Scientists Create Life in a Laboratory

[Guinness_Reloaded]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...today/11952407

"genomics pioneer Craig Venter announced that his research group created an artificial virus based on a real one in just two weeks' time.

When researchers created a synthetic genome (genetic map) of the virus and implanted it into a cell, the virus became "biologically active," meaning it went to work reproducing itself."

[Taxman]

I can't believe that nobody responded to this yet! Am I the only one that thought this was incredible (even if it does put me in the same boat as "beer boy" )

[Paul_Fisher]

It's cool. I like its implication. Life needs a Creator to happen.

[Liberty]

As long as it doesn't go on welfare......

[aipen]

[img]graemlins/Laughing.gif[/img] An astute observation, Paul!

[Guinness]

Originally posted by Paul_Fisher:
It's cool. I like its implication. Life needs a Creator to happen.

It also implies that creating life is very easy and you don't need to be an all-powerful God to do so.

[TXNavy]

The article avoids several points of biology and organic chemistry though. For one thing, a virus manufactured from existing proteins is fairly easy in concept and can still be called "synthetic," just like synthetic lubricants. There are several right and left-handed versions of simple proteins in DNA polypeptide chains which we cannot duplicate in the laboratory, nor can we explain how they could be created outside of a living cell. If they had pulled that one off, the announcement would have been a little louder.

There's also the question of a virus as a life form. Science has never classified it as such, since it is acellular and cannot reproduce or really function in of itself. Its little more than stray genetic material, or loose proteins. To me this looks more like genetic manipulation than creation, which we've already done before. Alter a gene or three to mimic a virus, and pop, out it comes. Hooray!

We've already modified viruses and carrier proteins to change DNA for gene therapy (remember that breakthrough?), so this isn't so earthshaking. I find the "Creation of Artificial Life" title is applied a little loosely on this one.

In short, the all-powerful God is still necessary...unless Guiness is sitting on some kind of organic chemistry secret he hasn't shared

[DoctorDoom]

It also implies that creating life is very easy and you don't need to be an all-powerful God to do so.

Let me get this straight, dude. Your opinion is that a group of highly intelligent scientists creating this "life" (a questionable designation at best) in a lab is proof that no intelligence was needed to create life in nature. Is that about right?

This is definitely on a par with Dawkins' infamous "Weasel" fraud.

[Guinness]

Originally posted by DoctorDoom:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />It also implies that creating life is very easy and you don't need to be an all-powerful God to do so.

Let me get this straight, dude. Your opinion is that a group of highly intelligent scientists creating this "life" (a questionable designation at best) in a lab is proof that no intelligence was needed to create life in nature. Is that about right?

This is definitely on a par with Dawkins' infamous "Weasel" fraud. </font>[/quote]I didn't say "no intelligence is needed", I said you don't need to be an all-powerful God.

[dsfiscool]

Nope...creating life doesn't necessarily call for an "all-powerful" God...when one considers new babies are made every day. However, going against established natural laws to create the very beginning of ALL life does.