Blog

Royal Society Announcement: $10 Million Prize for Life’s Origin

At the Royal Society in Great Britain 31 May 2019, Perry Marshall and investor Kevin Ham announced the $10 Million Evolution 2.0 Prize.

The meeting was hosted by Oxford Professor Denis Noble FRS CBE; and Oxford Professor Paul Flather, President of the Forum for Philosophy at the London School of Economics.

Denis organized the revolutionary “New Trends in Evolutionary Biology” conference, also at the Royal Society, in 2016.

Where did life come from? Where did the genetic code come from? The Evolution 2.0 Prize incentivizes the first person who can discover how code can emerge from chemistry. Such a discovery will bridge the gap between physics and biology.

Origin of Information (“Abiogenesis”) is the crucial question in the Origin Of Life. It’s also central to evolutionary change. It is the most elemental scientific problem that can be precisely defined. A solution may be as revolutionary as Einstein’s theory of relativity or the development of the transistor.

Read more »

Church kicks out member for rejecting Young Earth Creationism. This is his response

Author: Eugene Ulrich of dirtwriter.com
Eugene Ulrich

Years ago I was excommunicated and shunned from my church for my views regarding the Universe’s birthday. Took me years to get where I could write more lightly of it. Here’s an article I wrote once, just for the fun of it. Titled, “Male Cow Pies and Astronomy”.
 
“So let me just come out and say it. Much as I’d like to assure you I’ve purely logical reasons for rejecting Young Earth theories, I’ve got to admit I experience profound aesthetic and philosophical ugliness entertaining the YEC paradigm.

Here’s what I experience.
 
You walk up to an open-air milk barn, (preferably in some lush Costa Rican hills) and catch a dairy boy midway through his afternoon milking. You can tell because there’s a long row of cows, heads stuck through wooden stanchions and noses thrust deep into fresh green chop soaking in molasses water.
 
A thick aluminum milk can sits middle of the aisle entertained by its shiny reflection in the wet concrete and sporting a tin strainer bowl set atop its neck.

A quick intuitive glance at the cows’ udders tells you which way the boy’s been milking down the row. Twenty cows, 9 of them milked by counting the empty udders. Watching him milk and counting your fingers you deduce he’s been milking for about an hour and has about 65 minutes to go.
 
Checking the milk can confirms your intuitive connection between empty udders and the milk level in the can.
 
Checking the feed trough you noticing the fresh wet markings in its concrete sides and you’re further confirmed intuitively these cows have been munching for a time that roughly corresponds to cows milked, and the volume of milk in the can.
 
A quick look into the milk room and there’s cheese in the large wooden press, and opening the cooler, there appears to be several days’ worth of cheese.
 
Apparently, you just came across a boy doing his regular afternoon chores. Until his Dad comes out of the house barking, “whatcha doing, pal?”. You guiltily admit you’re just watching the boy do his chores and quite fascinated by the process. To which the Dad replies, “what process?”, and you say, “the chores your son is doing”.
 
The Dad quickly corrects you, “no, you don’t understand, there is no process. My son is not doing chores. I just created this scene to make it look like a place where stars birth and die. Where simple elements like hydrogen cook in the furnace of stars creating heavy elements like carbon and oxygen with which I build life.
 
I just made it look like suns clean up their inner sanctuaries building heavy rocky planets near their hearths while blowing the lighter gaseous elements out the front porch collecting into spheres of methane and other such fluffy leftovers. I just made it look like worlds take a meteoric beating over time through this phantom process.
The beautiful spirals you see in billions of galaxies are merely artwork. There’s no gravitational or inertial dynamic playing at all between the stars.
 
Heck, I just placed these cows in the stanchions, fed them and installed the half-full milk can with its strainer bowl in the tiniest fraction of a nanosecond.”
 
Just then you notice the boy angling the cow’s teat and squeezing a long squirt of milk into the throat of a most beautiful Persian cat and you watch in amazement as it closes its eyes, yapping up the end of this fortuitous milky way.
 
You turn to the Dad and ask incredulously, “how long ago did you create this scene”? The old Farmer twists his wrist and says, “6 billionths of a nanosecond ago”. You look at him and say, “really, that’s not even enough time for that squirt of milk to go from the cow’s teat to your cat’s throat.?”
 
To which the old pastor replies, “pal, God can do anything as fast as he wants to. Only the tiniest end of that milk squirt traveled through the air and landed on the cat’s tongue. The rest of the milky way was built to make it look like there’s a boy squirting milk from a cow. But as you know, God can feed a cat anyway he wants to.
 
Just then a big brown bull gets up from its comfy bed in the pasture beyond the fence, curls up and leaves a large, round pie in a grass that merely appears to have been flattened by a sleeping bull.
 
You turn and run. It’s too much male cow pie for one night, amigo!”

“Investors offer $10 million to recreate the origin of information. So far, no one can do it.”

“But the prize underscores a paradigm shift underway in academia: ‘Evolutionary biology is emerging from a period of great resistance to new ideas.'”



To read the rest of the article, please see the original publication on thecollegefix.com:

Investors offer $10 million to recreate the origin of information. So far, no one can do it.

