Re: Last universal but not universal common ancestor of life

On Thu, 12 Jun 2025 00:31:59 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:

On 6/11/25 5:43 AM, jillery wrote:
>

I suppose it's easier to willfully

>
You just used "willful" in your last post. Which means someone
read his Word of the Day calendar!
>
Why are you even arguing?
>
"No!  Words aren't supposed to communicate and, anyway, science
isn't supposed to be more exact than two nimords at the car wash!"
>
Try this:  "Yeah, know what?  You're right again!"
>

misunderstand the meaning of words

>
So I'm "Misunderstanding" the meaning of the word "Universal"
as "Universal."
>
Let's quote the story:
>
To apply this theory to the rest of the universe, we don’t have to go
far, either. “[A]biotic synthesis of aromatic amino acids might be
possible in the water–rock interface of Enceladus’s subsurface ocean,”
the scientists explain. That’s only as far as Saturn. Maybe a Solar
System block party is closer than we think.
>
Gee, no confusion between "Universal" in reference to the earth alone
and "Universal" used to reference THE UNIVERSE in the same piece...

You made an illogical leap from abiotic amino acid synthesis to LUCA.
But that's what you do.

You're so freaking thirsty for a "Win" that you constantly
argue idiocy! And the truly pathetic part?  There isn't even
anything to win!
>
You made yourself look like a shithead for nothing.
>
Science uses a lot of stupid language and this is an example.

Yeah, I get that a lot from willfully stupid trolls.

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge