>no experiment can replicate pure RNA forming under realistic circumstances (no whatever you'll link is not pure RNA)>dozens of labs, thousands of experiments, no resultsThis means these conditions did not exist on early earth. Even if it's possible, the parameters necessary are too narrow to produce RNA at the scale necessary to kickstart even the first steps of evolution. You didn't find the necessary parameters in the 80s or 90s. This means it's over for this theory. Pack it up. It is fiction.Neither have experiments showed that even the simplest form of self-replication is viable. Even at the very first step the mainstream view breaks apart. Without rapid self-replication RNA is too unstable anyway.
>>16970630We already have an evolution vs schizophrenia thread here: >>16958890Also, you're retarded.
>>16970636ah what a shame, I didn't see it before postingsorry
>>16970630>no whatever you'll link is not pure RNADefine "pure RNA"
>>16970642for a start, only 3′,5′-linkages not mixed with 2′,5′-linkages within the same molecule
>>16970636>evolution vs schizophrenialol its funny because /sci/tards will always arbitrarily assert the theory of evolution has N O T H I N G to do with abiogenesis whatsoever until you force them to admit its all the same shit.
