Can scientists 'create' life yet?


by Ceridwen018
Tags: life, scientists
honestrosewater
honestrosewater is offline
#19
Dec12-04, 10:07 AM
PF Gold
honestrosewater's Avatar
P: 2,330
Quote Quote by selfAdjoint
Here's one. Google on Craig Venter for others.
(Iansmith, thanks for the spelling correction).

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/bios/venter.html
This looks like the original paper. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...medid=14657399
Atom-Go-Boom!
Atom-Go-Boom! is offline
#20
Dec12-04, 01:55 PM
P: 4
Science cannot create life. Its can alter/change life, but cannot create it.
selfAdjoint
selfAdjoint is offline
#21
Dec12-04, 02:43 PM
Emeritus
PF Gold
P: 8,147
Quote Quote by Atom-Go-Boom
Science cannot create life. Its can alter/change life, but cannot create it.
This is the same claim that dekoi posted a couple of days ago on this thread. I asked for a defense of that bald statement then, and I'm asking for it again. Have you any reason, other than personal conviction, to believe this is true?
Astronuc
Astronuc is offline
#22
Dec19-04, 09:54 AM
Admin
Astronuc's Avatar
P: 21,634
Apparently scientsts are --

Researchers at Rockefeller University make small synthetic vesicles that resemble a crude kind of biological cell.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/1/h...ch/4104483.stm
arildno
arildno is offline
#23
Dec19-04, 10:49 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
P: 12,016
Quote Quote by Atom-Go-Boom!
Science cannot create life. Its can alter/change life, but cannot create it.
As yet, scientists can't create Mount Everest either.
It doesn't follow that there is some mysterious, "uncreatable" substance hidden away in the heart of that chunk of rock, though.
cronxeh
cronxeh is offline
#24
Dec19-04, 10:55 AM
PF Gold
cronxeh's Avatar
P: 1,236
We cant create or destroy matter. However we can manipulate it, put together quarks and make protons, neutrons and electrons. We can further arrange the structure of these things into elements, then react these elements together creating chains of molecules. Further reactions will yield nucleic acids. You can react it further and polymerize it. Few processes further you will get your DNA (or RNA if you wish). Where you go from there is up to your imagination.

the fine print: *such technology is 10-20 years away*
jimmy1200
jimmy1200 is offline
#25
Dec19-04, 12:22 PM
P: 46
ive read conspiracy theories that have said that the government has already succeded in creating life, but thats just whistle blow, and for the argument that we can create life, well here goes.
if a creator did give life to this planet and or life to the entire universe, then we wouldnt really be creating life, because we would already be using the tools to which were created by another source. from the metal we use to build the machines, to the actual chemical fundamentals that make "life", along with other things that we probably dont know how to manipulate, therefore we cant create life yet.
what are we saying when we say create life. are we saying create a body, or creating a mind, body and soul, because although the mind and soul have yet to be proven to be false or true, there is still the possibility that they exist outside the body but still interact with the body(this is what i believe) and if this is true, then we would have to know how to create all three of these. so when we say create life, what are we saying?
i mean we're still unraveling stuff about the human body all the time

we have to first define life, and that is far from being easy, but do we have to define life to be able to create it, maybe not and now im thinking to hard
Nereid
Nereid is offline
#26
Dec19-04, 04:59 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 4,005
Then 'making' a fire, or 'creating' a house is the same kind of activity as 'making' a custom bacterium that lives (swims, eats, reproduced, dies) just like other bacteria.

