PDA

View Full Version : Creation of life



Hans
05-08-2014, 12:35 PM
Wednesday, May 7, 2014, 8:55 PM - For the first time, California researchers have created a living cell with two 'foreign' DNA blocks in its genome.

Throughout the history of life on Earth, DNA always been written with four letters -- A, T, C, and G. These are the labels scientists have given to all the sub-units that create life in the known universe -- until now.

Scientists at the Scripps Research Institute in California have observed the creation of a bacterium that contains six letters, marking the first time that life has been created using DNA bases that aren't found in nature.

http://www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/scientists-create-life-with-alien-dna/26873/

I believe this brings us an important step closer to the theory of how life started, and at the same time brings us further away from the theory that life was created by some kind of "creator"

The Berean
05-08-2014, 06:28 PM
So you're saying they have created something that is NOT like anything in nature??

Please let us know when they DO create something that has ALL the characteristics of life, and IS the same.

The Berean
05-08-2014, 06:38 PM
Here's the original info, as given by the original site:

http://www.nature.com/news/first-life-with-alien-dna-1.15179

From that site:

"The team engineered the bacterium Escherichia coli to express a gene from a diatom — a single-celled alga — encoding a protein that allowed the molecules to pass through the bacterium's membrane."

And the rest of the story:

"But creating a wholly synthetic organism would be a huge challenge. “A lot of times people will say you’ll make an organism completely out of your unnatural DNA,” says Romesberg. “That’s just not going to happen, because there are too many things that recognize DNA. It’s too integrated into every facet of a cell’s life.”

So to say this, "brings us further away from the theory that life was created by some kind of "creator", is premature, even ludicrous.

Hans
05-08-2014, 07:44 PM
But it is not at all ludicrous.

They have engineered a bacteria from a single cell, with a DNA structure that does not naturally exists.
It is perfectly possible that nature could have done the same, given enough time and the right conditions.
Which means evolution makes it possible to create more and more complex life, which could eventually have led to human life.

It is a lot more plausible than the creator theory.

Aristotle
05-08-2014, 07:46 PM
But it is not at all ludicrous.

They have engineered a bacteria from a single cell, with a DNA structure that does not naturally exists.
It is perfectly possible that nature could have done the same, given enough time and the right conditions.
Which means evolution makes it possible to create more and more complex life, which could eventually have led to human life.

It is a lot more plausible than the creator theory.

No it's not. Both require faith in something that cannot be proven to have happened.

At least Christians are good with that. Secularists, not so much.

Hans
05-08-2014, 07:52 PM
What do you mean? I fail to see what faith has to do with the creation of this 6 letter DNA? It was created using scientific methods.

The Berean
05-08-2014, 07:52 PM
But it is not at all ludicrous.

They have engineered a bacteria from a single cell, with a DNA structure that does not naturally exists.
It is perfectly possible that nature could have done the same, given enough time and the right conditions.
Which means evolution makes it possible to create more and more complex life, which could eventually have led to human life.

It is a lot more plausible than the creator theory.

They modified something existing. They created nothing.

As to what's plausible, that's an opinion.

Interesting that you mention, "given enough time". Consider an infinity of time, and what should be apparent.

Aristotle
05-08-2014, 07:54 PM
What do you mean? I fail to see what faith has to do with the creation of this 6 letter DNA? It was created using scientific methods.

You have faith science will help us know all someday. You do not know that,you have faith science will do it.

You and I both have faith in something, we just direct it in different directions.

Hans
05-08-2014, 07:58 PM
There is 1 big difference between your direction and mine: my direction has increased my knowledge about basically everything we see around us, while your direction has increased your knowledge by nothing.
Your direction has not increased your knowledge about what is around you, mine has and continues to do so.

Aristotle
05-08-2014, 08:03 PM
There is 1 big difference between your direction and mine: my direction has increased my knowledge about basically everything we see around us, while your direction has increased your knowledge by nothing.
Your direction has not increased your knowledge about what is around you, mine has and continues to do so.

Science at one time told us to use leeches to cure sickness. It at one time told us to bleed people to relieve pain. Do you think the people who lived back then believed their faith in science led to constant improvement and gain of knowledge? You can bet they did.

