adds." (Horgan, John [science writer], "In The Beginning ...," Scientific American, February 1991, p.103. Elipses in original).

"not one self-replicating RNA has emerged to date"

"DNA replication is so error-prone that it needs the prior existence of protein enzymes to improve the copying fidelity of a gene-size piece of DNA. `Catch-22,' say Maynard Smith and Szathmary. So, wheel on RNA with its now recognized properties of carrying both informational and enzymatic activity, leading the authors to state: `In essence, the first RNA molecules did not need a protein polymerase to replicate them; they replicated themselves.' Is this a fact or a hope? I would have thought it relevant to point out for 'biologists in general' that not one self-replicating RNA has emerged to date from quadrillions (1024) of artificially synthesized, random RNA sequences." (Dover, Gabriel [Professor of Genetics, University of Leicester], "Looping the evolutionary loop," Review of "The Origins of Life: From the Birth of Life to the Origin of Language," by John Maynard Smith and Eors Szathmary, Oxford University Press: 1999, in Nature, 399, 20 May 1999, pp.217-218)

"tthe RNA world hypothesis is still far from being proved"

"Nevertheless, despite the fact that most scientists working in this field accept the validity of the idea, the RNA world hypothesis is still far from being proved. For one thing, in almost 20 years only seven types of natural ribozymes have been discovered: two remove introns (parts of RNA that don't code for proteins) from themselves; four cut themselves in two; and one trims off the end of an RNA precursor." (Evans J., "It's alive - isn't it?" Chemistry in Britain, Vol. 36, No. 5, May 2000, pp.44-47. http://www.chemsoc.org/chembytes/ezine/2000/evans_may00.htm).

View user profile

3 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Tue Aug 18, 2009 10:39 pm

the origin of life, by Leslie E. Orgel

http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/lab/2948/orgel.html

The precise events giving rise to the RNA world remain unclear. As we have seen, investigators have proposed many hypotheses, but evidence in favor of each of them is fragmentary at best. The full details of how the RNA world, and life, emerged may not be revealed in the near future.

View user profile

4 The DNA - Enzyme System is Irreducibly Complex on Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:47 am

The DNA - Enzyme System is Irreducibly Complex

http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/845

View user profile

5 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Mon Aug 16, 2010 1:04 pm

http://www.allaboutscience.org/rna-world.htm

RNA world – An Introduction

The RNA world hypothesis is an attempt to provide an adequate answer to problems facing origin-of-life researchers in relation to the original information storage medium on primitive earth. DNA is responsible for housing the information that the cell requires to fold proteins into the correct shape critical to their respective function. Practically every cellular and extracellular structure is constructed from proteins. Given this importance, the information housed in DNA defines life’s most fundamental operations and structures.

When cells undergo replication, DNA and the information it stores is copied and subsequently passed on to the daughter cells. Biochemical blueprints are conveyed to the next generation through DNA replication. This process generates two ‘daughter’ molecules which are identical to the ‘parent’ DNA molecule. Once replication is complete, the two generated DNA molecules are distributed between the daughter cells produced during cell division.

Building proteins requires genetic information in DNA, but information in DNA cannot be processed without many specific proteins and protein complexes. Mutual interdependence of DNA and proteins has stood as a major stumbling block for Darwinian paradigms with regards to life’s origin since the mid-1980’s. Origin-of-life researchers even refer to this conundrum as the chicken-and-egg paradox. Because proteins are so fundamental to the means by which DNA replicates, DNA and proteins could not simultaneously arise from a primordial soup.

RNA world – A Solution?

The RNA world hypothesis has been proposed as a resolution to this paradox. This model maintains that RNA preceded DNA and proteins as the initial fundamental information storage medium. RNA can simultaneously store information (like DNA) and catalyse chemical reactions (like proteins). Thus it is contended that the RNA world eventually evolved into the DNA-protein world of contemporary biochemistry, with RNA currently functioning as an intermediary between DNA and proteins.

While the RNA-world hypothesis sidesteps the need for an interdependent system of DNA and proteins in the earliest living system on paper, in practical terms it appears largely untenable. Numerous difficulties abound for the RNA world hypothesis. For example, the formation of the first RNA molecule would have necessitated the prior emergence of smaller constituent molecules, including ribose sugar, phosphate molecules, and the four RNA nucleotide bases. It turns out, however, that both synthesizing and maintaining these essential RNA building molecules (particularly ribose) and the nucleotide bases is profoundly problematic, if not impossible to perform under realistic prebiotic conditions.

Another major difficulty confronting proponents of the RNA-world hypothesis is that naturally occurring RNA molecules possess very few of the specific enzymatic properties of proteins. Ribozymes can perform a small handful of the thousands of functions performed by proteins.

The inability of RNA molecules to perform many of the functions of protein enzymes raises a third and related concern with regards to the tenability of the RNA-world paradigm. To date, no plausible explanation has been advanced as to how primitive self-replicating RNA molecules could have made the transition into modern cellular systems which rely heavily on a variety of proteins to process genetic information. Consider the transition from a primitive replicator to a system for building the first proteins. Even if such a system of ribozymes for building proteins had arisen from an RNA replicator, that system of molecules would still require information-rich templates for building specific proteins. There is no foreseeable account of the origin of that information.

