Miller's classic "Primeval Soup" experiment, published in 1953, is still widely used to mimic the chemical reactions that occurred in gas-rich volcanic eruptions. It has now been restored and improved at the University of San Diego
A new study suggests that lightning and volcanoes are the ones that could have provided the sparks for the beginning of life on Earth. Researcher Jeffrey Bada, of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography at the University of San Diego, has reexamined Stanley Miller's classic origin-of-life experiment, offering a renewed explanation for the formation of essential building blocks from volcanic eruptions.
The researcher, a professor of marine chemistry and a former student of Miller's in the University of San Diego's chemistry department in 1960, preserved Miller's original chemical samples. Together with his colleagues, he reexamined the samples to determine whether new chemical compounds could be detected using modern equipment and measurement methods. The article, entitled: "The Miller Volcanic Spark Experiment" was published in the prestigious journal Science.
"We believed that more could be learned from Miller's original experiments," said Bada, the author of the paper. "We discovered that a more modern version of the device, which simulated the volcanic eruption, produced a wider variety of compounds."
Miller's classic "Primitive Soup" experiment, published in the same journal in 1953, is still widely used in high school chemistry labs to mimic the chemical reactions that occurred in high-gas volcanic eruptions. In this experiment, the substances methane, ammonia, water vapor and hydrogen, which imitate the ancient atmosphere of the earth, were put into a closed container, and an electrical spark similar to lightning was injected into the container. After a few days, organic compounds began to form in the mixture tank, a finding that shows that the early atmosphere on Earth could have been the source of life.
It is assumed that small volcanic islands were included in the beginning of the earth. This research suggests that lightning and gases emitted from volcanic eruptions on these islands could have created the chemical components necessary for the formation of primitive life.
Bade's lab is the first to conduct follow-up studies using Miller's original device and chemical samples, which were discovered following his death in 2007. The researchers reanalyzed eleven original samples using modern analytical chemistry methods and identified twenty-two amino acids - the building blocks of proteins. , where ten of them were not previously identified by Miller.
"In the historical context, there are not many studies that could be more famous than Miller's studies; "They redefined our understanding of the origin of life and showed that there is no doubt that the basic building blocks of life could have been formed by natural processes," says lead author Adam Johnson, an Indiana University graduate who is part of the NASA Astrobiology Institute team.
The news of the University of San Diego
On the same topic on the science website
54 תגובות
Just one:
Either you really didn't read the stuff or you're just a liar (one).
Those who lower the discussion to low levels, behave like a broken record, do not make any argument and only belittle others, these are rested and satisfied.
Regarding the rest of your words - ok, so you believe.
Atza believes that pie is worth three?
Do you believe that the rabbit and the rabbit rummage?
Do you believe that the Torah was passed from the hands of God to Moses and from him to the Israelites and reached us without interruption or disturbance even though in the days of Josiah no one knew it?
Do you believe that the trachea of the cow splits into 3 when one of the parts reaches the liver?
Do you believe that lice are created from human sweat and mice from mold?
Do you believe that women should be discriminated against?
Do you believe that Shabbat violators should be killed?
Do you believe gays should be killed?
Do you believe that it is forbidden to desecrate the Sabbath in order to save the life of a Gentile?
Do you believe that it was okay that about thirty years ago a koim in Israel was raped in accordance with religious law when a childless deaf woman became a widow and could not undergo a Halizah ceremony?
I don't see how you draw the factual contradictions between religion and reality in the direction of confirming religious belief.
Perhaps you can explain to me what is the basis of your claim that things can be pulled this way or that way?
Michael, Yehuda and Higgs - It's a shame that you descend to such low levels, disparaging talk about issues that are important to many people.
To be satisfied and to rest - there is not so much point in arguing with someone who just comes to present his opinion and prove that the other is wrong (from hard experience in the army) it is better to simply interrupt the debate at the beginning and in a good spirit.