Let's fast-forward to today:you believe science has you on a constant trek forward. Perhaps. But maybe not. So how do you know for sure?

You don't, you simply have faith science is doing so.

We both have faith.

Aristotle
05-08-2014, 08:08 PM
Your direction has not increased your knowledge about what is around you, mine has and continues to do so.

That is a logical fallacy. To be true it must be true that I disregard science, which I do not. I believe science has done much good, and will continue to do so. What I do not believe is it is the one and only answer.

You see, I believe God created science, so I have no bone to pick with science. I support it to the utmost. Now,when it over-steps its bounds, and declares itself arbiter of all that has been, is, and will be,well, then I laugh a little, pat science on the head, and ask it to get over itself.

God created science to give us amazing glimpses into the world and reality He created.

So...

God created science
Men are scientists
Men are fallen creatures
Fallen creatures can sin,and distort Truth
Science is distorted when fallen man tries to use it for that which it was never intended

Hans
05-08-2014, 08:11 PM
I don't see it that way. Those people you mentioned from way back in the time of leeches and blood letting, were correct in believing science would lead to constant improvement.
We now have medical knowledge and equipment capable of curing and correcting many medical conditions that would not have been possible without science.

If we would have followed your direction, we would still be using leeches and blood letting.
In fact, we would not even be able to discuss this because we would not have the technology to do so.
That and we would not be able to write or read anyways.

Hans
05-08-2014, 08:14 PM
That is a logical fallacy. To be true it must be true that I disregard science, which I do not. I believe science has done much good, and will continue to do so. What I do not believe is it is the one and only answer.

You see, I believe God created science, so I have no bone to pick with science. I support it to the utmost. Now,when it over-steps its bounds, and declares itself arbiter of all that has been, is, and will be,well, then I laugh a little, pat science on the head, and ask it to get over itself.

God created science to give us amazing glimpses into the world and reality He created.

So...

God created science
Men are scientists
Men are fallen creatures
Fallen creatures can sin,and distort Truth
Science is distorted when fallen man tries to use it for that which it was never intended

Which God would that be? There are many to pick from. That is one of the issues with the God theory.

Aristotle
05-08-2014, 08:15 PM
I don't see it that way. Those people you mentioned from way back in the time of leeches and blood letting, were correct in believing science would lead to constant improvement.
We now have medical knowledge and equipment capable of curing and correcting many medical conditions that would not have been possible without science.

If we would have followed your direction, we would still be using leeches and blood letting.
In fact, we would not even be able to discuss this because we would not have the technology to do so.
That and we would not be able to write or read anyways.

But the people back then that believed science would continue to improve believed it in fact had done so when leeches were used to cure people. We now know that in fact the prescription was worse than the disease at times. So did science move knowledge forward in that instance? No. But at the time the people believed it did,so, they had blind faith.

We both have faith

Aristotle
05-08-2014, 08:16 PM
Which God would that be? There are many to pick from. That is one of the issues with the God theory.

I can only speak from my vantage point: that of a Christian

Hans
05-08-2014, 08:19 PM
I can only speak from my vantage point: that of a Christian

A muslim would say the exact same thing. So would several other Religions.
Regardless of who might be right or wrong, there is 1 thing we can be sure off: there can only be one correct answer.

Aristotle
05-08-2014, 08:21 PM
A muslim would say the exact same thing. So would several other Religions.
Regardless of who might be right or wrong, there is 1 thing we can be sure off: there can only be one correct answer.

Maybe.

to me the answer is this: God created science,therefore science is good, until it is abused (just as the same can be said for all creation)

Hans
05-08-2014, 08:25 PM
So you are stating God created Muslims?

The Voice
05-08-2014, 08:26 PM
No it's not. Both require faith in something that cannot be proven to have happened.

At least Christians are good with that. Secularists, not so much.

I never said I had any answers to any questions.

The Voice
05-08-2014, 08:28 PM
So you are stating God created Muslims?

I'll answer you that one his god most certainly did create Muslims.

Aristotle
05-08-2014, 08:28 PM
So you are stating God created Muslims?

He sure did!

Hans
05-08-2014, 08:33 PM
I tend to disagree. Muslims believe Allah (their word for God) to be One.
Christians have a different believe about God.
And as I said before: there can only be one correct answer.

