It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Life As We Know It Nearly Created in Lab

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   

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..




posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   

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.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   

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.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   

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]



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   

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]



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 01:07 PM
link   

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.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by 44drake44
 


Perhaps it wasn't Adam and Eve

Maybe is was Atom and EVE (Extraterrestrial Voluntary Enhancement)

Now its our turn - thus giving the term multi-verse



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
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!



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   
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.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:19 PM
link   

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??



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:34 PM
link   
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]



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by saint4God
 


I know this is going to be off topic so forgive me mods but umm, its funny that you should mention Edison, what with the whole AC/DC wars he had with Tesla (the forgotten founder of Radio and Father of AC and all modern current using applications)....Edison VS Tesla



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:37 PM
link   
how does this have to do with life being created in a lab? they made an artificial enzyme not a human?



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:38 PM
link   

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.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Averysmallfoxx
... its funny that you should mention Edison, what with the whole AC/DC wars he had with Tesla (the forgotten founder of Radio and Father of AC and all modern current using applications)....Edison VS Tesla


Good call. It is on topic because it shows how science/scientists/science companies will jump the gun in order to get rights and investors into their work. Edison had JP Morgan and other backing him. It's rare these days you'll hear of a solo scientist doing science for science's sake.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by fnIrish
 


You completely missed the point...


Yes, there was a creator for this experiment. It does, however, give clues to how life could have started without one.

Are we on the same page yet, or do I need to clarify again?



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by fnIrish
 


You completely missed the point...


Yes, there was a creator for this experiment. It does, however, give clues to how life could have started without one.

Are we on the same page yet, or do I need to clarify again?


But where did the chemicals and compounds comefrom?

they may be remenants of a steller event, but where did all of that come from.

even if you look at where everything is made, if you keep going back, where do you get?



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by MR BOB
 


You get God? Where did the God come from?



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by fnIrish
 


You completely missed the point...


Yes, there was a creator for this experiment. It does, however, give clues to how life could have started without one.

Are we on the same page yet, or do I need to clarify again?




Unfortunately, we aren't on the same page yet because I still believe in a creator - a sigularity that began it all. It doesn't sound like you do. The good news is that only one of us can be wrong. Either way, cheers to ya! I like your avatar!



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   
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...



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join