Re: What is legitimate about the ID bait and switch scam at this time?

On 16/06/2025 4:06 pm, LDagget wrote:

On Sun, 15 Jun 2025 23:57:53 +0000, MarkE wrote:
 

On 15/06/2025 7:45 am, RonO wrote:

https://evolutionnews.org/2025/06/jonathan-wells-cleared-the-ground-for-
intelligent-design/

>
<snip>
>

Denial seems to be all that the ID perps ever had, and the only thing
that creationists like Tour and MarkE can continue with,

>
<snip>
>
Hi Ron, speaking of denial, Tour and OoL, here's a real example of
denial, in this case denial of the OoL chirality problem:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ArnQyn5tdT4

  Not much of a mystery.
 Life requires a regulated system of catalysis.
 The need for catalysis and regulation should be obvious. The mechanisms
of each are observed in biochemistry, including the fact that organic
polymers are capable to forming diverse catalytic function, that can
be regulated in myriad ways. And it all happens with a rather small set
of simple components that are just doing what they readily do, in or
out of living systems. There's no magic involved.
 As far as chirality goes, it is an aspect of carbon based chemistry so
it exists as a matter of course. As for the specificity involved,
chirally
specific catalysts produce chirally specific reactions.
 Where the unimaginative may get lost is that there's nothing surprising
about the fact that sustainable catalytic systems naturally coalesce
upon conserved chirality.
 Do the thought experiments about primordial systems of catalytic
synthesis
of simple polymer subunits. Some are more, some are less specific in the
production of self-similar chiral products. Those that just happen to be
more self-similar are better placed to produce catalysts that are then
capable of a next step of sophistication and specificity in the products
they can synthesize.
 There is a problem if one insists on dubious ideas about how early
prebiotic chemistry arose, especially if one clings to unworkable ideas
involving completely random synthesize from some prebiotic pool of
racemic
monomers. But that's a nonsensical model.
 

I'd be interested in your comments in the my logic and understanding of the issue, as follows.
Life's molecules are now strictly homochiral (e.g. proteins composed of only L-amino acids), therefore either they developed this way from the beginning, or were purified by a later process.
If the former, this implies either an enantiomerically pure source of monomers, or a prebiotic polymerisation process that selected only one form. You suggest "specific catalysts [which] produce chirally specific reactions", but what reactions exactly, in what prebiotically plausible situation, and with what necessary amounts of material and time?
If the latter, this would involve the complete substitution of L for R units and/or removal of R units. But this would change the structure of say a protein and erase its evolved function. This alone rules out this option.