Yeah, I know why you wouldn't want people to read that interview with de Duve because it shows up your untruths for what they are: not just misrepresentations, not just economies with the truth, but cheap, graceless, big fat porkies. To put it in the kind of boorish style you are so fond of, it takes your claims and hits them for a screaming six over mid-on.
Here it is again.
Yea yea sure. I hope everybody reads it!! Understanding it (with this crowd)....Not Bloody Likely. So lets have a go, shall we...
Steve: That the early biological world was an
RNA-based world.
de Duve: Well that's the conclusion of my fellow laureate Walter Gilbert, who got the prize for sequencing DNA. And he invented the world, RNA world, and that kind of theory has become extremely popular among all the experts in the field. Leslie Orgel was one, Stanley Miller to some extent, but just then the others and all the people really very much involved in this field had bought this idea of RNA world;
I don't buy it.
Well @ least he has some sense.
de Duve: So, the question that I asked in Nature, "
Did God Make RNA?"
is still valid today because nobody knows.
Ahh Christian, we sure know What Didn't 
Steve: So did he?
de Duve: Well, of course not, I mean, I don't know (laughs) I mean, I don't know.
No waffling; decisive...Speaks from Validated Scientific Experiments.
de Duve: My belief is that early chemistry,first of all, my belief is that it was chemistry, because the problem is a chemical problem—how do you get a molecule like RNA together? Once you have it, it can reproduce itself, but how do you get it together?
It can Reproduce itself? LOL....Why, HOW???
de Duve: But, as a scientist, I have to take as a working hypothesis that this came about naturally and not supernaturally.
A Nobel Prize winning Biochemist and doesn't even know what a Scientific Hypothesis is!!! Priceless. Hey Christian what's your "Independent Variable"...your Imagination? Eyelids? Other?? 
de Duve: Then answer number two is this chemistry is biochemistry, because you see, that is what Stanley Miller and Leslie Orgel and all the people who work in this field do not accept. They believe that this is a special kind of chemistry they call abiotic chemistry which has nothing to do with biochemistry that created the first RNA molecule.
Hey Christian, they probably don't "Accept" it because to have the "Bio" in Biochemistry...you have to have LIFE ("Bio") First, Great Googly Moogly!!
Tell us sir, how many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Pop...True or False??
de Duve: And my reason to believe that something like biochemistry had to arise originally is a somewhat complicated argument; but for the new chemistry to arise, the new, the biochemistry is based on enzymes; because all the reactions of biochemistry are reactions that would not take place on their own.
Oy Vey, AGAIN... How on Earth can you have BIOchemistry without the BIO?? 
ENZYMES, where'd you get those?? Start here sir....
Of the ~500 Amino Acids (AA's) known, 23 of them are Alpha Amino Acids. All Life requires and exclusively uses 20 Essential Alpha AA's.
1. Please show (CITE Source) of the "Natural" Formation of ALL 20 Essential Alpha AA's from their "Building Blocks"....? (This is ONE of the dirty little secrets you never hear about, it's really quite mind numbing...but they know they can 'Whistle Past The Graveyard', because of the utter ignorance and "Blind" Faith of their target audience).
2. We could in-effect stop right here, but where's the fun in that.
3. Once you get all of the Alpha AA's "Naturally" (and...you won't), they exist "Naturally" as Stereoisomers...Enantiomers i.e., a 50/50 mix (Racemic Mixture/ Mirror Images/Chiral) Left Handed-Right Handed. But LIFE exclusively uses Left-Handed Amino's (There are Exceptions but not material and outside the scope of our discussion). To be "Functional" Proteins, you not only need their Primary Structure (Proper Sequence) but FORM (Secondary Structure) "Form = Function" motif. ONE "right-handed" AA in the chain Compromises Secondary Structure...aka: Football Bat.
