Posted on 03/04/2009 12:43:07 PM PST by Free ThinkerNY
Feb. 27, 2009 -- When NASA began thinking about missions to look for life beyond Earth, it realized it had a problem: how to recognize life if it were found.
Scientists came up with a definition for life -- a self-sustaining chemical system capable of Darwinian evolution -- but remained understandably fuzzy on the details.
It is still not known how life on Earth took hold, what happened to a bunch of chemicals that made them capable of supporting a metabolism, replicating and evolution. But a new field of science, called synthetic biology, is aiming to find out.
One of the most promising developments lies in a beaker of water inside a Florida laboratory. It's an experiment called AEGIS -- an acronym for Artificially Expanded Genetic Information System. Its creator, Steve Benner, says it is the first synthetic genetic system capable of Darwinian evolution.
(Excerpt) Read more at dsc.discovery.com ...
Being unsophisticated in matters scientific, what you say sounds reasonable to me. So far, I think, this discussion has principally illustrated that, despite how much we know, we can't even describe (define) life in an adequate fashion.
Now life is defined, not by the creator of life but by the enemy of the Author of Life, per their definintion.
I have a definition of life.....The biochemical expression and/or supernatural expression of the genetic code.
If successful, they will only prove life had a creator. They kick against the pricks, professing themselves to wise they have become fools, vain in their own conceits, worshiping the creation more than the creator.
In the future, code can be inserted that will "ping" newly evolved humans on other planets to their real origin...
LOLOL! Thanks for the ping!
“Oh, the irony......”Yep.
The committed evo-atheist has no answer to that question. If they can’t tell you where the intelligent scientist came from, their entire house of cards comes tumbling down. Otherwise it would be an infinite regress. Your point demonstrates precisely and elegantly why the only logical conclusion is that there is an uncreated Designer (God) who created everything. Your hardcore evo-atheist can never accept that fact because it interferes with their debased lifestyles. They try to spread their intellectual/theological impurities to the rest of us but we’re wise to their tricks.
ID as a belief has absolutely nothing to do with biotech labs and very transparently everything to do with claiming the discovery of evidence of a “design”...which can be conveniently claimed of ANYTHING observed...complex sodium potassium pumps-—a HA...too complicated to occur naturally.....thusly proving that there MUST BE a “Designer”........that being God, not a lab geek......so Creationism can be taught in public schools as a “science” equal to actual scientific theories........and I will not be duped by the “it could be in a lab too” argument.
Unless you think it equally plausible that all life on earth exists in a petri dish in my incubator in my lab....of course, that would make me, a lowly human, your God.
LOL! I find little reason to read past your opening strawman.
Your silly use of "all" and "anything" and so on -- that's just you being as unscientific as the most ardent 6-day creationist.
What biotech labs mean -- not to mention the topic of this article -- is that ID is a valid scientific hypothesis. (I predict that you will need to look up valid, as it pertains to hypotheses)
and I will not be duped by the “it could be in a lab too” argument.
You seem to have been duped, nevertheless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.