Avi - as the editor of the site, I think it is not particularly appropriate for you to participate in this discussion, especially when he is surfing such tricks.
And regarding Dion (my father's answer 47):
B. The distinction needs to be made - we are not saying that there is some very powerful, strong and wise entity that created us (and then attacked the claims that it does not care about us and is not related to us even if it wants to because of its distance) but something above that created (and did not create) us for a specific purpose.
Since he created the universe, he is certainly not limited to his time/space (those who find it difficult to understand this to explain the ear can look at it as if someone is in the tenth, twenty-sixth or higher dimension)
third. Prophecies and providence is not something that concerns the scientific topic, so I will not address it.
Regarding the "hiding" behind the big bang - it is impossible to escape the fact that something caused it and why exactly then (even though it is already very philosophical because if there was before this the same question except that before there was no time) and apparently science had to answer that (and indeed There are some theories) but it seems very likely (and I hope I'm wrong) that we will never find out.
Disclaimer: I'm not a regular visitor to the site, so I don't know the characters who work (if someone is a constant annoyance, etc.) and I haven't really delved into the whole thread.
And faith begins or ends with scientific proofs and not even heresy in the end everything begins and ends with faith and anything especially in scientific matters can be pulled this way or that.
Have a good week everyone
rest of spirit:
Nachi said his opinion and it is that there is a God and science is garbage more than once.
He did not justify his words in any way and only lied, insulted and defamed.
If you want to hear a broken record player - buy a broken record player.
If you want to read Nachi's words, go to any mahbatim website and you can read tons of the same things.
It seems on those sites they give an introduction here to articles about evolution for example. Or even to articles that deny Einstein's existence as an ultra-Orthodox in the style of Mea Shearim (he ordered his body to be cremated, for example).
to my father
I can't help but get out of my "ignorance" when I see how you knowingly or unknowingly sabotage the scientific truth. The opinion of others is just as important. Why can't your correspondence with Nachi and everyone else be open? ?
It's hard to understand you, father, hard.
To Nachi, maybe we can continue our correspondence by email? There is no need to reveal religious propaganda that has no scientific innovation to the site's users. They have enough of it all over the internet.
Provided
Well, your nakedness has been discovered. It is certain that you are the son of the doubter's son.
And why did a starling go to a crow? Not because he is one of his kind, a relative of his own flesh and blood.
Please don't brag about us, for tomorrow I will rain on you, lest your shame be revealed and all your feathers fall.
And it will be rubbed with tar, and water will be poured out and stuck in your stomach and you will fall.
Hello Nahi. I also need to sleep sometimes so my answer won't be too long.
A. After all, how did they discover the big bang - they did a backward projection of the expansion of the universe and came to the conclusion that the universe started from one point, and the estimates are that this happened about 13-15 billion years ago (if I'm not mistaken, the latest calculation speaks of 13.7, but 15 is also the same order of magnitude). Therefore every point in the universe today is 15 billion light years away from the starting point, be that as it may. But because of the limited speed of light, we do not see the entire universe as it is today, but sample it along the entire length. I hope I didn't confuse you,
B In light of the answer to A, whoever is the creator of the universe, assuming there was such a creator, is so far away from us, that by the time he gives one command at the speed of light, the earth's atmosphere will have evaporated and he will revolve around the sun inside the envelope of the material that will be ejected from it after it becomes a red giant (approx. another 5 billion years).
third. Come on, true prophecies are easy to write, especially in retrospect. Also, general warnings a few decades before the destruction, given the knowledge of regional politics, is also not a problem to give (I can also predict a war against Iran. If it happens in a year or in 30 years, they will still say that I am a prophet. If it does not happen, it will probably not be recorded my things). This is what you read in your book, which relied on copies every time because there was no pattern.
In practice, there is not a single spark of personal supervision. And that's it. Please use your power of persuasion against the readers of the pan sites who can be misled by pseudo-scientific arguments masquerading as scientific arguments.