RNA world – Conclusion

In summary, RNA can perform only a few minor functional roles and even then usually as the consequence of researchers intentionally ‘engineering’ the RNA catalyst in question. Even in the face of extreme difficulty, most neo-Darwinians remain convinced that the RNA world must have existed, subsequently paving the way for the DNA-protein world. If it did not, the chicken-and-egg paradox -- from a materialistic perspective -- cannot be resolved.

View user profile

6 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:17 pm

Hmmm. I don't know enough about RNA to make any sense of all this, so I'll have to give this one a pass.

By the way god doesn't exist. All the so-called evidence on this forum is cackapoo.

View user profile

7 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:01 pm

http://rheumatology.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/37/1/15.pdf

SYSTEMIC sclerosis (SSc) is an autoimmune disease
characterized by thickening and ®brosis of the skin
and internal organs, the severity of which varies con-
siderably between individuals [1]. This clinical hetero-
geneity causes considerable management problems
and an important aspect of disease classi®cation is to
identify groups of individuals likely to follow a par-
ticular clinical course. Virtually all patients are now
recognized as having antinuclear antibodies (ANA)
and the various speci®cities have been shown to be
useful in the identi®cation of disease subsets [2]. The
most common SSc-speci®c antibodies, anticentromere
(ACA) and anti-topoisomerase I (ATA), have been
predominantly associated with limited cutaneous
disease (lcSSc) and di€use cutaneous disease (dcSSc),
respectively, and their mutual exclusiveness has been
well documented [3]. Antibodies to PM-Scl and
nRNP are also present in SSc; they are less frequent
and associated with overlap syndromes that show
features of polymyositis (PM) and systemic lupus
erythematosus (SLE) [4]. More recently, three further
SSc-speci®c antibodies reacting with U3-RNP,
Th-RNP and RNA polymerases have been described.
Whereas anti-U3 and anti-Th are relatively rare,
antibodies to RNA polymerases (ARA) represent a
major antibody category with distinct clinical features
[4±7].
The three mammalian RNA polymerases (I, II, III)
(RNAP) are enzymes with multiple subunits distin-
guishable from each other by the resolution in poly-acrylamide gel of characteristic bands for the two
largest subunits of each enzyme (190 and 120 kDa
for RNAP I, 220 and 145 kDa for RNAP II, 155
and 138 kDa for RNAP III). The antibodies precip-
itating RNAP I and III have also been shown to be
speci®c for SSc, de®ning patients who typically have
dcSSc, major organ involvement and a poor pro-
gnosis [8, 9]. Antibodies to RNAP II occur in SSc,
but are not disease speci®c [10, 11]. They recognize at
least two epitopes, one of which is formed by the
phosphorylation of the 220 kDa subunit. Antibodies
to this phosphorylated form of RNAP II (RNAP
IIO) are found in association with ATA in SSc, but
are also present in other connective tissue diseases
[12]. Antibodies to the non-phosphorylated form
occur in association with ARA (I and III).
In this study, we report our experience of immuno-
precipitating the SSc-speci®c ARA (I and III),
thereby excluding the RNAP II antibodies that react
with RNAP IIO, and detail the main clinical features
of these patients in comparison to patients with
ATA.

