Propaganda Through ‘Science’ Headline-Writing: Diamidophosphate as ‘Missing Link’ in Origin-of-Life Research

I just today ran across an example of a much-adored pet peeve: Deceptive headlines in science journalism.

I get a lot out of ExtremeTech, a web publication focused on information technology and science. However, today the following headline appeared in their RSS feed:

Scientists Identify ‘Missing Link’ in Life’s Chemical Origins

This headline got my baloney meter going. It implies that researchers have unequivocally identified a key step in the origin of life. But I know a little about origin-of-life research, and I was immediately skeptical of the implied assertion.

Diamidophosphate ion. Source: Ueliem.

Upon actually reading the article, I could see quickly that things were not as certain as the headline-writer would like the reader to think (boldface mine):

A team from The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI) in California have found a molecule that could have been integral to the development of life…

According to the TSRI team, diamidophosphate could have existed in water on Earth billions of years ago…

These complex interactions are just a sample of what could have happened on Earth eons ago.

The headline-writer at Scripps Research Institute, ExtremeTech’s source, was more honest, using the word “potential”:

Scientists Find Potential “Missing Link” in Chemistry That Led to Life on Earth

The Scripps article quotes the author of the TSRI study, who acknowledged that the compound in question, diamidophosphate (DAP), is only a hypothetical link in the chemical origin of life (boldface mine):

We suggest a phosphorylation chemistry that could have given rise, all in the same place, to oligonucleotides, oligopeptides, and the cell-like structures to enclose them,” said study senior author Ramanarayanan Krishnamurthy, Ph.D., associate professor of chemistry at TSRI. “That in turn would have allowed other chemistries that were not possible before, potentially leading to the first simple, cell-based living entities.

Making exaggerated claims is a recurring trope in science journalism. Why do I refer to deceptive headline-writing as “propaganda”? For one thing, it’s dishonest. For another, editors know that many people won’t bother to read beyond the headline. And for another, it conveys the idea that something has been proven about an important question — in this case, the origin of life. It supports a materialist ideological stance, even though the research finding itself might be tentative.

One of the most reasonable considerations of the state of origin-of-life research can be found in the book Signature in the Cell, by philosopher of science Stephen C. Meyer. Meyer’s work focuses on the role of information in living systems and makes a good argument for an intelligent designer as the best explanation for the existence of biological information.

For some additional thinking about assertions and propaganda, see this discussion:

The Way Things Are, the Way Things Were, and What Is True

ARK — 7 Nov. 2017