In EVERY SINGLE OOL Paper with AA's/Proteins (and SUGARS---we'll get to that), take a look @ "Materials and Methods" Section
... their other dirty little secret, you'll find EVERY-SINGLE TIME the word "PURIFICATION" or equivalent. Because they **sequestered**---if Proteins, then left-handed AA's are chosen...if Sugars, then right-handed ones are chosen, before they even start on their "a priori" fairytale.
**This is Investigator Interference and PROVES the need for Intelligent Agency!
4. The DeltaG for Polymerization of AA's to form Polypeptides is "Positive" i.e., Non-Spontaneous.
5. Peptide Bond Formation is "Condensation Reactions". Ahhh, That is....Peptide Bonds won't form IN WATER, from both a Thermodynamic and Kinetic point of view... Peptide Bonds won't form between two AA zwitterions, this is the form AA's are found in Aqueous Environments.
You'd have better chances resurrecting Alexander The Great's Horse than attempting even a cogent explanation of how this could be in the Galactic Universe of Possibility, let alone actually Physically/Chemically forming a 30 mer "FUNCTIONAL" Protein, "Naturally"!!
AND...This is even before we discuss: Primary Structure, Sunlight which destroys AA's (and Nucleo-Bases), pH, Cross Reactions, Brownian Motion, Hydrolysis, and Oxidation.
I suppose this is what the Grand Poobah of Origin of Life Research (Dr. Leslie Orgel) was referring to, when he said...
"However, solutions offered by supporters of geneticist or metabolist scenarios that are dependent on “if pigs could fly” hypothetical chemistry are unlikely to help."
Orgel LE (2008) The Implausibility of Metabolic Cycles on the Prebiotic Earth, PLoS Biology.
You/They were told this Years Ago, but didn't listen....
Dr Murray Eden, Professor MIT, concluded that, ‘...an adequate scientific theory of evolution must await the discovery and elucidation of new natural laws—physical, physico-chemical and biological.’
Murray, Eden, “Inadequacies of Neo-Darwinian Evolution as a Scientific Theory,” Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution, editors Paul S. Moorhead and Martin M. Kaplan, June 1967, p. 109.
de Duve: So my conclusion was that biochemistry had to be prefigured already in the early chemistry, and so I'm looking for an early chemistry that could do something like biochemistry.
So there had to be BIO ("Life") chemistry already prefigured in early ("Non-Life") Chemistry? So a Married Bachelor motif? 
de Duve: I'm thinking of catalysts that could have occurred under the primitive conditions and that could mimic what enzymes do, and I'm thinking of peptides—those associations of amino acids. The amino acids were there; Stanley Miller, showed it, they are on meteorites, the amino acids are available and how they got together is not so difficult, it's not a big thermodynamic problem.
1. Ahh Sir, Stanley Miller??...
a. Show all 20 Essential Alpha Amino Acids produced in this experiment...?
b. Please confirm the Fairytale atmosphere they used: Methane, Ammonia, Water vapor, Hydrogen....?
c. They used only 'SELECT' wavelengths of UV Light (Good Thing, because UV Light destroys AA's (and Nucleobases) )
d. They FILTERED OUT (using "Catch Basins"), natural process eh ?...the products. They made: 85% carcinogenic resin, that also included cyanides and carbon monoxide, and 2% amino acids. Mostly 2 amino acids...The amino acids will bond with the tar and others long before they bond to each other (good thing they filtered, eh?).
2. Not a Big Thermodynamic Problem???
All execpt for this of course...
"Such reactions, however, are condensation reactions, requiring the elimination of a water molecule for every peptide bond formed, and are thus unfavorable in aqueous environments both from a
THERMODYNAMIC and
KINETIC point of view.
In addition, PEPTIDE BOND FORMATION WILL NOT OCCUR between two amino acids in their zwitterionic form, the predominate state in a bulk aqueous environment."
Griffith EC, Vaida V; In situ observation of peptide bond formation at the water-air interface; Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 08/2012; 109(39):15697-701
My suggestion, Take the Next 3 days off....then Quit.
Oy Vey, de Duve
!
(rotflol) 
