An upper bound probability for the RNA world hypothesis is 10^-1018. A reasonable interpretation is that the RNA world hypothesis is impossible in the real world.
A superficial reading doesn't inspire much confidence in this peer-reviewed article but I agree that RNA-world is a thought experiment at best. There is no evidence of these RNA structures in actual lifeforms.
RNA encodes proteins.
The most parsimonious explanation is that proteins(likely incapable of true replication by themselves) preceded RNA even if an RNA-based system can be designed in theory.
I won't make claims of probability of unknown processes but proteins exist that can assemble spare nucleotides and proteins exist that can assemble proteins out of nucleotide chains.
All you need is a pair of them to come in the vicinity of each other and wait until RNA comes along that encodes a similar-enough pair.
I hope you are aware that the sustainable scientific enterprise we all appreciate today was birthed by Christian Europe, and relied on the faith that the universe was understandable because it was created by a rational being.
Look, YEC are notorious for lying and cherry picking, almost as bad as flat earthers. The "Gish Gallop" technique is named after a creationist. ChatGPT is not know for giving the same answer twice. These aren't perfect heuristics, but it would seem rational to view the combination of both as logical poison.
I am not going to defend every YEC. But you are using too broad a brush. Read the book and decide for yourself. We did not use chatgpt to write the book; it was part of the editing process and we checked everything from chatgpt, because, as you said, it is not known for watertight reliability.
Thanks for that comment. A very important point. Worldviews condition how we interpret evidence. In that sense they can be self reinforcing. This applies to all worldviews- atheistic, Christian, and others.
In medicine, for minor procedures such as blood tests or ECG, there is the notion of implied consent. Just holding out your arm for the blood test is implied consent. To refuse, you might say, I am of sound mind and I do not consent to this procedure. Or, you are performing this procedure without my consent and against my wishes. I'm not a lawyer,and not in the US, but this is how it generally operates for practical reasons. Written informed consent is required for more invasive or significant procedures.
CREATE TABLE user(
pk INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
area INTEGER,
age INTEGER,
active INTEGER
);}
for {set i 0} {$i < $loop} {incr i} {
puts "
WITH RECURSIVE tmp(pk,area,age,active) AS
(
SELECT [expr {$i * $increment}],
500001,
5,
0
UNION ALL
SELECT pk+1,
10000*(abs(random())%9+1)+abs(random())%100000,
5*(abs(random()%3)+1),
abs(random()%2)
FROM tmp
WHERE pk < [expr {($i+1)*$increment-1}]
)
INSERT INTO user
SELECT * FROM tmp;"
}
An upper bound probability for the RNA world hypothesis is 10^-1018. A reasonable interpretation is that the RNA world hypothesis is impossible in the real world.