The Voice
05-08-2014, 08:34 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagoras

If I was to be religious this would be my religion.

I used superior math skills to get where I am today.

The Voice
05-08-2014, 08:35 PM
I tend to disagree. Muslims believe Allah (their word for God) to be One.
Christians have a different believe about God.
And as I said before: there can only be one correct answer.

They are both Abrahamic religions they worship the same god.

Hans
05-08-2014, 08:37 PM
Not according to muslims. Muslims explicitly reject the concept of God being more than One, while Christians insists God is a trinity.
There can only be one that is correct in this case. And there is also the possibility both are incorrect. But there is no possibility both are correct.

The Voice
05-08-2014, 08:46 PM
I am not saying either one is correct simply that it is the same god the god of Abraham.

The Voice
05-08-2014, 08:47 PM
It really doesn't matter what Muslims say it is still the same god.

The Berean
05-08-2014, 10:33 PM
Not according to muslims. Muslims explicitly reject the concept of God being more than One, while Christians insists God is a trinity.
There can only be one that is correct in this case. And there is also the possibility both are incorrect. But there is no possibility both are correct.

Sorry Hans, Christians believe in One God. Your understanding is off.

Aristotle
05-09-2014, 09:36 AM
Not according to muslims. Muslims explicitly reject the concept of God being more than One, while Christians insists God is a trinity.

Sheesh, a big misunderstanding on both sides, Hans.

First, Muslims believe in one God: Allah. They are not polytheistic. The three monotheistic religions are Christianity, Islam, and Judaism

Second, Christians do not believe in three gods. There is three persons in The One God.

The Left Sock
05-09-2014, 12:06 PM
The Trinity is just another way that early Christians adapted their faith in order to draw more followers into the fold. Everybody had lots of gods back then, so splitting theirs into three had some appeal to those who couldn't imagine worshiping a single deity.

It's the Easter Bunny, all over again.

The Left Sock
05-09-2014, 12:10 PM
But back to the OP. The idea that the experiment 'created life' is false. They created a hybrid, from existing parts.

It's like as if I took parts from a Chevy and a Ford, and created a mutant car, and then claimed, 'Look, a brand new car!'.

It doesn't fly.

The Berean
05-09-2014, 02:40 PM
The Trinity is just another way that early Christians adapted their faith in order to draw more followers into the fold. Everybody had lots of gods back then, so splitting theirs into three had some appeal to those who couldn't imagine worshiping a single deity.

It's the Easter Bunny, all over again.

I would honestly be interested in sources for stuff like this.

By the way, there are those in the Christian fold who also say, "One God", denying the Trinity. The problem is that they, much like trinitarians, try much too hard to put hard and fast definitions on the very nature of God. Which is foolish.

Personally prefer the word, "Tri-unity"!!

The Berean
05-09-2014, 02:41 PM
But back to the OP. The idea that the experiment 'created life' is false. They created a hybrid, from existing parts.

It's like as if I took parts from a Chevy and a Ford, and created a mutant car, and then claimed, 'Look, a brand new car!'.

It doesn't fly.

But thanks for this.

Hans
05-10-2014, 04:39 PM
Cars are created from various parts sourced from all over the planet. There's no such thing as a Ford, a Chevy or a mutant car.

Hans
05-10-2014, 04:43 PM
Not according to muslims. Muslims explicitly reject the concept of God being more than One, while Christians insists God is a trinity.

Sheesh, a big misunderstanding on both sides, Hans.

First, Muslims believe in one God: Allah. They are not polytheistic. The three monotheistic religions are Christianity, Islam, and Judaism



Second, Christians do not believe in three gods. There is three persons in The One God.

No, I believe it is a misunderstanding on your part.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_the_Trinity

Hans
05-10-2014, 04:48 PM
The Trinity is just another way that early Christians adapted their faith in order to draw more followers into the fold. Everybody had lots of gods back then, so splitting theirs into three had some appeal to those who couldn't imagine worshiping a single deity.

It's the Easter Bunny, all over again.

Christians use the holy trinity all the time. The Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Muslims do not subscribe to that view, and they actually consider it blasphemy to refer to God as such.

