> All it means is you can say "if life is rare, it's not because these specific small chemicals can't be produced".
This is absolutely a good finding to have in your pocket.
> All it means is you can say "if life is rare, it's not because these specific small chemicals can't be produced".
This is absolutely a good finding to have in your pocket.
"Good"? Ok, if it makes you feel better. But scientifically, it doesn't do much.
Whats your problem with this topic? Highly confronting posts about nothing. Iterative approach to science seems foreign here.
There's a tremendous amount of confidently stated bullshit on the issue of OoL that I have long since lost all patience with.
What's your problem with the debunking of falsehood?
You asked "does it contain ribose"; I answered (with a reputable source) in the affirmative.
Where's the falsehood?
I also asked about other things you have conveniently forgotten to mention there.
The overarching falsehood is that identification of biologically relevant molecules at 200 ppb levels, in a soup of tens of thousands of other chemicals, moves the needle any in figuring out OoL.