Provided:
Haven't you caught it yet?
from me!
Nahi:
You did make a mistake.
To my father!
You asked intelligent questions and I will try to answer them, and if I am wrong, I will apologize for my mistake.
A. The distance from the center point could have been created while moving and could also appear during the big bang itself. That is, that when the universe was created it was created in this way that has distances in it, and it is not necessary to say that everything started from one central small point.
B. The creator of everything, created his creation by virtue of being unlimited. [From a logical point of view it is not possible for him to be limited because since he created everything from 'nothing' there is nothing to limit him], as such, the forgetfulness that is our limitation - humans, will also control him.
third. Indeed, surprisingly and unbelievably, there is a private supervision over every person from the people of Israel [including you!]. And the destruction of the first and second houses did not come as a result of neglect, God forbid, but with a very specific purpose - which we do not necessarily have the intention of going to the bottom of. And the proof that there is no neglect here is the fact that in turn there is a detailed warning about the destruction of the first and second temple, together with identifying details about the destroyers of the temple and more.
If you are indeed interested in knowing the movements of the Supreme Providence, please refer to the book Da'at Tevonot written by the sage Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto [it can be obtained in any self-respecting Hebrew/Torah library] and there you will find explanations that make sense of this serious question.
Gentlemen, where did the Big Bang get the explosive material for the purpose of compensation?
What internal management of Mefsano determined the time of the explosion? Who was there that exploded in his place?
And separately: I believe that the management of the esteemed site will censor me at its discretion.
In any case, thanks to the management for the informative website.
Good night.
To Mr. Sabradimish:
I went through the correspondence history, just to be sure, and I didn't find anywhere that I wanted Michael to talk to me.
Regarding reconciliation, etc., I did not guess and did not understand. goodbye.
Provided:
What do I say and what will I speak?
You're just lying!
You never (but never!) answered the claims I made and I did make real claims - do you really not have enough sense to understand this?
It seems to me that the Suffek and Nahi join as additional testimonies that confirm the rule "all the mahbatites are liars"
rest,
A more important question is asked,
Suppose someone created the universe, and in the meantime the universe has moved away from its starting point 15 billion light years away, is there any chance that he even knows anything about us, that he cares at all? Since there is no proof of its existence, it is now pushed by those who want to reconcile science and religion behind the big bang.
In the great religions, an important part of their essence is private supervision, which we have seen countless times lacking (from the destruction of the house, through the expulsion from Spain to the events of the 20th century).
What do you think about this? You only claimed that nature was created by some creator?
Provided
I have to disappoint you, but just as the articles here are very high level, so among the commenters there are a few who fill the page with the shallow type of nonsense that fills their top.
But, what to do is the price of freedom of speech.
In other forums, everything that embarrasses the site would already be censored.
Michael:
Regarding your first question, yes.
Regarding your second question, yes (and only to him),
As for the rest, I responded in advance to all your claims if they can be called that, as they say in Yiddish,
Dahil Rabak, this is a scientific website, is there any room for discussion in this spirit?
Do me a favor, don't ride me, you have an argument, explain it and explain it, you don't, you have the right to remain silent.
Regarding the boredom, see my comment to Higgs on this very matter.
Rose and the rain!
In light of:
The situation you describe in your response did exist before the world was created by its Creator, blessed be He.
"Chaos and chaos and darkness on the face of an abyss...etc",
Another matter, isn't the existence between opposites the essence of life?
I would appreciate your response and thank you for the seriousness of the discussion.
Dear Sirs, with your permission I will split my answers into separate comments: hugs:
Indeed, heaven deserves one, a doubt is satisfied with contentment, a doubt is satisfied with doubts, and makes noise
The gates of the hedges, a gate in your soul.
Where did you get the qualification to determine what is a problem and what is not, as long as there is a question mark at the end.
And regarding my level of boredom, I am ready to consider discussing it with you, in other settings, and thanks.
