Theoretical origin of life: warming solar flares; stupid (Introduction)

by David Turell , Friday, May 27, 2016, 22:14 (3102 days ago) @ David Turell

Here is a scientist's answer to the last article on solar flares. it won't work and the issue raises a problem in the origin of life debate: life requires fixed nitrogen. Nitrogen gas was on Earth but only as part of the atmosphere as a gas, not on the surface. Protein molecules MUST have nitrogen ions as part of amino acids. Cyanobacteria and legumes fix gaseous nitrogen into the soil or in the ocean. Fixed nitrogen is made by life, so how did life start? Here a space scientist's take:-http://www.uncommondescent.com/origin-of-life/cranky-young-sun-kickstarted-life-no/-"But what this article does reveal-like so many Darwinian “breakthroughs”-is that nitrogen is a real problem for Origin-of-life (OOL). Every protein and nucleobase has nitrogen in it, which needs to be “fixed” or chemically bound for life to start, because fixed nitrogen is unstable. That is because the N2 gas that fills our atmosphere (“unfixed”) is so extremely stable, as organic matter decomposes in our garden, it loses nitrogen to the atmosphere, which never comes back. That's why coal has no nitrogen content. Other than fresh organic stuff, (or mined organic stuff such as guano) farmers have to put (fixed) nitrogen back in the soil as “nitrates”, a popular version being “ammonium nitrate”, which is now made synthetically using the Nobel-prize winning “Haber-Bosch” high-temperature catalyst process.-"So what OOL needs, in addition to energy sources, entropy barriers, miscible membranes, hot-springs etc, is some way to get fixed nitrogen in the environment as well. This article wants to tie it into solar flares and thence to a young sun to make OOL on Earth more likely. In contrast, Miller-Urey argued for lightning, which is indeed, far more efficient than solar protons. This fellow is either cheerleading for Darwin, or advertising his (overly-simplistic) 2-D computer modeling codes (having done some 3-D magnetosphere models ~20 years ago.) But that's the way this
 game is played-no matter how insignificant your result, if you want the media to notice your press release, claim it either supports Darwin or global warming or both.-Comment: Lightning does produce some fixed nitrogen as was done in the Miller-Urey lightning-in-an-bottle experiment, but just a little. Life is required. Another reason, of which I was not really aware, for OOL theories. As for his coal comment, remember coal comes from decomposed plants. Nitrogen really makes for a chicken/egg problem.