They're Finally Trying to do it!

And if they CANNOT create life? That would
have to mean that for life to have happened without GOD would be TOTALLY ridiculous.
Already scientists have been attempting to
CREATE another species by radiating fruit-flies.
That hasn't happened either with ALL their
diligence.

Do scientists lack the diligence of Nature? Seems
to me that Nature doesn't have a manipulative
thought for anything...

 

Way to jump to conclusions A_Christian. If they couldn't create life in this attempt, it could be the result of many things.

I think you lack the facts on what the scientists are actually doing.

 

But Nature can establish life even though it
attempts NOTHING...

 

Gene Wilder already did this in Mel Brooks' Young Frankenstein.

"It's pronounced FRAHNK-en-steen!"

 

Well when you see a tree doing lab science, you let me know.

 

If we are ever successful in this endeavor it will only prove that people can be really clever. Apart from that, one needs to demonstrate natural conditions for something like this to occur in order to substantiate abiogenesis. I don't think that will happen any time soon.

 

I agree with Travelsong. In fact, that was the point I repeatedly tried to make under the "abiogenesis" thread.

To Christians who don't believe that man will ever create life, I'd say... don't bet on it. Man can be pretty clever, and I believe it may be possible for man to engineer a living organism someday. But, I do not think they will ever be able to demonstrate that life can arise under truely naturalistic conditions. I think the origin-of-life experiments will continue to illustrate the "brick wall" that naturalists pretend does not exist.

 

If a scientist sets out to create "life" - how do we know if he succeeded? What does he have to create to qualify that as "life"?

 

Imogene Coca

 

A number of evolutionists have tried to divorce abiogenesis from evolution. I would refer them to an article in the May 28 BMC Evolutionary Biology (http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcevolbiol/)

which has an article about abiogenesis -- for they (silly of them!) actually consider that evolution involves abiogenesis as well...

 

EF Well, (a) of course life has to start if it is to evolve! But we could also posit that (b) life could have arisen and not evolved. This creates an interesting philosophical paradox. Those who try to divorce abiogenesis from evolution argue that option (b) is at least a viable possibility and creationists who choose option (a) must also consider evolution a real possibility. This is true even if only arguing scenarios. At any rate, I think the whole abiogenesis debate is much ado about nothing. Both 'sides' know that life exists and both 'sides' agree it evolved. We debate limits of evolution.
As far as humans creating life in the lab, creationists always have an out. They will merely assert that it took intelligence to create the life. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I really don't find the abiogenesis argument compelling for either side.