Provided
At first I thought that you are a person who asks from a point of view that you already have all the answers in advance because your name tells you that you are satisfied and perfect and all your desires are already in your hands.
And suddenly I realized that the other commenters think that you are a skeptic that even half of your lust is not in your hands.
And I still think you are completely satisfied with your skepticism and actually maybe a little bored.
Why do you continue to make noise with difficulties that are not difficulties.
Provided:
Do you accept God's commandments?
Is he allowed to tell you what to say and what not to say?
And I already explained to you that I created the world and all the proofs you have of God's greatness are actually proofs of my greatness!
You continue to argue without pointing out any mistake in what I said.
You do this because there is no mistake in my words - I am simply "riding" on the fundamental error of your entire worldview and any logical contradiction of my words will contradict your entire approach to life.
You're just boring.
provided,
You claimed that if a physical law (or chemical, or any other law of nature) exists and works, this is proof that someone or something enacted it. good and beautiful Let's engage in a thought experiment:
Suppose gravity never existed. Dropped objects would not drop. With the same amount of logic you would probably argue that the fact that objects don't fall is proof that something/someone decided so, and therefore God exists. That is, whether the force of gravity works or not, you see it as proof.
If both a condition and its opposite lead to the exact same conclusion, the conclusion is false.
For example, suppose A lends B money. The conclusion: B owes A money.
Let's reverse the situation: A did not lend B money. The conclusion: B owes A money.
It is clear to everyone that this is impossible.
If I haven't convinced you yet, let's assume that all the laws of nature were not in effect. The universe as we know it did not exist. The earth did not revolve around the sun. The electricity you use to surf the internet wouldn't work. The digestive system could not use the acids and bases to digest the food you ate, and so on. Was this proof that there is no God? After all, you claimed that if there are laws of nature, there is God. So if there are no laws of nature, then there is no God?
If the laws of nature worked differently, say, the electron had a positive charge and the proton a negative charge, is this proof that there is no God? What is proof that there is no God, according to you?
to be supplied
What does "God doesn't talk to Michael" mean?, you want Michael to talk to himself???, and you also want Michael to talk to you?
You know for sure, dear, that the Vatican wants to give a saintly title to Pius XII, but not only to him,
Who else?…who, who, who….like God? Who is God? Did you guess??…
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
to be supplied
What does "God doesn't talk to Michael" mean?, you want Michael to talk to himself???, and you also want Michael to talk to you?
You know for sure, dear, that the Vatican wants to give the title of saint to Pius XII and....you guessed it right, our Michael, our Michael will be a saint
Michael: Please don't tell me what to say or not to say to you. The right to speak is granted to me by the laws of the country and the website's policy, even God did not tell me that. Fortunately, the Creator does not need your permission or your advice in order to do as He wills in His creation and therefore He changed and will change the laws at His will and He will not give up on you except to obey the new laws and apparently to fabricate some theory that you explain the totality of your lack of understanding at that time. Although I repeat and emphasize that I no longer have any need for proof of the existence of a creator, you continue to refer me to him for this purpose.
In my humble opinion, it is you who, in the secret of his heart and in a way that is still hidden from his understanding, is a great believer in the blessed name.
I have no idea (and neither do you), on what you are basing the claim that he doesn't talk to me - and he probably doesn't talk to you because of your refusal to talk to him.
I have no dispute about the existence of natural laws, nor do I doubt the fact that if there is a law, someone enacted it. Please work and improve my kidney research in the future. Honestly, I'd rather you avoid it at all. A blessing from God.
Yehuda:
what are you arguing I was there and I know.
Just to clear your mind, you should know that in the days of Josiah they knew no less about the days of Abraham than you know today and they had no problem adjusting the text and calling Abraham (who was not and was not created) whatever they wanted.
Besides - simply factually - I created the world only about ten years before Josiah began to reign and just as I planted the dinosaurs in it so that the paleontologists would be confused - I also planted in it cities destroyed by barbed wire for the archaeologists and all kinds of "ancient" writings in all kinds of places.
to the supplier:
don't tell me what i did
I did not create the laws of nature to break them.
