-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Producing life from non living matter
- Thread starter FearGod
- Start date
A fire cannot be kindled from ash, but only from unburnt wood. Dead life is ash. Do you understand? Life can indeed be (and has been) created out of non-living matter as my article demonstrates, but not from matter from dead organisms as that kind of matter, like ash is unsuitable for its chemistry (it has been oxidized).
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
And why is that?
It would be simple & clear if you didn't keep shifting the goalposts between this and
"Don't you see how silly it's when believing that the unconscious nature did it while we claim
that we don't have the knowledge yet to do it?"
You're using natural processes as a benchmark for what constitutes a valid counterclaim when you say this - immunisation and disease resistance is one such process.
And without a description of what those creatures are, how they function or what they will look like once humans develop a method of perceiving them, this is as vague, generic & convincing as those prophecies which say 'in the future there will be wars & rumours of wars'. Wow, really? They might as well prophesy that it'll ****ing rain in some places and not in others.
Last edited:
FearGod
Freedom Of Mind
We already have. It replicates, though very slowly, but it does replicate by using energy from surroundings. Made entirely artificially.
A recursive vesicle-based model protocell with a primitive model cell cycle : Nature Communications
. While we have previously described a giant vesicle (GV)-based model protocell in which amplification of DNA was linked to self-reproduction, the ability of a protocell to recursively self-proliferate for multiple generations has not been demonstrated. Here we show that newborn daughter GVs can be restored to the status of their parental GVs by pH-induced vesicular fusion of daughter GVs with conveyer GVs filled with depleted substrates. We describe a primitive model cell cycle comprising four discrete phases (ingestion, replication, maturity and division), each of which is selectively activated by a specific external stimulus. The production of recursive self-proliferating model protocells represents a step towards eventual production of model protocells that are able to mimic evolution.
(a) Membrane lipids consisting of vesicular membrane of self-reproductive GV. Cationic membrane lipid V, amphiphilic catalyst C and phospholipids (POPC and POPG) (right). The membrane lipid V and electrolyte molecule E are generated through the hydrolysis of the membrane lipid precursor V*. (b) The production of cationic membrane lipid V from its precursor V*. The cationic membrane V is produced together with the electrolyte E at an active site comprised of amplified DNA and amphiphilic catalyst C in the giant vesicular membrane. The proposed structure of the active site, comprised of amplified DNA, cationic membrane lipid V and amphiphilic catalyst C, for production of membrane lipids is shown in the bottom. (c) pH lowering induced adhesion and fusion between the target GV and the conveyer GV. The surface charge of the target GV changes to cationic due to the protonation of the POPC as well as the increase of the cationic membrane lipid V from its precursor, and the target GV adheres to the conveyer GV with a negative surface charge at pH=3. These two types of GVs fuse, and the transport of dNTP from the conveyer GV to the target GV proceeds.
----—-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your challenge has been met now what?
I anticipate that you will now change the goalposts and redefine life. Correct?
Here is the Britannica definition I am using
life, living matter and, as such, matter that shows certain attributes that include responsiveness, growth, metabolism, energy transformation, and reproduction
How the challenge was met, where's the living creature specifically the fly?
God challenged of making a simple creature and which is a fly.
What prevents us from creating a fly?
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
It'll change the goalposts of FearGod's argument, that's for sure.
I don't really see the issue. If we can produce a fly it's because God has set things up in just such a way that we can create a fly. It strikes me as a simplistic take which would venture such a challenge.
You asked if we created life we have.
You did not ask if we have created a fly. We have not. A fly is far more complex organism than a simple living cell, brought about by 3. 5 billion years of evolution after simple cells like the one we are making now arose on earth. It lies currently beyond our technological capabilities just like sustained fusion that powers the sun.
But simple cells are as much a life as a fly, just like fire is as much a source of light as a sun. Sun has no special matter that makes it light giving. Neither does a fly have any special matter that makes life, for we have created life without adding anything special.
Your original OP question have been answered . make a new OP if you want to ask a different question.
This is simply not true. God did no such thing.
Humans claiming to speak for God do such things quite commonly. And when proved wrong they pretend that they didn't say it, or that they meant something else, or that the human making the claim was not a True Believer, or any number of dodges.
This sort of lying and dissembling is a huge part of why I don't believe in religion. I believe in God, but not Islam or Christianity or whatever.
Tom
FearGod
Freedom Of Mind
Again, what prevents us of making a fly, is it a billions of years needed or lack of knowledge or you have no idea what is missing, no the OP wasn't answered since you don't admit that God's challenge wasn't met yet.
Yes, I believe life on earth was created through conscious intent of intelligences beyond our understanding. And life is imbued with elements beyond our physical perception.
I think this challenge is a good one for the physicalists. If life is just atoms and molecules in a certain arrangement, why could we not create at least some miniscule simple lifeforms by putting atoms and molecules into the same arrangement?
EDIT: now one might reply to me by bringing up the complexity of the arrangement being too difficult to put together but then that gets us back to the question of how a physicalist believes it did happen.
Last edited:
FearGod
Freedom Of Mind
That's a very sincere reply.
PositiveThinking09
Member
I have been working with computers my whole life and have always viewed their "senses" as a humans replication of the "dream realm," but for machines. I have dabbled with generating displays based on logical geometry; to create greater images. Echoes of Echoes that create even greater Echoes.
I feel like this is a part of life embedded on our universe that we are being kept from tapping into.
Do you think a fly has dreams? If so how complex? How complex are the "dreams" your computer has?
I feel like this is a part of life embedded on our universe that we are being kept from tapping into.
Do you think a fly has dreams? If so how complex? How complex are the "dreams" your computer has?
It is a fact. We cannot create life from no life, yet. But I cannot exclude that we will.
Can you exclude that?
Ciao
- viole
FearGod
Freedom Of Mind
No, my point that the challenge wasn't met yet, if humans create a fly in the future then that means the quran will fail.
Being dishonest is not the way to be religious. This is your OP
If life wasn't a product done by a creator, then what prevents us from creating it
the same way as it has been done by the unconscious nature.
This challenge was offered by God thousands years ago, as to create living creatures, can we?
Scientists have created living creatures. A living cell that grows and replicates is a living creature. Your OP has been met. You have said nowhere in the OP that only a fly counts as a living creature.
Some living creatures are far more complicated than others. A fly is a complicated living creature while a cell is a simple one. Simple things are easier to understand and make. That is why scientists today can make a living cell.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Once we do that, will you admit that no god is required?
Was not met yet, means it can never be met just because then the Quran will fail?
Ciao
- viole
FearGod
Freedom Of Mind
The OP is what I said but the quran's challenge is about making a fly, I mentioned it in another post.
O people, an example is presented, so listen to it. Indeed, those you invoke besides Allah will never create [as much as] a fly, even if they gathered together for that purpose. And if the fly should steal away from them a [tiny] thing, they could not recover it from him. Weak are the pursuer and pursued.(22:73)
Why do you think making a fly is so complicated? nature made it without even thinking.
Last edited: