DNA is an aggregation of molecules. Bits and pieces of DNA are not alive. When assembled in the proper sequence, they are the building blocks of life. So it would appear that assembling DNA in the proper order is the process of creating life. And man has achieved this.
I've gto to stop ya here freeeee. Placing a different genome into an already alive bacteria, might be man-made speciation, but it is in no way the creation of life.
(aside: Ever wonder who created those building blocks?)
Ignoring the obvious discussion of duality of existence you have opened for now, consider this: if I used preserved human parts to create a machine that used preserved human parts to make duplicates of itself, you would not say those machines were "created life", would you?
Then, does it not follow that there must exist some other quality or attribute that things that we agree are "life" must posses, other than mobility and the ability to create copies of itself?
No we have not. We have rearranged DNA, but we have not created new DNA strand. We have also not made new DNA from simple molecules either. However that is not the point. Even then, it is doubtful that DNA is itself the source of life. There is no difference between a live cell's DNA and the same cells DNA one minute after death.
First off man doesn't create. DNA is alive otherwise nothing would come of it. Life does not come from something that is dead.
When assembled in the proper sequence, they are the building blocks of life. So it would appear that assembling DNA in the proper order is the process of creating life. And man has achieved this.
DNA is a building block of what we are. The sequence is incredibly sophisticated. Man still doesn't understand this sequence and in unable to replicate it. Man has NOT achieved this. So you are wrong that man can create life. Man cannot create life.