[P8riot]

Even if "life" was created in the lab, it would only vindicate those of us that believe that intelligence is required for its creation.

Now if they left some primordial soup on the counter and it sprang to life, that would be a different story.

[freedumb2003]

Even if "life" was created in the lab, it would only vindicate those of us that believe that intelligence is required for its creation.

Uh, no. They simulated conditions from 4 billion years ago. To simulate requires intelligence. It is like saying that it requires intelligence to demonstrate gravity, since an intelligent entity dropped a ball.

Now if they left some primordial soup on the counter and it sprang to life, that would be a different story.

So to prove geological epochs, they need to build a planet amnd observe it for a few billion years?

[Catphish]

Not really, if they demonstrate, in addition, that the chemical reactions that occurred in the lab occur in nature then it proves the exact opposite.

Analogously, if a scientist creates lightning in a lab, as long as he shows the same conditions occur in the atmosphere he has demonstrated that lightning occurs naturally, as opposed to say Zeus shooting down bolts of electricity to the earth.

[muawiyah]

If you simply leave out the RNA step and place water under the sort of pressure you might have at the core of a planet, you get double-helix water molecules (technically an ice) remarkably similar to DNA. (SEE: http://www.geotimes.org/apr07/article.html?id=nn_ice.html )

There's no reason life has to jump through the DNA hoops and learn how to behave like a trained puppy when it's possible that it's just something that takes advantage of water.

[Secret Agent Man]

No kidding. Look at how much thought, effort, time and money has been spent by us to create life as we know it. All of this has INTELLIGENCE behind it. Not as great as God’s but it still is a level of intelligence. It just doesn’t happen on its own.

Thank you scientists for proving our point.