Creating New Form of Life

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Dunemeister

How can a universe of atoms and chemicals that have no teleology/purpose/"proper" function produce things that actually have teleology/purpose/proper function? This isn't a scientific problem, but a deeply philosophical one, ...

When you equate "teleology/purpose" with proper function the problem is first and foremost semantic.

[rocketman]

Originally Posted by little_monkey

If life can be produced in a lab according to natural laws, it certainly can arise in nature under natural laws.

That's a bit of a stretch. What you would need to do is to demonstrate that such things can arise independantly in the field without any intelligent intervention. And as far as the historical evolution questions go, because we don't know what the finite initial conditions and parameters were, we'll never be able to conduct such an experiment.

This 'new' form of life actually relies on existing elements from nature like nucleic acids, the self-replication is not entirely autonomous, and the quasi-cell does absolutely nothing useful biologically. For now it's an interesting feat of genetic engineering. It won't bother creationists at all.

[little_monkey]

Originally Posted by rocketman

This 'new' form of life actually relies on existing elements from nature like nucleic acids, the self-replication is not entirely autonomous, and the quasi-cell does absolutely nothing useful biologically. For now it's an interesting feat of genetic engineering. It won't bother creationists at all.

True, but it is with these experiments that we will eventually discover the natural laws that exist out there which allows life to emerge from non-living thing. Once this is desmonstrable, meaning if it happened on this planet then it can happen anywhere in the universe, then the hypothesis of a creator to upstart life becomes superfluous. Life, like gravity, is then just a series of events following natural laws.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by little_monkey

True, but it is with these experiments that we will eventually discover the natural laws that exist out there which allows life to emerge from non-living thing.

Natural laws don't "allow." They describe.

[little_monkey]

Originally Posted by Jayhawker Soule

Natural laws don't "allow." They describe.

"Allow" is meant in a figurative way. You can say that Newton's law of gravity "describes" gravity, but it is also that "description" that made it possible to land a man on the moon, to send regularly probes to mars, to have the convenience of GPS, etc. Knowledge, even if it is a description, does give us power we would not have without it. Being able to "describe" the laws governing life, when we will have them, would give us tremendous power. It will "allow"...

[Willamena]

The distinction about describing is that in defining a natural law we are not saying "this is the thing that did it," but rather "this is how we will describe it, this way."

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by little_monkey

Being able to "describe" the laws governing life, when we will have them, would give us tremendous power. It will "allow"...

Natural law does not "govern," it describes. It's a distinction you trivialize, but your narratives persistently promote "natural law" to something more than verifiable descriptions of regularities.

[Heneni]

I find it funny that people who dont believe in god, try to be him! (Maybe this man is a christian? I dont know)

Of course he doesnt use ONLY dead chemicals but a genetic material, which can not stricktly be consider lifeless.

But scientific research is always welcomed. Often when we investigate one thing we discover a few new things as well.


Interesting the feedback on the site shows that people think a zombie apocolypse is in store if this research continues. HA HA HA HA...

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Heneni

I find it funny that people who dont believe in god, try to be him!

I find it funny that you would distort science with such ignorant abandon.