View user profile

8 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:02 pm

METHODS
Patients
Sera from 735 patients ful®lling the ARA criteria
for the classi®cation of SSc [13] were assessed for the
presence of ANA and antibodies to extractable
nuclear antigens (ENA). Further analysis, limited by
the availability of the 35S-labelled HeLa cell antigen
extract, was undertaken on sera from 374 SSc
patients by immunoprecipitation. These were selected
by ANA pattern without any prior knowledge of
clinical disease. We also performed ANA, immuno-precipitation and anti-ENA estimation on serum
from 93 patients with other autoimmune diseases (28
SLE, 16 PM, 5 SjoÈ gren's syndrome, 20 rheumatoid
arthritis, 14 autoimmune hepatitis and 14 Raynaud's
phenomenon). The records of all patients in whom
ARA was detected were reviewed and compared with
a similar number of patients positive for ATA.
Clinical features
Patients with SSc were classi®ed as either dcSSc,
showing skin sclerosis proximal to the elbows and
extending towards the trunk, or lcSSc, characterized
by skin sclerosis restricted to the extremities and face
[14]. Clinical severity was assessed according to an
internationally validated system [15] with involvement
being de®ned as at least grade one severity within
each individual system. The duration of SSc was
taken as the time from onset of the ®rst de®nite non-
Raynaud's symptom. For the patients studied,
respiratory involvement was de®ned as >30%
reduction from the predicted carbon monoxide
transfer factor or forced vital capacity, or by other
con®rmatory evidence of ®brosis, such as amorphous
or reticuloanodular in®ltrates on high-resolution
computed tomography. Cardiac involvement was
determined by an ejection fraction of under 65% by
echocardiography or by a signi®cant arrhythmia or
conduction defect. Renal involvement was recorded if
there was any history of hypertensive renal crisis
attributable to SSc, even if subsequent recovery
was full, or where there was persistent otherwise
inexplicable renal impairment or proteinuria.
Myositis was de®ned by the presence of at least two
of the following: signi®cant proximal weakness
(power below MRC grade three), abnormal electro-
myography, elevated serum creatinine kinase or
histological evidence of myositis on biopsy. Gastro-
intestinal tract involvement was invariably present in
all patients and determined by symptoms of oesopha-
gitis or abnormal motility on scintiscan [16]. All SSc
patients were examined for isolated pulmonary hyper-
tension de®ned by reduction of carbon monoxide
transfer factor with a normal forced vital capacity
associated with characteristic Doppler echocardio-
graphic features [17]; however, no cases of isolated
pulmonary hypertension were seen in patients with
ARA or ATA included in the comparative study.
Skin involvement was assessed by scoring each of 20
areas as normal=0, possible thickening=1, de®nite
thickening=2 or hidebound=3, to give a maximum
score of 60 [18].
Indirect immuno¯uorescence ANA testing
Sera were diluted at 1/100 in phosphate-bu€ered
saline (PBS) [150 mM NaCl, 10 mM phosphate (pH
7.2)] and screened by indirect immuno¯uorescence
[19] using a HEp-2 cell substrate (Bion Inc., Park
Ridge, IL, USA) with rabbit anti-human polyvalent
¯uorescein isothiocyanate conjugate (F0200, Dako,
Ely) and viewed at 400 magni®cation under a
¯uorescence microscope (Carl Zeiss, Oberkochen,
Germany).
Anti-ENA estimation
Counterimmunoelectrophoresis (CIE) for anti-
ENA was performed as previously described using
soluble extracts from human spleen and rabbit
thymus acetone powder (Pelfreez Biologicals, Rogers,
AR, USA) as antigen [20] and antisera of con®rmed
speci®city [21].
Immunoprecipitation
Immunoprecipitation from [35S]Met-labelled HeLa
cell extract was performed essentially as described [7].
Brie¯y, 2510 cm culture plates of subcon¯uent
HeLa cells were cultured in methionine-free MEM
with Trans 35S-label overnight (0.5 MBq/ml) (ICN
Radiochemicals, Thame). The cells were harvested by
scraping and washed in ice-cold PBS. Following
resuspension in 5 ml of immunoprecipitation bu€er
(IPP bu€er) [500 mM NaCl, 10 mM Tris (pH 8.0),
0.1% Nonidet P40], cells were sonicated on ice
(330 s), centrifuged at 14 000 g for 15 min and the
supernatant used as antigen.
For immunoprecipitation, 20 ml of patient serum
were incubated with 0.5 ml of 4 mg/ml protein
A±Sepharose CL4B (Sigma Chemicals, Poole,
Dorset) in IPP bu€er overnight at 48C. Antibody-
bound Sepharose was washed three times with IPP
bu€er and resuspended in 200 ml of IPP bu€er,
combined with 50 ml of 35S-labelled HeLa extract for
2 h with occasional mixing. After four washes with
IPP bu€er, the immunoprecipitated proteins were
denatured by boiling for 2 min in 40 ml sample bu€er,
fractionated on 8% polyacrylamide gels [22]. Gels
were then ®xed, enhanced by soaking for 1 h
in Amplify (Amersham International plc, Little
Chalfont, Bucks.) and precipitates visualized by
autoradiography.
RESULTS
ANA patterns in SSc
Seven hundred and thirty-®ve patients with SSc
were classed according to their ANA pattern on
HEp-2 cells. Cytoplasmic or nuclear staining was
observed with all sera, and ANA were present in
97%. ACA was identi®ed from the ANA pattern in
25% of sera. Of the remainder, 26.5% gave a homo-
geneous pattern, 21% a ®ne speckled pattern, and
14% a ®ne speckled and nucleolar pattern. Less
frequently observed were a coarse speckled pattern
in 7.3%, nucleolar only in 3.3% and cytoplasmic
only in 2.9% of sera (Fig. 1).
Anti-ENA in SSc
Anti-ENA were investigated by CIE on sera from
all patients. ATA were detected in 157 (21%), anti-
nRNP in 48 (6.4%) and anti-PM-Scl in 40 (5.3%),
each being associated with homogeneous, coarse
speckled and ®ne speckled ANA, respectively. Anti-
Ro were detected in 36 patients and in six of theseanti-La were also detected. Anti-Jo-1, anti-PL-7 or
anti-Ku were present in serum from nine patients,
and anti-U3 RNP were detected in serum from eight
patients. Sera from patients with ACA were generally
negative for anti-ENA with only three patients
having anti-Ro (Table I).

