I know that they are properly referred to as "peptide bonds". A polypeptide is a polymer of amino acids. A peptide bond is a chemical bond formed between molecules of amino acid that involves the loss of a water molecule. That is about the extent of my personal knowledge of the subject.
Look, Foster, we're having a discussion, "in a friendly and lively way," you and me.
Why can't anyone else conduct themselves civilly, as you are doing with me?
There are two reasons:
1. Because they do not wish to. They have absolutely no intention of being friendly with someone like me, whom they hate.
2. Because they know nothing about the science of biochemistry, which is, after all, the foundation of evolution.
We continue, you and I.
Off the top of my head: Several amino acids, some common on Earth and some rare. Also Also alkanes like those synthesized in the Urey-Miller experiment.
There were about seventy. Moreover, the experiment to which you refer is almost always called the "Miller-Urey" experiment.
Bravo. Thank you.
I have always found chirality to be fascinating, haven't you?
How it is that the "primordial ooze" managed to do what you and I cannot, without a fine chemistry laboratory, has eluded evolutionary theorists. The only answer I have gotten to such questions is that "SOME" reactions "result in a slight imbalance in D and L forms."
And from a slight imbalance, we get all L forms in life?
This does not follow. Not remotely.
This I do not know off the top of my head. Looking it up I see that twenty two amino acids were synthesized in one of their vessels. "Miller and Urey observed that as much as 10–15% of the carbon within the system was now in the form of organic compounds. Two percent of the carbon had formed amino acids that are used to make proteins in living cells, with glycine as the most abundant. Sugars, liquids, and some of the building blocks for nucleic acids were also formed."
Only two or three of those simplest amino acids were in significant quantity, which is to say more than a trace. The papers I have read didn't list nearly as many as twenty-two, but even so, I accept your figure.
You see, rather than call someone "stupid" or a "liar" for citing facts with which I disagree, it is much simpler to find some sort of compromise so we can continue on to things even more interesting.
Your pals cannot countenance such a thought.
As you can see I am not completely ignorant of this subject. I also understand that ignorance is not something shameful. We are all ignorant of a great many things. /// Ignorance is only a failing when it is maintained willfully.
Tell that to your pals, who call me "ignorant" with dozens and dozens of posts, directly and indirectly. Maybe they will listen to you.
I believe I will concentrate on responding to thoughtful people like you in the future. It's far more productive and interesting than trying to relate to chimpanzees, who do little more than shake their ears wildly and make loud noises.
). I don't really know why; it just never clicked with me. 