Why “tweaking Darwinism a little” ain’t gonna get the job done – Denis Noble, the Martin Luther of Evolutionary Biology

Denis Noble, one of the judges for the Evolution 2.0 Prize, discusses in this interview why we can’t just put lipstick on a pig – why the public needs to be aware that evolutionary theory has undergone a revolution, and how this affects not only religious and philosophical discussions but policies and actions in medicine economics and politics.

Learn More About The Largest Origin of Life Science Prize In History: https://www.naturalcode.org

Evolution 2.0, $10 Million Prize, and the Royal Society of Great Britain

At London’s Royal Society, Oxford Professor & prize judge Denis Noble announced the $10 million Evolution 2.0 Prize with Perry Marshall

We doubled the Evolution 2.0 Prize from $5 Million to $10 Million.

I announced this at the Royal Society in Great Britain on Friday, May 31, 2019.

The Financial Times (the UK equivalent of the Wall Street Journal) ran the story Sunday. See the FT article at www.evo2.org/ft

***Have you ever rubbed eyes and re-read an email to make sure you weren’t hallucinating??***

Read more »

Entrepreneurs offer $10m prize for cracking mystery of DNA

This article has been republished with written permission from The Financial Times Ltd.

 

 

At the Royal Society in London: Financial Times Science Editor Clive Cookson; Denis Noble, Fellow of the Royal Society; and Perry Marshall at the Evolution 2.0 Prize announcement.

Wealthy investors are offering a $10m prize to the first scientific team that can create a genetic code from simple chemicals — reproducing the unknown process that led billions of years ago to DNA as the vehicle for transmitting information in life on Earth.

The Evolution 2.0 prize is an initiative by Perry Marshall, an online marketing entrepreneur based in Chicago. It will be judged by prominent scientists, including George Church, genetics professor at Harvard university, and Denis Noble, the Oxford university biologist who was the first to model the human heart on a computer.

“The biggest problems in science today are: how life got going in the first place and what is the origin of the genetic code,” said Professor Noble. “We want to know whether the way information is encoded in DNA is the result of chance or whether there are good chemical reasons why the code should be the way it is.” Read more »

The Man Who Re-Invented DNA: Steve Benner on Hachimoji DNA

In This Episode of the Evolution 2.0 Podcast…

Iconoclast, polymath, renegade and world-class chemist, Steve Benner has engineered a new breed of DNA with 8 nucleotide options instead of four. This exponentially increases its data capacity and it’s called Hachimoji DNA. 
 
What are the implications of this?

In this podcast, Steve sounds off about the conflict between research and advocacy, and the great power of shattering paradigms and admitting what we don’t know.

Press play above to listen, now! Or click here to listen on your favorite podcast platform: https://evo2.org/podcasts/hachimoji-dna/

Important Note: Please Subscribe to Evolution 2.0 on Youtube or your preferred podcast platform to be notified of future episodes.



What are your thoughts on today’s discussion? Comment below to join the conversation.


Why Neither “Extreme” Can Take Science Literally

A blog reader named Nelson Hernandez said:

There isn’t code in DNA. Those are just letters we give chemical interactions to be able to talk about them. There isn’t a code in DNA. That’s like saying there is a code in the rain/water cycle. Nonsense.

Nelson,

There’s a guy who often comments on this site, his name is Tom Godfrey. He is a young earth creationist. He believes the universe is 6000 years old and only “looks billions of years old.” He says that science cannot be used to determine history, only the Bible.

Nobody but young earth creationists ever says this. Because the YEC worldview forbids people from thinking otherwise.

You believe that DNA only “looks like a code”. You insist code is only a convenient way humans use to describe it, but it’s not really code. My experience is, only atheists say this. Because the atheist worldview forbids people thinking otherwise.

What’s the difference between a YEC who thinks the age of the earth is an illusion and an atheist who thinks the genetic code is an illusion?

Have not both camps invented their own version of science in order to avoid what would otherwise be painfully obvious?

Just to be clear, I’m not asserting that there’s no possible naturalistic explanation for the genetic code. I’ve got a $5 million prize for anyone who can figure it out. http://www.naturalcode.org.

And we don’t even have to argue about whether it’s a code or not. All you need is something that “looks like a code” and you’ll win the money.

Ken Wilber, Involution, and Evolution as a Function of the Divine: Frank Visser and Perry Marshall in Conversation

Frank Visser discovered Ken Wilber’s work in 1982 and contacted him in 1995 by fax, after which they became friends. Frank has written the first popular academic book on Wilber: “Ken Wilber: Thought as Passion” (SUNY 2003).In this conversation, we discuss Frank’s departure from Ken Wilber’s insistence that life itself and evolution are manifestations of the divine. We explore the question of how theology informs specific evolutionary theories. Does invoking God further science? Frank and Perry take a look at the nuances of Darwinism versus Design.

Read more »

“Darwin Devolves” Review – Perry Marshall & Bill Cole discuss Michael Behe’s controversial new book

Michael Behe’s “Darwin Devolves” asks: Has Darwin solved the design problem in biology? Behe says absolutely not, and backs his position with detailed examples. Furthermore, nobody has really solved the famous problem of “irreducible complexity” that Behe described in “Darwin’s Black Box.” But Perry Marshall insists Behe has still omitted vital details and landmark experiments. Bill Cole works closely with Behe, so Perry and Bill discuss: Will Behe’s approach be effective in addressing the shortcomings of mainstream science?

Podcast Transcript:

Read more »
Page 1 of 20 1 2 3 20