View user profile

9 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:03 pm

Immunoprecipitation results
Sera from 374 SSc patients (51%) were immuno-
precipitated and while varying proportions of the
ANA/anti-ENA categories listed in Table I were
tested (ACA 17%, ATA 59%), the concentration of
all 86 positives in the sera giving ®ne speckled or ®ne
speckled with nucleolar staining patterns led to a
greater proportion of these sera (74±75%) being
tested. Banding patterns characteristic of the precipi-
tation of RNAP III, RNAP I and III or RNAP I
and III together with the non-phosphorylated form
of RNAP II were detected (Fig. 2) in 3/86, 50/86 and
33/86 sera, respectively. We estimate that the overall
frequency of these antibodies in SSc is not less than
86/735 (11.7%). None of the 86 sera had detectable
ACA, ATA, anti-nRNP, anti-Ro, anti-La or anti-
PM-Scl.
Other autoimmune diseases
Sera from 93 patients with ANA-positive auto-
immune diseases other than SSc were also immuno-
precipitated. Half of the 93 sera (46/93) contained
antibodies producing ®ne speckled or ®ne speckled
and nucleolar ANA. Eighteen of these contained
antibodies to Ro or Ro and La that gave a nucleo-
plasmic stain virtually indistinguishable from that
produced by the ARA present in the SSc sera.
However, none of the 93 sera produced the character-
istic banding patterns of ARA seen in the SSc sera.Clinical features of patients with ARA
Clinical details were available on 81/86 patients
with ARA. The group was predominantly female
(84%), aged between 20 and 71 yr at onset with a
mean of 48 yr. Sixty-two patients were classi®ed as
dcSSc and 19 as lcSSc with an overall mean skin
score of 31. Internal organ involvement was noted in
53 patients, 35 had pulmonary ®brosis and 27 renaldisease (17 in the absence of lung ®brosis). Myositis
or cardiac involvement was present in 15 of the
patients with lung or renal disease. The duration of
disease ranged from 1 to 19 yr with a mean of 5.8 yr.
Renal disease and pulmonary ®brosis were equally
prevalent throughout the range, although organ
involvement in general was more common in the 25
patients 4±6 yr from onset compared with those with
the disease for <3 yr or >6 yr; the mean skin score
was also higher in this group, but not statistically sig-
ni®cant (data not shown). One-third of patients had
renal disease and this was of similar frequency in
both patients with lcSSc (7/19) and dcSSc (20/62).
A comparison group of patients positive for ATA
by CIE was selected from the 88 patients on whom
immunoprecipitations had been carried out. Forty-
one were classi®ed as dcSSc and 40 as lcSSc; con-
sequently, they had a signi®cantly lower mean max-
imum skin score (18.6) and only 3/81 had renal
disease. However, signi®cantly more patients had
pulmonary ®brosis, but there was little di€erence in
the incidence of in¯ammatory muscle disease or
cardiac involvement, and isolated pulmonary
hypertension was not a feature of either group
(Table II).
DISCUSSION
From a relatively simple breakdown of ANA
patterns, we have been able to segregate the major
autoantibodies occurring in SSc. In common with
most recent studies, positive ANAs were recorded in>95% of patients. The three most common SSc-
speci®c antibodies to ACA, ATA and ARA were
present in almost 60% with the additional character-
ized autoantibodies to PM-Scl, Ro, La, nRNP and
U3-RNP detected in a further 15%. Detection of one
SSc-speci®c antibody, anti-Th-RNP, was not reliable
and no results were recorded in this study. The
percentage of characterized autoantibodies identi®ed
was 08% lower than in those recorded by Okano
et al. [8]. They detected anti-Th-RNP in 4% of
patients and higher frequencies of ARA and
U3-RNP, but virtually no anti-PM-Scl. Frequencies
of anti-nRNP, anti-La, ACA and ATA were similar.
Serum from 86 patients precipitated proteins
characteristic of RNAP III with 83 also precipitating
RNAP I. These antibodies are regarded as SSc spe-
ci®c and all these sera gave a ®ne speckled nucleo-
plasmic stain on HEp-2 cell substrate as previously
observed [8]. This pattern was indistinguishable from