What I wanted was to see how the world develops under these exact laws of nature and I had no intention of violating them. The fact that Josiah wrote you grandmother's sifners in the book is your problem.
As I said in my response to Judah - the world did not exist at all at the time when the sun was supposed to stop at Gibeon. The sun didn't exist either. I created everything later because before that I had other things to do.
You claim that I am pretentious and demand proof from me and the only reason you do this is that I even bother to answer you online. Even if a God you believe in answered you on the Internet, you would answer him the same way. It is simply because in the secret of your heart and in a way that is hidden from your understanding, you know that God does not exist and therefore you do not believe in the possibility that he relates to you.
As mentioned - did you ask for proof from the God you believe in?
You didn't ask because he didn't talk to you and you have no choice but to treat all kinds of other facts of nature and reality as "proofs" but those facts of nature and reality - those of which are truth and not your fiction - really exist even when I'm talking to you and you can see them as proof of my actions as much as you Sees them as proof of his work!
Don't you understand that?
Michael
Only because in your nobility you manage to overcome the lack of sense in answering me, I will answer you:
If there is a force that can stop the sun, it would not be surprising for it to hold the seas and the public in its place.
Would you be able to write any comment at all if the internet hadn't somehow been created?
Do you know someone or something that made themselves? I have already answered you that your very existence is sufficient proof of the existence of the Creator. You are confusing the creators, it was not I who claimed that you were the Creator but you and since that is the case, the onus of proof is on you.
God only enjoys the smell of the sacrifice, He leaves the prey to us.
A brief study of the words of the prophets will remind us that he is also very dissatisfied with the behavior of his heroes.
You are not the first to pretend to be what you are not.
I actually tend to believe that the stories that have a basis, start at least from the time of Abraham.
The very fact that they gave it the name Hebrew, most likely after the name of an ancient city, passed Ever, which even then in the days of Josiah had not existed for at least hundreds of years, Darshani says. Prof. Yuval Naaman wanted to investigate before his death about a past that is somewhere in Syria. In this book an ancient book was discovered and for some reason the Syrians refuse to allow its investigation. A king of Heber applied a monotheistic religion to his city, but after a few decades the city disappeared, but not the belief of monotheism, so the term Hebrew is attached to every monotheistic believer. The Hebrew Abraham means Abraham whose faith is like the faith of the past.
The writers of the Torah could not have known the story of Eber, and if they had known, they would most likely have deleted the word Eber from the name of Abraham our father because that would have taken away from him the right of the rishonim to monotheism. When it is written in the Torah, "On the other side of the river, your ancestors dwelt from the beginning, my father Avraham and my father Nahor lived; And they will serve other gods" (Joshua chapter XNUMX), they did not mean from the other side of the river but from the city the river passed or passed through.
So I believe in the existence of the stories of the Tanakh at least from the time of Abraham and I would not, of course, cancel the story of the kingdom of David and the house of Jesse.
It was in the interest of all the rulers in the region to erase the facts of the existence of the history of the Jewish people, just as the people of the Muslim Waqf, today destroy every Jewish remnant of the Temple in their excavations.
So about Adam Hava God Michael and Hugin, I will not argue with you, but, Abraham our father existed in my opinion.
Good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda:
This is a book I did not write.
Josiah wrote it when he wanted to take command of the people and then he planted it in the temple.
I don't care at all who believes in what nonsense and I actually enjoy watching them brag about the delusional ideas that are born in their minds.
There are all kinds of things that even I - who built their minds - did not believe they were capable of falling into.
Some of them believe that Jesus walked on water, some of them believe that I once stopped the sun for them and don't even understand that "stopping the sun" is actually stopping the rotation of the earth. If I did that, everyone would fly to Pizdioluch (except those who live at the pole) and all the continents would be flooded.
So tell me - why should I stop such good entertainment?
But in your holy book of laws it is written to raise burnt offerings and sacrifices, on coals, so who said that, you, or your company do whatever they want?
If you are God, then take leadership!!!
Maybe you need an assistant?, the textile industry is not something today.
We'll just laugh
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda:
The fact that there are some delusional people who sacrifice meat to me does not mean that I am not a vegetarian.
Fact! Has anyone seen me eat meat?
Michael
do you want a difference? please
God is not a vegetarian, on the contrary, he even devours all the offerings and sacrifices left and right. You are a vegetarian, and between us, hand on heart, it is not suitable for a vegetarian to be God. What do you want, to have a carrot sacrificed to you every day and sweet potato sprouts to come up?, it won't work.
Our Michael, sorry, with all the appreciation we have for you, you are not God. point.
Happy holiday
Sabdarmish
Provided:
Although there is no point in bothering to answer you seriously, there were still serious things in my response and you - of course - could not deal with them.
In fact - when you demanded proof from me - you proved that you are simply a liar because you do not demand proof from God.
I tell you that everything you claim God did - I actually did it.
You decide not to.
Why?
Just because I also know how to send comments online?
Point me to one difference you can point to - between me and God - other than the fact that I exist and he does not.
Dear everyone, Happy Holidays,
Laur: The distinction you make between something and something does not matter since both were created. For example, before I was I wasn't (someone) and until I made my first bean soup (something) he wasn't either. I have yet to come across a work that does not have a creator, be it a child or someone. Therefore, I am convinced that if soup existed, someone brewed it, even they placed it. The ball must have fallen as a result of the action of something because before that it was held in some way. It dawned on me what the direction of its fall would be, but I could not yet understand, which of the forces of nature whispered to the ear of the metal it was supposed to attract.
And thanks for your comment.
Michael: If you don't want to answer seriously, please spare me the rudeness you spew.
Who are you to tell me what to do with shoes? And a huge disgrace.
I do not demand from the Creator of the world! I humbly and humbly ask. As for the question itself, I will be content with your existence as proof, therefore I do not need to present it. And finally, a friend like me, which one? At least I know my place...
Mr. Sabradmish: This is probably not the only matter that Michael is wrong about, keep a good spirit,
There was peace
Sabdarmish Yehuda
The natural human tendency to complicate
It is possible that it is more complicated to define something so simple
to be supplied
I also built a universe, a simple universe, and Michael constantly spoils me and says that his universe is better
Is this my friend's doing?
Happy holiday
Sabdarmish Yehuda
to the supplier:
There's just no point in bothering to answer you seriously.
When I created the world I made some mistakes - I admit - that's why there is a company like you.
But you also have to know your place - who are you to order me to do something?
By the way - even from the idiot you delude yourself into thinking that he created the world, do you demand such proof?
From me you have at least proof of existence and from him you don't even have that.
of your shoes over your feet...
and put them on the ears.
provided,
Can you answer your own question? Who do you think "put" the soup in its place?
At the core of the question is an assumption, not taken for granted at all, that there is a need for someone (as opposed to something) to "put" the soup. To distinguish between "someone" and "something", the concept of life is needed. You will surely agree with me that you and I meet the definition of "someone", but the force of gravity meets the definition of "something".
If we move to another example: suppose that some ball is dropped in the air and falls. You ask: Who dropped the ball? In your question, you rule out the possibility that the ball fell as a result of the action of "something" (the force of gravity) and automatically assume that the ball fell as a result of the action of "someone".
In the case of the ball, even if someone left the ball in the air, he is not the one who dropped the ball; If the ball had been left in conditions of zero gravity, it would not have fallen. The thing that made the ball fall was gravity. In the case of the ancient soup, natural forces are responsible for its creation. To get a broader idea of these forces of nature, I recommend you talk to physicists and chemists (also via the Internet).
To the cool commenter -
I'm glad we agreed on one thing, but I disagree with the rest of your conclusion.
