>From: Peter Ruest <pruest@pop.mysunrise.ch>
> Here is the view of one of the leading origin-of-life researchers (after
> he did such research for more than 30 years):
>
> Orgel L.E., "The origin of life - a review of facts and speculations",
> Trends in Biochemical Science 23 (1998), 491-495:
Peter,
1. Thanks for the reference. I tried to look it up on the Journal's website
but I must be doing something incorrectly. Nothing is listed under Orgel as
author, and the list of contents for volume 23 (1998) ends at p. 450. Any
suggestions? I'd like to see the piece in its entirety to get a better sense
of the context of his remarks.
2. Question: Given Orgel's experience, does he despair of science ever
coming to a better understanding of the formation of first life? Does he,
for example, conclude that, in spite of all of the remarkable things that
molecules and molecular configurations can do, the formational economy of
the universe is inadequate for the actualization of life without being
supplemented by some sort of divine action? Or, on the other hand, does he
judge that it makes perfectly good sense for him to continue his research in
the field of "first formation of living systems" (more commonly called
"origin of life" research)?
Howard
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Nov 19 2001 - 15:04:37 EST