that produced by anti-La, and since this antigen is
known to associate with RNAP III transcripts [23], it
is possible that the same particles are being visualized
by indirect immuno¯uorescence. The speckled
nucleolar pattern originally described by Reimer et al.
[5] as characteristic of RNAP I antibodies was not
seen and only 13 patients gave additional nucleolar
staining that was homogeneous in appearance.
Seventy-®ve per cent of SSc patients giving ®ne
speckled ANA were analysed, providing an ARA fre-
quency of 11.7%. This is higher than the 1±5%
noted in studies on antibodies to RNAP I [5, 7]. A
similar frequency of positives was observed by Kipnis
et al. [4], but a higher frequency (22%) was recorded
by Okano et al. [8]. In the only other UK study
identifying ARA, Harvey et al. [24] observed that
10% of their sera precipitated RNAP I and III; an
additional 7.2% precipitated RNAP II in conjunction
with ATA, but in the absence of the other poly-
merases. This association had previously been noted
by Satoh et al. [12] and both studies showed that the
dominant antigen was the phosphorylated form of
the large subunit of RNAP II (RNAP IIO), but
observed that the unphosporylated form (RNAP IIA)
could also be precipitated. Unlike the SSc-speci®c
association of RNAP I/III antibodies, RNAP II anti-
bodies have also been detected in other connective
tissue diseases [11]. Although RNAP IIA antibodies
were found in association with other ARA, the
broader range of RNAP II antibodies suggests that
they should be considered separately from those
speci®c to SSc and that epitope mapping will provide
a clearer picture with regard to the ®ne speci®city of
these antibodies. Also, the precipitation of RNAP
IIO antibodies may be part of a more general
phenomenon whereby autoantigens become more
reactive with autoantibodies when phosphorylated
[25].
In earlier studies, the mutually exclusive nature of
ACA and ATA has been documented [3]. It now
appears that ARA form a third distinct sub-
population [8] with only a single example of co-
existence between ARA and ATA reported to date
[24]. The subgroup associated with ACA is almost
entirely con®ned to those patients with limited skin
thickening and little internal organ involvement, but
in whom isolated pulmonary hypertension may be an
important feature [3, 26]. We chose to compare the
clinical features of the ARA-positive group, pre-
viously associated with di€use disease, with a similar
number of ATA-positive patients. ATA is also pre-
dominantly associated with di€use disease or with a
form of lcSSc with severe distal skin involvement and
an increased incidence of pulmonary ®brosis [3]. The
results con®rmed previous observations by Okano
et al. [8] that the maximum mean skin score and the
incidence of renal disease were signi®cantly higher in
ARA patients. Conversely, the ATA patients had a
signi®cantly higher incidence of pulmonary ®brosis,
whereas the frequency of in¯ammatory muscle
disease and cardiac involvement was similar in both
groups.
While skin scores provide an indication of disease
severity, both ARA- and ATA-positive patients were
divided between the classi®cations of lcSSc and
dcSSc. Within the ARA patient group, both classi-
®cations carried the same risk of renal disease and
similarly in the ATA-positive patients the incidence
of pulmonary ®brosis was not signi®cantly di€erent
whether patients were classi®ed as lcSSc or dcSSc.
Thus, ARA and ATA are markers of particular
clinical signi®cance in the lcSSc subset. Although
skin scoring remains a useful measurement, particu-
larly in patients without a de®ned autoantibody
pro®le, the existence of mutually exclusive antibodies
with well-de®ned and distinct patterns of organ
involvement provides a more informative prognostic
indicator.
In summary, ARA were identi®ed in sera from
scleroderma patients. These sera all produced a ®ne
speckled ANA and contained no other characterized
autoantibodies. RNAP IIA antibodies were present
as a subpopulation within the sera positive for anti-
bodies to RNAP I and III. The presence of ARA
identi®ed a clinical picture featuring extensive skin
and renal involvement.

