Freethought & Rationalism Archive

JohnV · 10-30-2002, 06:21 AM

There's a couple reasons that theists aren't howling over this.

1) Most articles on it started out by saying that the virus was made from scratch using chemicals commonly available by mail order. Some articles such as <a href="http://www.gyre.org/news/cache/2323" target="_blank">this one</a> went on to say:

"Scientists reported yesterday that they had constructed a virus from scratch for the first time, synthesizing a live polio virus from chemicals and publicly available genetic information.

The work, conducted by scientists at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, was financed by the Pentagon as part of a program to develop biowarfare countermeasures. The scientists constructed the virus using its genome sequence, which is available on the Internet, as their blueprint and genetic material from one of the many companies that sell made-to-order DNA."

So, they took genetic material and re-arranged it according to a known pattern. Few people would consider this as making life "from scratch."

2) If humans (presumably intelligent) did make life from scratch, what difference does it make anyway? This would be intelligent design, not abiogenesis.

phlebas · 10-30-2002, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tercel:
<strong>I suppose it's theoretically possible that a humanly created being might not have a "soul" (In which case I believe it would be obvious that there was a problem, ie I would expect them to be mentally incapacitated)... but that would significantly lower my opinion of God - if he's a quarter of the super-powerful being he's supposed to be, I'm sure he's quite capable of combining a soul with a newly created body especially given that he does it all the time whenever anyone's born...</strong>

So, how do you tell if someone has a soul or not? Surely being mentally incapacitated isn't the only litmus test.

But that's beside the point, really. We're not talking about whether we can grow humans in labs -- the point is that scientists have now created life from non-living substances. It's a very simple form of life, but we're still new at this.

Since one of the more tiresome creationist complaints is that life cannot come from lifelessness, this should be a big blow to them, forcing them to redefine what they mean by "life."

My original point was that no matter how complex a lab-made lifeform is, the creationists will continue to weasel out of acknowledging it with their vague, untestable claims about a soul.

So -- tell us how to judge whether something has a soul, and we'll get to work creating it in a lab.

Psycho Economist · 10-31-2002, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jankin:
<strong>Soul? What's that? Show me one. I presume you mean something that can be differentiated from mind? If so, it must be that imaginary organ that has never been discovered in surgery, nor found missing in autopsy, but has been asserted loudly to exist by some, which is afflicted by another imaginary disease called "sin," for which a set of social and economic parasites claim to have the only effective treatment and cure, i.e. group ritual psychotherapy practiced without a medical license or malpractice insurance, called "salvation," which must be purchased and paid for while alive but whose efficacy and safety can only be demonstrated after death, from which state we have had no credible reports as to the truth or falsity of these claims.</strong>

<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

I hope you knew I was being sarcastic... but that the Senator I was lampooning was not.

Jack · 11-05-2002, 10:50 PM

Well, now we know the answer to the Fermi Paradox.

Jack

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-30-2002, 06:21 AM	#21
JohnV Banned Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: . Posts: 132	There's a couple reasons that theists aren't howling over this. 1) Most articles on it started out by saying that the virus was made from scratch using chemicals commonly available by mail order. Some articles such as <a href="http://www.gyre.org/news/cache/2323" target="_blank">this one</a> went on to say: "Scientists reported yesterday that they had constructed a virus from scratch for the first time, synthesizing a live polio virus from chemicals and publicly available genetic information. The work, conducted by scientists at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, was financed by the Pentagon as part of a program to develop biowarfare countermeasures. The scientists constructed the virus using its genome sequence, which is available on the Internet, as their blueprint and genetic material from one of the many companies that sell made-to-order DNA." So, they took genetic material and re-arranged it according to a known pattern. Few people would consider this as making life "from scratch." 2) If humans (presumably intelligent) did make life from scratch, what difference does it make anyway? This would be intelligent design, not abiogenesis.

11-05-2002, 10:50 PM	#24
Jack Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Anaheim, CA, USA Posts: 126	Well, now we know the answer to the Fermi Paradox. Jack

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.