Originally posted by resistor
A brilliant scientist discovers how to take dirt and create life from it. Flushed with pride he now shouts to all who will listen how he has become a god.

He cries out to the very Creator himself, ‘I am your equal!”.

A bit nonplussed, God allows the scientist to prove his claim.

“Ok”, says the scientist, “first I take this dirt here…”

“Hold it”, says God, “Get your own dirt.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not to throw too much cold water on things, but I would love to see the details on how this RNA was ‘created’. I’m thinking that it’s probably just really smart kids playing with really cool building blocks.

Still,

Science rocks!

where did god get his dirt?..cant make things from nothing remember..

Originally posted by alienesque
where did god get his dirt?..cant make things from nothing remember..

God made it/created it from nothing. That was the idea of the joke. Even though we can take resources and makes something out of it, we cannot create a resource. That would be something God does.

Originally posted by dbates

Scientists have pinned it down to roughly this:
...perhaps in a primordial tidal soup or maybe with help of volcanoes or possibly at the bottom of the sea or between the mica sheets

Sounds like they have it really pinned down to an exact science .

"He buddy, how do I get to the Department of Motor Vehicles from here?"

"Turn left, or maybe just go straight for 2 miles, or possibly just drive to another town, or it might just be in between your house and your neighbor's."

Those would be the words of an total layman of a writer... not a scientist.

If you asked the scientists how it works, they'd give you quite a definitive answer.
Alas, the scientists didn't write the article... someone with little to no scientific comprehension did.

Originally posted by johnsky
Those would be the words of an total layman of a writer... not a scientist.

If you asked the scientists how it works, they'd give you quite a definitive answer.
Alas, the scientists didn't write the article... someone with little to no scientific comprehension did.

Here's the problem, when you have data, you have the people who asks "what does it mean?" At that point, either the scientist, reporter, layman, etc. gives their understanding of what's going on. If I handed my boss a bunch of data, s/he'd likely say, "And?" The last page(s) of my notebook has a checklist for me to complete basically saying "These tests passed, therefore this product should work". It doesn't always work however, which is why there is a Customer Service line. I believe the more a person understands science, the less definitive of an answer they'd make...not because they don't know the laws but because laws become less absolute in function...especially in biochemisty. If it weren't, more than likely the job would be replaced by machines.

[edit on 12-1-2009 by saint4God]

Originally posted by ohioriver
Wow Those scientists must have lots of time on their hands. Did they cure cancer already? Or maybe they have extra time on their hands because they did away with all illnesses. In my opinion all scientists should work on cures for diseases, then when they find the answer to that,then and only then should they be allowed to waste resources on their pet projects!

Science should have many avenues to pursue,many of the world greatest scientific achievements were achieved by a different means than what was intentionally planned...i cant think of anything worse as someone saying follow this path and forget the others that may interlink along the way.

[edit on 12-1-2009 by Solomons]

Originally posted by Averysmallfoxx
As simple as it sounds, this type of research is dangerously close to playing god, and as stem cell research is banned, I'm assuming this should be somewhat taboo in that same sense. Hate to be the pessimist here but I think this is a bad concept to be mastering or even studying with the intent to harness (or manipulate) the benefits in profitable ways...Theres a reason humans arent GOD as he/she is described by most religions and I think I'd rather like to keep it that way...

It's only banned because they fear us figuring out how we were really created. Don't you see...The gods in the bible were another life form far more intelligent than us basically doing what these scientist did.
However they did the experiement with apes and their own dna and created us.
Now we are possibly close to doing the same.
Once we figure out how to do it we would probably eventually if we smartened up would realize this is how we were created because we would have our own experiements as living proof.

= More proof than total eveolution, and more proof than bible creationism.

Like a mix of both but true.

that is a great question to ask.... each answer has dire implications for religions far and wide.

Is God giving us a clue to how things started?

Have we found out how things accidentally began?

Are we playing gods?

Or does God believe now we can handle and understand how it all started?

Either way you cut it.... it's pretty tasty.
Can't wait to see what comes from this
Thank you for the great find!

Got to love how angry this makes people. Science makes another leap and instead of being happy, people either make excuses about how it doesn't mean anything, or critique the results like they have any business discussing it.

Each new discovery backs you guys further into a corner.

Originally posted by Solomons

Originally posted by ohioriver
Wow Those scientists must have lots of time on their hands. Did they cure cancer already? Or maybe they have extra time on their hands because they did away with all illnesses. In my opinion all scientists should work on cures for diseases, then when they find the answer to that,then and only then should they be allowed to waste resources on their pet projects!

Science should have many avenues to pursue,many of the world greatest scientific achievements were achieved by a different means than what was intentionally planned...i cant think of anything worse as someone saying follow this path and forget the others that may interlink along the way.

[edit on 12-1-2009 by Solomons]

most of the time, what ever astonishing "New Discovery/Breakthrough" has been found... it was found by ACCIDENT.
Stumbled across something...
Something reacted differently than expected.
So in turn..... focusing on one thing and the same thing over and over, may potentially be counter productive for the good of man kind???

Who knows what some some genius in a lab will stumble across next??

I think they are trying to prove that 'The Gods'/''creators'

Were just like us(always wanting to learn more) and seeded a planet to see what happens. sometimes intervening.

If they make us live for only 100years maximum. Then they can observe us faster.

[edit on 12-1-2009 by MR BOB]

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
Great point, SkyFloating. Of course, no one can prove there is no God, and that has never been the point. With the big creationist push lately, it's more about being able to keep evolution and science in schools instead of lopping off 100 years of progress and teaching creationism again.

All this does is serve the purpose of showing how life can begin on its own without a creator.

Actually, my friend, there was a creator involved. Someone created the environment for the experiment and someone added the compounds to that environment. Without a "creator" there would have been no experiment at all.

Either way IF there is a GOD,he's not willing to just hand out his trade secrets to his creatures apparently, you might speculate that maybe we aren't ready for them, who knows. If we aren't ready yet how do we get ready? develop? Learn? Isn't that what science is for? If there is not a god then it's not like we are doing something wrong by learning where we came from or at least learn how it might have been possible...