View user profile

10 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:04 pm

REFERENCES
1. Medsger TA. Systemic sclerosis (scleroderma), localised
forms of scleroderma and calcinosis. In: McCarthy DJ,
Koopman WJ, eds. Arthritis and allied conditions.
Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1993.
2. Craft J, Hardin JA. Anti-nuclear antibodies. In: Kelley
WN, Harris ED, Ruddy S, Sledge CB. Textbook
of rheumatology. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co.,
1993:40.
3. Steen VD, Powell DL, Medsger TA. Clinical correla-
tions and prognosis based on serum autoantibodies in
patients with systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum
1988;31:196±203.
4. Kipnis RJ, Craft J, Hardin JA. The analysis of anti-
nuclear and antinucleolar autoantibodies of sclero-
derma by radioimmunoprecipitation assays. Arthritis
Rheum 1990;33:1431±7.
5. Reimer G, Steen VD, Penning CA, Medsger TA,
Tan EM. Correlates between autoantibodies to
nucleolar antigens and clinical features in patients with
systemic sclerosis (scleroderma). Arthritis Rheum
1988;31:525±32.
6. Okano Y, Steen VD, Medsger TA. Autoantibody to
U3 nucleolar ribonucleoprotein (®brillarin) in patients
with systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum 1992;35:95±
100.
7. Kuwana M, Kaburaki J, Mimori T, Tojo T, Homa
M. Autoantibodies reactive with three classes of
RNA polymerases in sera from patients with systemic
sclerosis. J Clin Invest 1993;91:1399±404.
8. Okano Y, Steen VD, Medsger TA. Autoantibody
reactive with RNA polymerase III in systemic sclerosis.
Ann Intern Med 1993;119:1005±13.
9. Kuwana M, Kaburaki J, Okano Y, Tojo T, Homa
M. Clinical and prognostic associations based on
serum antinuclear antibodies in Japanese patients with
systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum 1994;37:75±83.
10. Hirakata M, Okano Y, Patu U, Suwa A, Medsger TA,
Hardin JA et al. Identi®cation of autoantibodies to
RNA polymerase II: Occurrence in systemic sclerosis
and association with autoantibodies to RNA poly-
merases I and III. J Clin Invest 1993;91:2665±72.
11. Satoh M, Ajmani AK, Ogasawara T, Langdon JJ,
Hirakata M, Wang J. Autoantibodies to RNA poly-
merase II are common in systemic lupus erythematosus
and overlap syndrome: speci®c recognition of the phos-
phorylated (IIO) form by a subset of human sera.
J Clin Invest 1994;94:1981±9.
12. Satoh M, Kuwana M, Ogaswara T et al. Association
of autoantibodies to topoisomerase I and the phos-
phorylated (IIO) form of RNA polymerase II in
Japanese scleroderma patients. J Immunol
1994;153:5838±48.
13. Masi AT, Rodnan GP, Medsger TA, Altman RD,
D'Angelo WA, Fries JF. Subcommittee for scleroderma
criteria of the American Rheumatism Association
Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee: pre-
liminary criteria for the classi®cation of systemic
sclerosis (scleroderma). Arthritis Rheum 1980;23:581±
90.
14. LeRoy EC, Black CM, Fleischmajer R et al.
Scleroderma (systemic sclerosis): classi®cation, subsets
and pathogenesis. J Rheumatol 1988;15:202±5.
15. Medsger TA, Silman AJ, Steen VD et al. Development
of a severity index for systemic sclerosis. Arthritis
Rheum 1994;37(suppl.):S260.
16. Kaye SA, Lim SG, Taylor M, Patel S, Gillespie S,
Black CM. Small bowel bacterial overgrowth in sys-
temic sclerosis: detection using direct and indirect
methods and treatment outcome. Br J Rheumatol
1995;34:265±9.
17. Denton CP, Calies JB, Phillips GD, Wells AU, Black
CM, DuBois RM. Comparison of Doppler-echocardio-
graphy and right heart catheterisation to assess
pulmonary hypertension in systemic sclerosis. Br J
Rheumatol 1997;36:239±43.
18. Clements PJ, Lachenbruch PA, Ng SC, Simmons M,
Stertz M, Furst DE. Skin score, a semiquantitative
measure of cutaneous involvement that improves pre-
diction of prognosis in systemic sclerosis. Arthritis
Rheum 1990;33:1256±63.
19. Humbel RL. Detection of antinuclear antibodies by
immuno¯uorescence. In: van Venrooij WJ, Maini RN.
Manual of biological markers of disease. Dordrecht,
The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic, 1993:A2.1±16.
20. Bunn C, Kveder T. Counterimmunoelectrophoresis and
immunodi€usion for the detection of antibodies to
soluble cellular antigens. In: van Venrooij WJ, Maini
RN. Manual of biological markers of disease.
Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic,
1993:A3.1±12.
21. Bernstein RM, Bunn CC, Hughes GRV, Francouer
AM, Mathews MB. Cellular protein and RNA
antigens in autoimmune disease. Mol Biol Med
1984;2:105±20.
22. Laemmli UK. Cleavage of structural proteins during
the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature
1968;227:680±5.
23. Gottleib E, Steitz JA. Function of mammalian La pro-
tein: evidence for its action in transcription termination
of RNA polymerase III. EMBO J 1989;8:851±61.
24. Harvey GR, Rands AL, McHugh NJ. Anti-RNA
polymerase antibodies in systemic sclerosis (SSc):
association with anti-topoisomerase I antibodies and
identi®cation of autoreactive subunits of RNA poly-
merase II. Clin Exp Immunol 1996;105:468±74.
25. Stetler DA, Jacob ST. Phosphorylation of RNA poly-
merase I augments its interaction with autoantibodies
of systemic lupus erythematosus patients. J Biol Chem
1984;259:13629±32.
26. MacGregor AJ, Davrashvili J, Knight C, Denton CP,
Lipkin DP, Black CM. Early pulmonary hyper-
tension in systemic sclerosis: risk of progression
and consequences for survival. Arthritis Rheum
1994;37(suppl.):S151.

View user profile

11 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Sat Jan 07, 2012 10:00 pm

http://www.reasons.org/RescuingtheRNAWorldPart1of2

View user profile

12 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:20 am

http://www.debate.org/debates/Abiogenesis-Is-Impossible/1/

View user profile

13 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Mon Jan 09, 2012 5:15 am

http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/molecular_biology_16.html

View user profile

14 Re: RNA, and the origin of life on Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:41 pm

The RNA World Hypothesis Explained and Unexplained

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=12&article=2317

by Kathleen Hamrick
Will Brooks, Ph.D.

[Editor’s Note: The following article was written by A.P. auxiliary staff scientist Will Brooks and one of his students. Dr. Brooks holds a Ph.D. in Cell Biology from the University of Alabama at Birmingham and serves as Assistant Professor of Biology at Freed-Hardeman University.]

One of the goals within the discipline of biology is to define life. This goal, however, is no simple task. While we can have an intuitive understanding of what it means to be alive, forming this understanding into a precise definition of life poses a dilemma for scientists. Life comes in many shapes, sizes, colors, and forms, so placing all these variations of life into one nice definition is seemingly impossible. To circumvent this problem, scientists have defined life by stating characteristics shared by all life forms. To be considered “alive,” a system of molecules must possess each of these characteristics. Examples include (1) the ability to sense and respond to stimuli, (2) the ability to acquire and utilize materials for energy, (3) the ability to store genetic information in the form of DNA, and (4) the ability to self-replicate. All living organisms share these basic characteristics, and those systems of molecules which lack even one of these basic characteristics is not considered to be a living organism.

Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is the genetic material used by all living organisms to code for life. DNA can be thought of as the genetic fingerprint of each organism because it is unique to each species of organism. During the process of self-replication, this genetic code is duplicated and identical copies (discounting rare instances of mutation) are given to each progeny of an organism, maintaining the fingerprint and thus the identity of that organism. The function of DNA as the genetic material of an organism is to provide a code for the production of another group of molecules known as proteins. Proteins serve a host of functions for an organism. They are known, appropriately, as the workhorses of a cell, because they carry out the vast majority of organismal tasks, including catalysis.

A catalyst is any substance capable of increasing the speed of a chemical reaction. Within each living organism on Earth, millions of chemical reactions take place every minute. The majority of these reactions are prompted by a very large group of protein catalysts known as enzymes. These enzyme-mediated chemical reactions range from those used to synthesize various metabolites to those used to break down ingested foods. By serving as enzyme catalysts, proteins play a crucial role in all living organisms. For without enzymes, organisms would be both unable to break down the food that they ingest and unable to make the necessary metabolites needed to sustain life.

While the vast majority of functional enzymes within living organisms are proteins, scientists have discovered that another group of molecules, known as ribonucleic acids (RNAs), are also capable of catalyzing some chemical reactions (Kruger, et al., 1982). RNAs are very similar in structure to DNA, differing only in the type of sugar used to form the molecules—DNA utilizes deoxyribose and RNA utilizes ribose. While DNA is the vital genetic code that is passed down between parents and offspring, RNA also plays an important role. Ribonucleic acids are a messenger system that carries the DNA code from the cell’s nucleus, the home of DNA, to the cellular cytoplasm where proteins are synthesized. These are known as messenger RNAs (mRNA). Furthermore, another group of RNAs, known as ribosomal RNAs (rRNAs), is used along with proteins to build the cellular structure known as the ribosome, which is the cellular location at which proteins are made. So, RNA plays several related roles in the process of protein production: (1) it carries the genetic code from DNA to the ribosome, (2) it helps form the structure of the ribosome, and (3) it functions in catalysis.

While there are a few other examples (reviewed in Fedor and Williamson, 2005), the catalytic properties of RNA are best seen in the ribosome. When proteins are synthesized by an organism’s cells, small units known as amino acids are chemically linked together to form a long, linear chain. This chain of amino acids is known as a polypeptide or protein. The chemical bond that links together each amino acid in the chain is called the peptide bond. Because each of the 20 amino acids are very similar in structure, the same peptide bond is formed between every unit of the polypeptide chain. The chemical reaction that forms this peptide bond requires catalysis. The protein-rRNA complex that we know as the ribosome has long been known to serve as the site as well as the catalyst in forming the peptide bond. But, scientists were surprised to discover that the protein component only serves as a structural element of the ribosome. It is the RNA component of the ribosome that serves as the catalyst (Nissen, et al., 2000). This catalytic RNA has thus been termed a ribozyme.

Later it was discovered that yet another group of RNAs, the small nuclear RNAs (snRNA), were also capable of catalyzing a chemical reaction (Valadkhan and Manley, 2001). When produced by the cell, mRNA must undergo a series of maturation steps before it is fully functional as a genetic message (Alberts, et al., 2002, pp. 317-327). One of these steps toward maturity is the process of splicing. Newly synthesized mRNA contains large regions, spread throughout its length, that do not directly code for protein production. These non-coding regions are called introns. To make the mRNA mature and functional as a code, each intron must be removed from the mRNA and the remaining coding regions, known as exons, must be linked or spliced back together. These “cut-and-paste” events occur within the cell’s nucleus within a structure that we call the spliceosome. Like the ribosome, the spliceosome is a large complex of both protein and RNA, in this case snRNA. Amusingly, these protein-RNA complexes have been dubbed small nuclear ribonucleoproteins or “snurps.” Interestingly, scientists found that not protein, but RNAs were responsible for catalyzing the chemical reactions that take place during these splicing events. RNAs were carrying out chemical reactions on other RNAs.

Scientists were very excited by these revolutionary findings. Now, they had a single type of molecule, RNA, that possessed two very important properties. First, it was very similar in structure to DNA and thus theoretically could also store genetic information. Second, it could function as a catalyst like proteins. In 1986, Walter Gilbert coined the phrase “RNA World” and initiated what is now known as the RNA World Hypothesis (Gilbert, 1986). This hypothesis on the origin of life states simply that because RNA has the dual ability to both store genetic information and catalyze chemical reactions, it must pre-date DNA and proteins, both of which supposedly evolved after and perhaps from the RNA.