Aristotle
05-10-2014, 04:49 PM
Nope, Hans, you're wrong. It's very basic info that the three monotheistic religion are Islam, Christianity, and Islam

http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/3298/

Aristotle
05-10-2014, 04:49 PM
Christians use the holy trinity all the time. The Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Muslims do not subscribe to that view, and they actually consider it blasphemy to refer to God as such.

Exactly, they are monotheistic.

Hans
05-10-2014, 04:57 PM
Read it, then come back.

Aristotle
05-10-2014, 04:59 PM
okay, Hans,everyone else is wrong, you're right

http://www.onislam.net/english/oimedia/onislamen/images/discover_islam/2009/12/16867.jpg

Aristotle
05-10-2014, 05:01 PM
PBS is wrong, too


Three of the world's major religions -- the monotheist traditions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam -- were all born in the Middle East and are all inextricably linked to one another. Christianity was born from within the Jewish tradition, and Islam developed from both Christianity and Judaism.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/globalconnections/mideast/themes/religion/index.html?pagewanted=all

Hans
05-10-2014, 05:04 PM
I think you and I are talking about 2 different things.
When I said Muslims do not believe in the trinity, I was referring to the Holy Trinity, not the 3 major religions.

The Holy trinity is the belief that God exists in the communion of three distinct persons.
Muslims believe God exists as One absolute oneness, thus ruling out the possibility of another being sharing His sovereignty or nature.

Aristotle
05-10-2014, 05:05 PM
and...what?

Hans
05-10-2014, 05:07 PM
Was that a question, or an observation?

The Berean
05-10-2014, 08:38 PM
I think you and I are talking about 2 different things.
When I said Muslims do not believe in the trinity, I was referring to the Holy Trinity, not the 3 major religions.

The Holy trinity is the belief that God exists in the communion of three distinct persons.
Muslims believe God exists as One absolute oneness, thus ruling out the possibility of another being sharing His sovereignty or nature.

You used two different terms. Christians believe God exists as three persons in One being, thus using the (poor IMO) terminology Trinity. Exactly how this is possible is beyond human understanding.

Aristotle
05-11-2014, 08:52 AM
Was that a question, or an observation?

Both

Hans
05-11-2014, 10:16 PM
You used two different terms. Christians believe God exists as three persons in One being, thus using the (poor IMO) terminology Trinity. Exactly how this is possible is beyond human understanding.

Yes, and Muslims believe that God exists as One. So no Trinity.
So who is wrong, Christians, Muslims or both?

The Berean
05-12-2014, 01:29 AM
Yes, and Muslims believe that God exists as One. So no Trinity.
So who is wrong, Christians, Muslims or both?

"Exactly how this is possible is beyond human understanding."

Buddy, if this is your excuse for not believing in God, it's pretty silly!!!

dancingqueen
05-12-2014, 07:15 AM
"Exactly how this is possible is beyond human understanding."

Buddy, if this is your excuse for not believing in God, it's pretty silly!!!

Isn't the very premise of God "beyond human understanding"?

The Berean
05-12-2014, 07:19 AM
Isn't the very premise of God "beyond human understanding"?

I don't think so. Besides, simple logic tells us that creation had a source.

dancingqueen
05-12-2014, 07:21 AM
I don't think so. Besides, simple logic tells us that creation had a source.

Does "simple logic" really apply when you are talking about things that are not logical in nature?

The Berean
05-12-2014, 07:26 AM
Does "simple logic" really apply when you are talking about things that are not logical in nature?

If man has logic or intelligence at all, where do you suppose it came from??

We are not dogs, living only in a moment, run by instinct. No other creature can even conceive of the possibility of a source for the universe.

Edit to add, you said "in nature" again. God created nature. Nature IS logical!!!!

dancingqueen
05-12-2014, 07:41 AM
If man has logic or intelligence at all, where do you suppose it came from??

We are not dogs, living only in a moment, run by instinct. No other creature can even conceive of the possibility of a source for the universe.

Edit to add, you said "in nature" again. God created nature. Nature IS logical!!!!

