Life As We Know It Nearly Created in Lab

Get the ingredients together, put them in a box, and I would be the first person in line to buy one of these "World Kits"!

Horton hears a Who!! Anyone remember that animated movie!? Hmmmmmmmm Sounds like that movie was suppose to have a meaning behind it.

Humans are inching closer and closer to becoming 'godlike' in their own right.

The old story is that God made humanity in His image - the truth is finally starting to come out, that humanity created God in their image

Oh, and as for any religious ramifications, I think we can count on the 'believers' to dismiss this new development out of hand just like they do every other scientific advancement that serves to debunk their ancient dogmas.

I can picture the Billy Mays infomercial now, "have your credit card ready" and all "no COD'S please" hurry and get yours before supplies run out This concept is SOOO coool!!! I love science!!!

RNA for those interested.
nobelprize.org...
www.visionlearning.com...



DNA.



[edit on 12-1-2009 by alyosha1981]

What I want to know it: How long before we can start eating it?

RNA synthesizes proteins from raw material. Give it raw material, RNA will synthesize with it.

DNA is a blueprint for the RNA to read so it knows what to synthesize with the raw material.

In this laboratory we have RNA enzymes replicating what they can replicate without having a blueprint in the form of DNA. So what do they synthesize when they dont have any outside blueprints? Themselves.

The scientists are surprised that these RNA enzymes are able to replicate without the aid of other organelles and cellular structures? I'm not. RNA is a complex chemical compound that performs a certain action when raw material is present and its either "given the message" to do something with it, or "no longer barred" from doing something with it. How does the cell communicate this message? Possibly with hormones or other enzymes.

These molecules aren't competing. They're just using up the raw material before the other ones do. Of course one type will be more prevalent.

This whole thing really doesn't impress me. I mean I'm glad for them. I suppose its some kind of big step for mankind but it is a far cry from life of any sort. Molecules that replicate? Sounds like a complex chemical reaction left unchecked. Like a chain reaction. Or cancer.

Now, if they stick a single strand of DNA in the mix and the RNA goes and replicates that...

Note: I'm no scientist. I could be wrong somewhere above in what I've written. But my understanding of the situation has left me unimpressed. Except for the last part that is.

reply to post by resistor

---

Err no I didn't agree. Perception is very important. That's is where your knowledge and beliefs stem from.

Also, there is no first cause. It just is.

reply to post by fnIrish

---

Very well said. This is the bottom line though. What are the odds? Odds easily have this and much more if you believe there are infinite universes. Otherwise you can choose to believe that perhaps some higher power has us here for a purpose. In which case I see no reason for such a power to necessarily be omnipotent or omniscient.

......we are always told by the religious that something cannot come from nothing...thats their main critic of evolution (even though it has nothing to do with evolution)..which is odd...because its ONLY the religious that claim that something CAN come from nothing...not 'evolutionists'...science does not claim this...it admits it doesnt know where and how everything started...only the religious are that arrogant.

so...why do the religious disagree with their own theories?....the religious claim that something cannot come from nothing..they laugh at science for supposedly claiming it can (something that science doesnt actually do but nevermind)...they then claim that something CAN come from nothing...as youve just done..!!!

so...two questions....

1..can something come from nothing or not?
2..how do the religious manage to trick themselves to such a degree that they dont even agree with their own theories..without giving themselves a headache?

reply to post by alyosha1981

---

FRANCIS CRICK, the Nobel Prize-winning father of modern genetics, was under the influence of LSD when he first deduced the double-helix structure of DNA...

According to Terence McKenna, he was accessing a vast database stored within our Junk DNA, that contains information, placed there by our creators, and theirs and so on.

Basically, our DNA is some sort of Encyclopedia Galactica and can be accessed with certain substances (some also placed here on Earth for this purpose, as keys to these vast interactive archives).

Apparently we access them each night.

I'm glad you brought this up because I was thinking it but didn't have a good way of backing it up. Currently there is scientific debate as to whether viruses are alive or not. Yes they replicate, but do they go through any kind of ingestion, growth, respiration... (that kind of thing). The idea of creating viruses isn't a new one and can recommend many a' sci-fi shows & movies that give examples. I believe a previous poster who mentioned the Law of Unintended Consequences has it right and we all should keep that in mind with anything new.

There is a misconception that Christians will hate the idea merely because we believe God's authority is usurped. The truth is no matter what we do, God is still in charge. My worry, religiously, is that given our track-record of messing things up, that this could be a compounding problem beginning with ethics and ending with consequences for both the 'creator' and 'createe' lifeforms. If a person have a love for science so deep that the consequences be disregarded, then surely that could lead to a dangerous outcome.

[edit on 13-1-2009 by saint4God]

I am a Christian. Grrr. I am so angry. I want to...like...hit something...like a keyboard or my calculator. So mad that scientists like myself are using science to try new things. How dare they. So mad, so mad.

Here's the thing, scientifically it's called 'competition', but in the human world competing is a conscious action. These molecules aren't doing anything conscious, there's no 'decision making ability', no intelligence...but it certainly sounds that way when a scientist says competition.



Sounds right to me. You've made very good points, don't sell yourself short. You don't have to be a scientist to understand the mechanism and many times being a scientists means being wrong. Show me a scientist who claims s/he's never wrong and I'll show you a scientist incapable of learning.

[edit on 13-1-2009 by saint4God]

reply to post by saint4God

---

Well put Saint. I find the gentlemen's observations quite valid...makes sense. I on the other hand sense this is going torwards very large rammifications on some level in the future. For now its just harmless research and observation but dont some badly written zombie movies start out with stuff like this?

reply to post by Scramjet76

---

The universe is only infanint if you are alive..

What created us "the thing" was the not the same as the "way/tool" we was or wasnt!..

But being alive is key!! ; ) then yes everything is indeed possible. "even death and live"..

found that out usin math! lol

had to edit:

What we know or word.. is Infinity, one can only see infinity "or the loop" if one is alive.. to see it..

Now being alive is not about after life or befor life its just being here that matters.. can we recreate that what can see loops? Yes we can "called babies" "self replication"..

Now to do it lab style from "nothing" we dont know how to do that "YET" but we will...

So we are a step closer to creating a bug.. woohoopde doo

Now wat? shall we create a universe?

[edit on 13-1-2009 by theresult]

This is interesting, but we must remember the adverb--"Nearly."
We nearly created life in a laboratory, but we still provided the initial spark. The amazing thing is that we gave it nothing else, yet it still managed to survive and replicate....

But, as far as creating life in a laboratory--why, that in itself is old news...which makes me wonder about all the comments about life evolving in this lab enviroment to the point of intelligent life that would then believe we were "gods"?

Whew! Come on! We wouldn't be here long enough for life to evolve to "intelligence"...besides, there are so many enviromental factors that shaped humans rise....It's not like you plant an evolutionary seed, and every time humans would pop up!

But I know you guys were just joking around, and it is a thought-provoking subject.