The RNA World Hypothesis is widely accepted by evolutionists, because it provides an alleged solution to a long-recognized problem in evolutionary theory. Consider how proteins are made by a cell. First, DNA which holds the genetic code is converted into RNA through a process known as transcription. This process is similar to how one would copy a letter from one piece of paper onto another sheet. The contents of the letter remain unchanged, only the medium—the paper—has changed. RNA carries this information to the ribosome, where it is read and used as a code to make a protein through a process known as translation. This process can be compared to translating the copy of the letter from one language into another. Nucleic acid (DNA and RNA) is changed into another molecule altogether: protein. This linear progression of DNA to RNA to protein is known in biology as the Central Dogma of Molecular Biology (Alberts, et al., 2002, p. 301). Of the three components in the path, only DNA has the capacity to be replicated. So, while DNA stores the genetic code and can be replicated, it cannot perform any chemical reactions. And, while protein can perform chemical reactions, it cannot store genetic information. So, in evolutionary thinking, which came first—DNA or protein? Making the problem even more difficult, DNA relies upon proteins during its own replication. DNA does not self-replicate of its own accord. It must have protein enzymes to facilitate this process. So, what came first—the chicken or the egg? DNA or protein? Each relies upon the other. You should begin to see how RNA might solve this problem. If RNA can both store genetic information and catalyze chemical reactions, and if it evolved first, we have a single molecule that stores information and can catalyze its own replication, a self-replicating genetic material.

In order to prove this theory plausible, a set of conditions must be created to favor the spontaneous formation of RNA molecules without the aid of a biological catalyst. This would have had to be the starting point for an RNA world. One necessary component for RNA formation would be a steady supply of nucleotides, the building blocks of RNA. Scientists speculate these nucleotides were created from other small molecules present, or were generated in space before arriving on earth. Ribose, the sugar used in RNA, is assumed to have arisen from formaldehyde via the formose reaction. The mystery of the addition of nucleotides onto a ribose backbone remains unsolved by scientists attempting to create conditions of a primitive Earth (Müller, 2006, 63:1279-1280). Once these RNA molecules were formed completely by chance, they would have to have possessed or evolved the ability to catalyze reactions leading to self-replication. After sustaining itself through several replications, the RNA would then need to gain the ability to create a barrier between the extraneous materials surrounding it, in order to isolate the beneficial products from those proving non-functional. Thus, a membrane of sorts would have had to evolve and be maintained (Müller, 63:1285-1286). These steps are only the basics, proving the task much too complicated to occur by mere chance.

In all known organisms living today, DNA and not RNA is the genetic material. DNA has advantages over RNA which make it a more suitable molecule to store the very important genetic code. First, DNA is a double-stranded molecule while RNA is single-stranded. The double-stranded nature of DNA gives it the ability to be replicated in a much simpler series of steps. When DNA is replicated, each of the two complimentary strands serves as a template on which to build another strand. The result is that in one step, each strand of DNA is replicated to produce four total DNA strands or two identical double helices. RNA, however, is single-stranded. In order for it to be replicated, two sequential rounds of replication would be required. First, a complimentary strand would need to be synthesized from the original parental strand. Only then could that new complimentary strand be used to re-make the parental strand. As stated before, DNA and RNA differ in the sugar which makes up the molecule’s backbone. Deoxyribose, the sugar used in DNA, differs from ribose used in RNA, by lacking one organic functional group known as alcohol. The absence of this alcohol group greatly increases the stability of DNA over RNA. In ribonucleic acids, this
–OH group is capable of initiating chemical reactions which favor breakdown of the RNA molecule. For these and other reasons, DNA is a much more stable and preferable genetic material. This is made obvious by the fact that all living organisms use DNA, not RNA, as their permanent storage medium of genetic information. It also indicates that RNA would be an unsuitable medium by which to initiate life.

Evolutionists would have us to believe that non-living elements and molecules joined together and developed increasing biological capabilities. Those who believe in intelligent design reject this hypothesis, insisting that neither RNA nor living cells are able to evolve spontaneously. While some disagreement exists among those in the evolutionary community on the time frame for such alleged reactions to occur, the consensus is that, given large amounts of time, single-celled bacteria were formed. But all known biological principles militate against this notion. Even billions of years could not provide mechanisms for the reaction products to evolve advantageous characteristics and form DNA and cell proteins, let alone create strings of RNA nucleotides, arriving at just the right sequence in order to code for a functional protein. The four nucleotide bases that form RNA (adenine, guanine, cytosine, and uracil) can be arranged in an exponential array of combinations and lengths. For an actual, functional protein to be coded, a precise sequence of nucleotides must be obtained. Forming the code for even one protein by evolutionary means is impossible, without even considering the necessity of the number that work together in a single cell.

There is no scientific evidence to suggest that RNA is spontaneously being created and capable of forming pre-cellular life today. While some artificial ribozymes have been created in the laboratory (reviewed in Chen, et al., 2007), there are still significant holes in reproducing an RNA world to support the hypothesis. The ribozymes created artificially lack the abilities to sufficiently process themselves, and there is no evidence of them producing large quantities of advantageous nucleotide sequences. Moreover, no system has ever created cellular life. There is even significant debate among scientists over the conditions and constituents of a “prebiotic Earth” model.

The RNA World Hypothesis is simply another attempt by scientists to explain the origin of life to the exclusion of the divine Creator. Given the absolute impossibility of life originating from the reactions of non-living matter, it can be justified that RNA did not predate other biological molecules. All biological molecules were created together to work in concert. RNA was designed to be the essential intermediate between DNA and proteins, making our cells capable of sustaining life as it was created. The designer of this system must be the intelligent Designer, the God of the Bible.

View user profile

15 Re: RNA, and the origin of life Yesterday at 11:43 am

http://www.panspermia.org/rnaworld.htm

View user profile

View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum