Ars Technica has an origin of life post.
But it’s strange. I read it so very many times. Regardless of faith, science experiments are fascinating in general. This one was not.
All I can see is the following summary of this article:
RNA which is broken, A, B, and C are in a pot together. A and B can only repair other molecules (including each other), but C can self-repair. Note that C can instead cooperate and repair along with others, or its own self (individual, not just other C’s). This has to do with replication. Let us say that all cooperative results are D. Let us say that all self-fixes are E.
The results? D outnumbered E after [time]. Continuing to add randomly broken RNA did add some E, but D proved superior. Thus the cooperative RNA outperformed the selfish…
You don’t have to run a test to see that. Because as long as C can assist and not always be selfish, shouldn’t the results always favor community effort when in a non-segregated environment? So I don’t understand why this article thinks anything here is special… or, frankly, what this really has to do with origin-of-life. They are inferring that from simple chemical processes and very basic math, there is a basis in nature for community spirit outdoes selfishness. A scientist would say that’s a leap of faith. I call it a headline-grabber.
Now, I’m all for working together in harmony. There’s a great religious song about it. But it doesn’t take a religious person to point out the results of a simple chemical and math equation. It does take a religious person (of a certain kind of faith…) to extrapolate that into how genes are preserved in a population over time. While I may disagree with those of the general Atheist persuasion, I do appreciate a good intellectual discussion.