Creating New Form of Life

[TashaN]

**MOD POST**


Thread is closed for review by the staff.

[MysticSang'ha]

***ADVISORY POST***

OK, folks. Let's stop making this personal. Keep it on topic and keep it civil now that the thread has been re-opened.

Thank you.

[little_monkey]

From the OP, if humans can create life, it means that life originated on this planet according to natural laws, not according to what the Creationists claim.

[rocketman]

Originally Posted by little_monkey

From the OP, if humans can create life, it means that life originated on this planet according to natural laws, not according to what the Creationists claim.

The first part of that statement is scientifically and technically incorrect, as I keep telling you. You cannot use something that is being done deliberately in the lab today and say that it proves what happened accidentally in the field many years ago. The current experiment is not new life but merely deliberate genetic engineering based off already existing sequences, not a test to see if life can start all by itself. HUGE difference.

As I keep pointing out to you with regard to your opening question: this won't worry creationists at all.

[little_monkey]

Originally Posted by little_monkey

From the OP, if humans can create life, it means that life originated on this planet according to natural laws, not according to what the Creationists claim.

Originally Posted by rocketman

The first part of that statement is scientifically and technically incorrect, as I keep telling you. You cannot use something that is being done deliberately in the lab today and say that it proves what happened accidentally in the field many years ago. The current experiment is not new life but merely deliberate genetic engineering based off already existing sequences, not a test to see if life can start all by itself. HUGE difference.

As I keep pointing out to you with regard to your opening question: this won't worry creationists at all.

There is a big IF in my post. Hope you know the significance of that little word.

[rocketman]

Originally Posted by little_monkey

There is a big IF in my post. Hope you know the significance of that little word.

Yes, I was working on the IF factor. You see, IF humans can create life, it does not automatically follow that life originated on this planet according to natural laws. In fact, it's a completely different line of investigation compared with testing to see if life can start on it's own.

The answer to your original question "What are the implications of this new discovery/technology on CREATIONISM?" is: Little or none.

[fantôme profane]

Originally Posted by rocketman

As I keep pointing out to you with regard to your opening question: this won't worry creationists at all.

No scientific evidence or discovery will really worry most creationists I have encountered. Creationism is not about scientific evidence. The “theory of creationism” is not subject to change regardless of the evidence. The only question is whether they will decide to distort or simply ignore the evidence. But under no circumstances will any evidence have any impact on creationism, regardless of what that evidence is.

[rocketman]

Originally Posted by fantôme profane

No scientific evidence or discovery will really worry most creationists I have encountered. Creationism is not about scientific evidence. The “theory of creationism” is not subject to change regardless of the evidence. The only question is whether they will decide to distort or simply ignore the evidence. But under no circumstances will any evidence have any impact on creationism, regardless of what that evidence is.

I know, but in this case they'd actually be right.

[rojse]

Originally Posted by fantôme profane

No scientific evidence or discovery will really worry most creationists I have encountered. Creationism is not about scientific evidence. The “theory of creationism” is not subject to change regardless of the evidence. The only question is whether they will decide to distort or simply ignore the evidence. But under no circumstances will any evidence have any impact on creationism, regardless of what that evidence is.

Unless it supports creationism. Religious fanaticism is funny that way.

EDIT: the science behind it does not have to make sense, be verified, or even be valid proof, either, as long as it can be construed to be proof by those not educated enough to understand that the word theory has more than one definition.