The fact that the building blocks of life, i.e. amino acids and possibly proteins, could have been formed in the ancient atmosphere of the Earth, does not rule out the possibility that they could also have arrived here from the ready, on meteorites, comets or other bodies. The Pansperma theory does not disappear because of the Yuri-Miller experiment.
There is no reason not to assume that the universe is infested with life and that carbon-based life has evolved in many places. All the more building blocks that can develop with the help of lightning, chemicals and volcanic activity.
Therefore, I do not think that the Miller-Yury and others experiment that was conducted, proves how complex life (such as single cells or even viruses) was created and does not rule out any possibility that life or the building blocks for life, could have arrived from outer space to Earth. There are no absolute answers in the world since this is nature's way. Our world does not provide black and white answers or absolute answers - what is good in a mathematical calculation on paper, does not necessarily represent what is happening in the universe. Reality is a little different from our ability to fully express it with a mathematical formula or absolute answers.
See for example another article in "Hidan":
https://www.hayadan.org.il/%D7%A2%D7%9B%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%95-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%93%D7%A2%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%9E%D7%90%D7%A9%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A6%D7%90-%D7%94%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%9E%D7%94%D7%97%D7%9C%D7%9C/
Hanan Sabat
http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL
The continuation of Michael's joke:-
A cannibal who loves children cooked a child with rice. Each time she lifted the cap and gave the boy a blow on the head. Her friend asked her why you beat the child and don't let him cook in peace?
The cannibal answers her:-
Quietly, quietly, but he eats all our rice!
Michael: Compulsive reactions are not proof and are not a cover for a lack of understanding.
No, it is unlikely that it was you, but as we know the experiment in science should yield the same results, therefore please show your strength and create another one.
One cannibal asks her friend:
"Do you like children?"
"Yes! With rice!"
The second season.
It is in this spirit that the phrase "playing in soup with Hugin" should be understood.
I agreed to share the glory with someone but there is a limit! I am not ready to be only one of three!
You remember I said that I am one and my name is one! No?
Dear Friends
Michael is right, I was there and saw him play in the soup
with Hugin
Happy holiday
Sabdarmish Yehuda
someone:
I have no problem sharing the glory with you.
Michael:
You stole words from my mouth, but my forgiveness is reserved for you.
Provided:
Click here to
Dear All,
From the words it may be implied as if apparently the soup emptied itself and the mountains were nurtured to spit out at their mother's. Who put the soup in time and place and to the extent that it is there?
And who told the lightning to erupt and the mountains, volcanic or otherwise, to stand?
And who even brought the materials that make up the building? Who is the single cell that explained and taught the amino acid that it is?
Who created each ram?
Provided
Whatever is possible, everything is possible as long as I don't prove otherwise.
From an experiment I conducted it appears that it was Harry Potter who provided the sparks for the beginning of life.
He and no other.
Agree with Hanan Sabat (quite rare),
I think what they discovered could happily set aside all the alien theories that assume that aliens (whether unicellular or multicellular or some other unknown species) arrived on Earth at some point or another
Why did they forget Harold Yuri??? The experiment is named after Yuri and Miller. Yuri was the instructor and Miller the student (at the time). Please don't forget some of the soup ingredients.
and N.B. - From my knowledge of the material taught in high schools in Israel, it is a bit exaggerated to say that this experiment is given a wide weight. The experiment is barely mentioned in the textbooks, as a gimmick and nothing more. Perhaps in the countries of the first world it is studied in depth, in Israel certainly not. Here they are more concerned with trying to bring the focus to graduation and trying to teach the students to repeat in פפע like pupae on material.
Hanan Sabat
http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL
Great that you published the recipe, we will make this soup for the holiday.
you are right man
After decades without preservation, you can't be sure if the sample hasn't become contaminated.
It would have been simpler to repeat the experiment again under modern conditions.
Happy holiday
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Why did he have to keep the original samples?!