Smidlee, the comparison doesn't work. They are talking about highly conserved and identical sequences of RNA. The reason why they say they're primordial is because they are quite literally identical in all walks of life.

When you look at ATP Synthases, the DNA and amino acid sequences vary wildly and the mechanisms of action vary wildly from organism to organism. Unsuprisingly, the more complex the life form (and hence a larger energy output required), the more complex the ATP Synthase enzyme. In fact, it is just further evidence of evolution in action, as they have similar functions but have evolved to meet the energy needs of the host organism.

What many of these papers are talking about is a world prior to ATP Synthase as we know it. They're talking about life in a much simpler form than any life found today. No DNA, proteins or enzymes. A world consisting of RNA and ribozymes, catalysing their own synthesis, and where these molecules are originally formed by catalysis via inorganic sources such as metals and clays (see first reference).

You obviously read science, but don't actually grasp the concepts and then twist things to suit your point of view. Taking your car analogy, the early living organisms wouldn't be a car with no petrol, but would be like the first ever car (as in steam powered) and current life would be like the modern day, high performance, gasoline powered cars... like a Bugatti Veyron.

Conclusion: Science is constantly working to improve our knowledge of life using facts and evidence (and not the manipulation of quotes and the bizzare logic you seem to present) rather than placing blind faith in a god whose existence is unknown.

This is where we differ, of course ATP Synthases has to meet the special  needs of different life form yet there are similarities as well. (just like a lawn mower engine has similiarities with a F1 car engine)  This is not "evolution" in action, this is a statement of faith. (Both similarities and differences are so call evidence of evolution.) Thus "evolution" is just a label to slap on anything scientist learn about life. 

As far as blind faith , even scientist can be decieved  just any man can. (some clearly believe in some kind of god-subsitute) All throughout history it's been about nature gods (creators) vs spiritual ones.

 P.S Note the article state these RNA appears ALMOST everywhere in the tree of life (some have stated in the past this so called tree only exist in the human mind... just like RNA world) thus there must be  exceptions.

 This reasoning goes like  this:  Since it near impossible for these RNA appear once by chance then it''s even more impossible to pop up twice thus common RNA has to mean common ancestory.

This is going to be my last post in this as we will obviously have to agree to disagree.

Firstly, evolution has been observed in bacterial cells "in action", and continues to be observed in an on-going experiment. The evidence keeps growing and will continue to grow. You can come to different conclusions with the ATP Synthases but it's only a small piece in an ever-growing jigsaw of evidence.

Secondly, there are always exceptions and is hardly suprising given the length of time that has passed. And the tree of life is simply an easy representation and model to help humans visualise the complexity of life and different organisms.

Finally, your reasoning would carry some weight if RNA really was that difficult create. If scientists can recreate Earth-like conditions and observe the creations of RNA oligomers in such a short space of time, it really isn't a shock that RNA can be created over millions of years, likely occuring multiple times.

So far in labs scientists have had more success with bacteria and yeast evolving than fruit flies. Fruit flies are more resistance to evolution with only minor changes after  hundreds of  generations.

True but one of the Reasons team is ...

Fazale "Fuz" Rana discovered the fascinating world of cells while taking chemistry and biology courses for the premed program at West Virginia State College (now University). As a presidential scholar there, he earned an undergraduate degree in chemistry with highest honors. He completed a PhD in chemistry with an emphasis in biochemistry at Ohio University, where he twice won the Donald Clippinger Research Award. Postdoctoral studies took him to the Universities of Virginia and Georgia. Fuz then worked seven years as a senior scientist in product development for Procter & Gamble.

Research in biochemistry provided Fuz with the initial evidence that life must have been created. Although he recognized the work of a designer, he did not know the designer's identity. An acquaintance's challenge to read the Bible led him to believe that the God of the Bible is that Designer. Eventually, concern for the supposed incompatibility of science and Scripture led Fuz to Reasons To Believe (RTB).

Aslo Bio Chemist Patricia Fanning is a contributor.

HOLY CRAP! How do you people find these freaking threads?

There is some serious thread necromancy going on here.

Are you. Fucking. Serious?

I'm a Deist, so I do believe that a God created the world...but to what extent is open for interpretation. Could be anywhere from the bible version of God creating the earth, humans, animals, etc...down to God just creating the materials necessary for the big bang/evolution to happen...or anywhere in between.

So I have no idea how old the Earth is. The cool thing about Deism is it doesn't contradict science...so if people say the earth is however many millions/billions of years old I can believe it.

I gotta feeling a debate's gonna commence in this thread.