REASON Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 Talking to rude elitists who think they know something others do not is not my thing. You mean like Rush Limbaugh? (Sorry INow. I won't take this any further.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted July 21, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 How are you getting along with the life you made in the kitchen? Does it require a separate bathroom? When does it start kindergarten? Do you think it will grow up to be the smartest member of the family? Like I said, questor, your lack of knowledge and your misunderstanding of this topic is apparent to nearly everyone but you. Also, Reason... No worries. It was more than appropriate. It's amazing how far people will go to avoid understanding how the universe really works and to try holding on to their preconceived biases with personal attacks and logical fallacies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 We do. Nope. See below. I think it will become plainly obvious how misinformed/uninformed you truly are on this: Here's a good overview: Primordial Soup's On: Scientists Repeat Evolution's Most Famous Experiment: Scientific American Also, this is a must for anyone truly interested: The Harbinger. My Scientific Discussions of Evolution for the Pope and His Scientists You can also make life in your own kitchen. Call Sigma Chemical Co. at 800-325-3010 and order 1 bottle of catalog number M 7145 and one bottle of R 7131 amino acids solutions (you need both to get all the amino acids http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/sigma/formulation/M5550for.pdf). They will cost you about $40 plus shipping for both. Empty the bottles into a fying pan, turn the heat on low and heat until all the water is evaporated. Then heat for 15-60 minutes. Add water. You will have protocells in the solution. Here is more on one type of protocell: SpringerLink - Journal Article As per irreducible complexity, that is supposed to be a falsification of natural selection according to ID, but it has been shown that Behe used a strawman version of natural selection and that natural selection can produce any complex biological structure A classification of possible routes of Darwinian evolution. New Way To Think About Earth's First Cells And, just in case you're too lazy to read all of the above, or you feel the need to attack someone for relying on YouTube, here's more fodder for your falsehoods. :eek: YouTube - 3 -- The Origin of Life made easy As much as it pains me to tell you this, questor, your version of the truth is not really an accurate one, as should be abundantly clear by now if you were truly paying attention to the information which has been shared. :( No one has created life in a lab as of yet. Amino acids are the building blocks of life. You are misrepresenting the articles Inow. where does it claim they can create life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted July 21, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 Define "life" for us all, then, Thunderbird. There is really no meaningful distinction between life and non-life.It's not a binary state.It's a continuum, and we've repeated multiple steps along that continuum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 Not amazing Inow, it's pretty much a run of the mill, normal stance for humans. It's much easier to feel superior if there isn't any real effort involved. It's easier to assume you are some how in possession of the real truth and there by are superior to everyone else by allowing others to tell you that you are than it is to seek out and learn it the hard way. I've spent my life looking the hard way and it is far more satisfying than simply sitting back and listening to how good you are and how bad everyone else is over and over again. Religion is the easy way to feel superior to all the heathens and the fight for your own version of reality becomes a life or death struggle, no holds barred and winning by any means necessary is the way the battle is fought. I fear triumph will go to the participant with the least moral fiber, if so we are in trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 Define "life" for us all, then, Thunderbird. There is really no meaningful distinction between life and non-life.It's not a binary state.It's a continuum, and we've repeated multiple steps along that continuum.Autopoiesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 Define "life" for us all, then, Thunderbird. There is really no meaningful distinction between life and non-life.It's not a binary state.It's a continuum, and we've repeated multiple steps along that continuum.My above post is the best definition of life we have in biology thus far. More to the point however and simply put. No one as yet has claimed or exclaimed "its alive" in any lab anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted July 21, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 My above post is the best definition of life we have in biology thus far. More to the point however and simply put. No one as yet has claimed or exclaimed "its alive" in any lab anywhere. The myopia of the challenges in this thread are bewildering. By the definition you shared, we very much have accomplished reproducing the steps. Either way, the "definition" you shared relates more to early theories on the organization of thought. In the context of abiogenesis (life from non-life), the definition I've seen most commonly used in biological circles is that something alive must have all four of the following characteristics: 1. Metabolism (both anabolism and catabolism)2. Response to stimuli3. Growth4. Reproduction I've read that many researchers in the abiogenesis field have added a fifth characteristic: 5. RNA/DNA directed protein synthesis Further, some other researchers even add a sixth characteristic for their purposes: 6. Has a lipid bilayer membrane. The presentations I've shared meet those criteria, and the challenge really is finding a clear and consistent way of categorically separating the living thing from it's environment, which your term Thunderbird, noticably does not. Are you expecting them to dump some sugar and poprocks into a soda can and generate a flying squirrel? Give me a break. Stop with the myopic challenges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REASON Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 No one as yet has claimed or exclaimed "its alive" in any lab anywhere. Oh yeah? Well, give it a billion years or so. :eek: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 Whether or not life has been made in the lab depends on what you mean by or how you define life. If life is defined as a self replicating system guided by Darwinian natural selection then yes, life has been made in the lab. If you mean have actual living cells been made completely from scratch in a way that is a reasonable facsimile of the natural world then no it hasn't. The main problem with knowing how to make life from scratch and making it is time. Most research grants don't last for millenia. Using artificial means to speed the process up negates the experiment completely. Galapagos 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 Oh yeah? Well, give it a billion years or so. :eek:The simple fact here is Inow is referring to articles that he claims show that we can create life, when the scientist that are doing experiments are not claiming that.Life is a process that is more than the sum of its parts. yes we can fuse parts and we can even do experiments that recreate certain process, but we do not know all the steps of first origins of how the process started. We are at work at it but nothing yet has been created that is called life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galapagos Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 The Harbinger. My Scientific Discussions of Evolution for the Pope and His ScientistsReps to you for this post once I spread it around a bit, I especially enjoyed the S. Fox article. Thank you iNow. :eek: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REASON Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 The simple fact here is Inow is referring to articles that he claims show that we can create life, when the scientist that are doing experiments are not claiming that.Life is a process that is more than the sum of its parts. yes we can fuse parts and we can even do experiments that recreate certain process, but we do not know all the steps of first origins of how the process started. We are at work at it but nothing yet has been created that is called life. I'm not really arguing against your point. But do you believe that despite our ability to generate "life" in a laboratory, we have accumulated enough evidence to support the theory of Abiogenesis, or something along those lines? Essentially, would you agree that there is enough evidence to support the idea that life has come about naturally on this planet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 I'm not really arguing against your point. But do you believe that despite our ability to generate "life" in a laboratory, we have accumulated enough evidence to support the theory of Abiogenesis, or something along those lines? Essentially, would you agree that there is enough evidence to support the idea that life has come about naturally on this planet? Yes, It came about naturally, once the conditions were optimal, I would imagine it came about rather suddenly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrotex Posted July 21, 2008 Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 My above post is the best definition of life we have in biology thus far. More to the point however and simply put.No one as yet has claimed or exclaimed "its alive" in any lab anywhere. What the links provided actually claimed is that they have created "cells" from scratch. The cells comprised a lipid cell wall enclosing a short strand of either RNA or DNA. The cells also showed signs of very simple reactivity. Certainly nowhere near a modern cell structure, but also just as certainly, "close". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted July 21, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2008 The Harbinger. My Scientific Discussions of Evolution for the Pope and His ScientistsReps to you for this post once I spread it around a bit, I especially enjoyed the S. Fox article. Thank you iNow. :) Yeah, that's one of the best I've seen. I saw it shared a while back when a biologist was spanking a creationist at another forum, and I quickly added it to my arsenal. :) Galapagos 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted July 27, 2008 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2008 Via Afarensis: YouTube - Finding Lucy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPit_Mca8dM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.