It seems to me that if you take this 'creator' idea, you won't be at all surprised or upset if one day Venter IV 'makes' an ant, a tree, a hamster in his lab.
jimmy1200
jimmy1200 is offline
#27
Dec22-04, 09:45 AM
P: 46
i wouldnt be shocked if life were created, but to say create is a strong word, since youre already using what was already here to create. its not like any of these scientist just sat there and created life from nothing, hell if a creator existed, its hard to believe it created something from nothing, hell i cant even comprehend nothing, because even darkness or pure light is something. so life can possibly be created in a sense, but no one is truly playing mr creator, because were already using the tools of the creator, whether it be mr big bang or mr white beard.
its like me giving a kid all the legos to build a ramp and then she builds it, can she really be called the creator if i was the one who actually provided her with the tools to create, in a sense yes, but technically, no, because if it werent for me, then she would not even have built that ramp, nor had the tools to accomplish such a task.
plus when we say life, what are we considering? just human life or life in general, because there may be even more complex creatures out there then us(hard to believe), then what?
selfAdjoint
selfAdjoint is offline
#28
Dec22-04, 10:26 AM
Emeritus
PF Gold
P: 8,147
Quote Quote by jimmy1200
i wouldnt be shocked if life were created, but to say create is a strong word, since youre already using what was already here to create. its not like any of these scientist just sat there and created life from nothing, hell if a creator existed, its hard to believe it created something from nothing, hell i cant even comprehend nothing, because even darkness or pure light is something. so life can possibly be created in a sense, but no one is truly playing mr creator, because were already using the tools of the creator, whether it be mr big bang or mr white beard.
its like me giving a kid all the legos to build a ramp and then she builds it, can she really be called the creator if i was the one who actually provided her with the tools to create, in a sense yes, but technically, no, because if it werent for me, then she would not even have built that ramp, nor had the tools to accomplish such a task.
plus when we say life, what are we considering? just human life or life in general, because there may be even more complex creatures out there then us(hard to believe), then what?
So creation of living beings from inert off the shelf chemicals doesn't satisfy you; we have to recreate the universe to get our attention? I am sure this will be the fallback position of the magic-minded folks when Venter or somebody else exhibits artificial bacteria, but at least the elan vital enthusiasts (some of whom post on these boards) will be confuted.
jimmy1200
jimmy1200 is offline
#29
Dec22-04, 12:05 PM
P: 46
well ill be statisfied if a conscious "normal "human being was created from off the shelf products. it doesnt bother me none, im not gonna go kill myself, but what does it prove?
i mean really, what does it prove? i dont understand your argument?

all im saying is that you technically cant be a creator if the tools are already supplied for you. im not getting religious, or mystical on you, it just appears to make logical sense to me. so in essence, yes you would have to recreate and entire universe and life from "nothing" to get anyones "real" attention.
i mean isnt that true creation, to make something out of literally nothing, but like i said, that is almost incomprehensible to make something out of nothing, but that is the only true way to say youre the ultimate creator, is it not. so until then we will not be true creators and will be working with the tools given to us by the "ULTIMATE GAMER".

there is no denying that there has to be a comprehension of everything to truly be a creator, but like my first post said, do we have to define life to create it, probably not, what does that prove, a little but not much.

i dont understand the argument of creating life with tools already provided for you.

plus when we say life, what are we considering? just human life or life in general, because there may be even more complex creatures out there then us(hard to believe), then what?
selfAdjoint
selfAdjoint is offline
#30
Dec22-04, 07:45 PM
Emeritus
PF Gold
P: 8,147
The point is not "to be a creator". The point is to show that life does not require something extra, besides pure chemistry. If they can create a reproducing, metabolizing microbe, a living thing by all bilogists' classification, out of off-the-shelf chemicals, then they will have shown this.
Maritza
Maritza is offline
#31
Dec26-04, 08:47 AM
P: 2
to create means to bring into being; to form out of nothing; to cause to exist. That's all. Maybe another word (for instance produce) would be suitable. Besides, conversation is going off topic.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Can we create God? General Discussion 0
Scientists Finding Strange Life Forms in Great Salt Lake Biology 3
Be god, "create first life" Chemistry 3
Australian Scientists Confirm Past Life On Mars General Astronomy 3
Ban on scientists trying to create three-parent baby Biology 25