Your thoughts are disconnected. I cannot begin to respond appropriately. I will try my best..:


If man has logic or intelligence at all, where do you suppose it came from??
Evolution, Which may or may not have come from an almighty being such as "God" That is not to say God is limited by the same rules of logic though.


We are not dogs, living only in a moment, run by instinct. No other creature can even conceive of the possibility of a source for the universe.
We don't really know that, nor presently can we. But that is a discussion of another topic, What does that have to do with this topic?


you said "in nature" again. God created nature. Nature IS logical!!!!
I did say nature again. I can use the word you know... If I create play-doh, does that make me play-doh?

The Berean
05-12-2014, 08:13 AM
Nature is logical because it came from the same source that gave Man intelligence.

Animals don't think about God, because they were not created to. We were.

You say mans intelligence came from evolution. How?? And why only man??

The Left Sock
05-12-2014, 09:29 AM
"Animals don't think about God, because they were not created to. We were."

I honestly don't think we know that, for sure.

Maybe dogs have a better understanding of God than we do. Just because we don't speak their language, doesn't mean we can make such sweeping assumptions.

The Berean
05-12-2014, 10:16 AM
"Animals don't think about God, because they were not created to. We were."

I honestly don't think we know that, for sure.

Maybe dogs have a better understanding of God than we do. Just because we don't speak their language, doesn't mean we can make such sweeping assumptions.

Strrreeeccccchhhh!!!!

Go ask your dog. Don't come back without an answer.

The Left Sock
05-12-2014, 10:56 AM
Observational evidence:

Who follows the Ten Commandments better?

a) the average dog.
or b) the average human?

Aristotle
05-12-2014, 10:57 AM
Observational evidence:

Who follows the Ten Commandments better?

a) the average dog.
or b) the average human?

Absurd question.

Dogs do not have a conscience or soul, thus the Ten Commandments have no relevance to them.

The Left Sock
05-12-2014, 11:02 AM
God created the animals. God created man.

And by the way, dogs do have a conscience. Whether or not they really have a soul, well.... that's also a relevant question for humans, now isn't it?

The Berean
05-12-2014, 11:03 AM
Observational evidence:

Who follows the Ten Commandments better?

a) the average dog.
or b) the average human?

In the context of the questions here, the first commandment gets blown away completely.

And as Aristotle says, they are irrelevant.. Especially considering that.

Aristotle
05-12-2014, 11:07 AM
but if they did ...

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/ten-commandments-tablets-5548826.jpg

1...dogs come very close to god-worship of man

2 ...dogs do not have opposable thumbs, thus cannot create an image even if they wanted to

3 ...dogs cannot talk, so this one doesn't count

4 ...dogs do not act any differently on Sunday than they do any other day, the Sabbath means nothing to them

5 ...dogs do not even know their father, and use their mother for nourishment. They pay no respect to their mother, and care not what happens to her once they are of age

6 ...dogs kill things

7 ...a dog will have sex with any female dog it wants, it matters little if that dog had a previous litter with another male

8 ...dogs steal when it benefits them: food, another dog's toy, for example

9 ...dogs cannot lie, so we'll give them this one

10 ...dogs constantly covet that which is not theirs


So, seems dogs do worse than many humans, on average

The Left Sock
05-12-2014, 11:07 AM
Gee, and I thought there were ten of them.

I guess in your world, only one of them really counts, huh?

Aristotle
05-12-2014, 11:08 AM
And by the way, dogs do have a conscience.

do go on ...

Aristotle
05-12-2014, 11:09 AM
Gee, and I thought there were ten of them.

I guess in your world, only one of them really counts, huh?


errr...what??

The Berean
05-12-2014, 11:12 AM
Gee, and I thought there were ten of them.

I guess in your world, only one of them really counts, huh?

And what two commandments did Jesus say that all the others hung on??

The Left Sock
05-12-2014, 11:13 AM
That was in response to Berean, before your ridiculous doggie commandment analysis.

Aristotle
05-12-2014, 11:15 AM
That was in response to Berean, before your ridiculous doggie commandment analysis.

I see it was effective :)

The Berean
05-12-2014, 11:18 AM
That was in response to Berean, before your ridiculous doggie commandment analysis.

Rediculous?? Makes it pretty esay to see the difference betwenn animals and man, doesn't it?