Dumb ICR article

Here is perhaps one of the dumbest articles I have read in a while: ICR on the complexity of DNA. It asks, "How could DNA evolve from non-life?" Well, actually most scientists think that RNA came first, so let's start there. We know that at least one RNA nucleotide (Uracil) can, and almost definetly was, delivered to us from space on a meteorite. In addition, we also know that all four RNA nucleotides are easily formed under freezing conditions that simulate the early earth (See here and here). And why isn't the experiment which showed that RNA evolved into DNA mentioned? Creationists are strangely silent whenever an experiment comes along that destroys their central thesis: Namely, that life can happen on its own.

Uncommon Descent has a recent post perhaps just as dumb as this, in reference to the History Channel Special on the Origin of Life: "We then learn about the cell wall, with no explanation as to how it could have possibly originated."

Maybe not the cell wall (found only in plants), but the plasma membrane (found in plants, animals and bacteria), sure. The program even shows scientists mixing together some chemicals, putting them in a simulated hydrothermal vent, and coming out with lipid membranes. This is not even a new thing, lipid membranes have been known to form under prebiotic conditions for decades.