4 ms·

I trained as a biochemist and you nailed it. The submission title's claim is wildly more extraordinary than the actual result. It's like claiming "Lines of hu

I trained as a biochemist and you nailed it. The submission title's claim is wildly more extraordinary than the actual result. It's like claiming "Lines of humans spontaneously appear on a hot tin roof" when what happened was "humans spontaneously link arms when placed upon a hot tin roof."

MichaelZuo 4y ago
The original title is much less clickbaity ‘ Catalytic Synthesis of Polyribonucleic Acid on Prebiotic Rock Glasses’. Maybe one of the mods could change it since it’s not following the site rules anyways.
ianai 4y ago
But is that original title going to properly convey significance to non-biologists/the lay audience? Coming up with good titles that will survive the HN thoughtchamber is not easy.
- IncRnd 4y ago
  The existing, clickbaity title claims a significance that doesn't exist.
Layke1123 4y ago
Seems more reasonable a claim than life was breathed into clay to form man.
- natpalmer1776 4y ago
  I mean, if you imagine life on earth originated as a petri dish experiment by some advanced species the whole "breathed life into clay" might not be so far fetched, given some allowance for numerous translation context changes.
  - Layke1123 4y ago
    - Thorentis 4y ago
      Honestly, I've never had a Creationist call me a bigot for wanting to debate them. In fact, they usually welcome to the debate and see it as an opportunity to convert somebody. The only time I've ever seen name calling is when an angry anti-theist lashes out at somebody for not trusting science, or when comments like yours use them as a straw man.
      - Layke1123 4y ago
        Can I introduce you to some people then? I would love to drop you off in other places too, not just here in the US, but Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan and let's seem if your claim holds true. Care to take me up on the offer?
        dotopotoro 4y ago
        conflating “creationists” to societies which dont recognize women as individual person.. is technically correct. The best kind of correct of course. But also a bit of blow below the belt. (Especialy when there are plenty of shouting religious politicians, that could have been used in your argument)
        Layke1123 4y ago
        No, what it is is an acknowledgment that there are people who think rationally, and then there are those people who think you should fucking shut up and be burned at the stake for disagreeing with them. The idea that modern anti-theists are anything like our current theistic members of society is laughable, and honestly starting to make me wonder who cares if we turn into them.
        dang 4y ago

MichaelZuo 4y ago

The original title is much less clickbaity ‘ Catalytic Synthesis of Polyribonucleic Acid on Prebiotic Rock Glasses’. Maybe one of the mods could change it since it’s not following the site rules anyways.

ianai 4y ago

But is that original title going to properly convey significance to non-biologists/the lay audience? Coming up with good titles that will survive the HN thoughtchamber is not easy.

IncRnd 4y ago
The existing, clickbaity title claims a significance that doesn't exist.

Layke1123 4y ago

Seems more reasonable a claim than life was breathed into clay to form man.

natpalmer1776 4y ago
I mean, if you imagine life on earth originated as a petri dish experiment by some advanced species the whole "breathed life into clay" might not be so far fetched, given some allowance for numerous translation context changes.
- Layke1123 4y ago
  - Thorentis 4y ago
    Honestly, I've never had a Creationist call me a bigot for wanting to debate them. In fact, they usually welcome to the debate and see it as an opportunity to convert somebody. The only time I've ever seen name calling is when an angry anti-theist lashes out at somebody for not trusting science, or when comments like yours use them as a straw man.
    - Layke1123 4y ago
      Can I introduce you to some people then? I would love to drop you off in other places too, not just here in the US, but Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan and let's seem if your claim holds true. Care to take me up on the offer?
      - dotopotoro 4y ago
        conflating “creationists” to societies which dont recognize women as individual person.. is technically correct. The best kind of correct of course. But also a bit of blow below the belt. (Especialy when there are plenty of shouting religious politicians, that could have been used in your argument)
        Layke1123 4y ago
        No, what it is is an acknowledgment that there are people who think rationally, and then there are those people who think you should fucking shut up and be burned at the stake for disagreeing with them. The idea that modern anti-theists are anything like our current theistic members of society is laughable, and honestly starting to make me wonder who cares if we turn into them.
        dang 4y ago