Man one step closer to God?

[Exalt]

I'm not sure how that matters to this thread still.

it doesn't, not sure how your comment mattered either though

back on topic: RNA DNA AND AIDS

[HandofDeath]

Yes, by developing a self-propagating RNA species we are one step closer to having the power to create, but let's think about this realistically. What those scientists created, was the most fundamentally basic unit of biology (the ancestral precursor to an organism which can undergo recombinance sexually in order to allow for evolution and adaptation). For it to actually become anything recognizable as what we would call "living" would take billions of years and an extraordinary amount of luck -- or a lot of cheating on the part of the scientists in order for it to mimic life. Although cool, this really isn't as controversial or exciting as some make it out to be.

Like the article says, the discovery is only useful in terms of genetic modeling -- ultimately, so that we can better understand how gene reproduction and selection occurs.

Sigh -- journalists are sensationalizing science once again.

Edit: How annoying, my college doesn't have a subscription to that magazine's online content, so I can't actually view the publication itself.

[HandofDeath]

Oh, and in response to Izor and whoever else he quoted:

Most biologists would surmise that RNA spontaneously formed by atoms and molecules bumping into each other. The Miller-Urey experiment (Source; Wikipedia, though I learned about this originally in my Bio and O.Chem classes) did such a thing, where the researchers imitated the atmospheric conditions thought to be present during the beginning of life, and surprisingly, multiple organic molecules (molecules normally only produced by living organisms) were found in the reaction apparatus after the experiment. The astounding thing is that recent analysis shows that many amino acids were among the organic molecules found -- AAs are the building blocks of proteins.

Moreover, the Wikipedia page goes on to describe subsequent experiments, including one involving the combination of hydrogen cyanide and ammonia (molecules which can be easily present in Earth's atmosphere) to produce one of the building blocks of RNA and DNA, adenine. Other experiments experienced success creating other RNA and DNA precursor molecules as well.

I don't remember what it is exactly offhand, but like you said, the chances of something happening like these are astronomical. But, after you consider the scope of things -- that all of the molecules in the world are constantly smashing into each other, and that they had a VERY long time to be doing that -- the chances are not as much astronomical as they are somewhat likely.

So, there you have it -- the chemical origin of life.

Edit: Oh yeah, and to debunk all you "well think of the CHANCES of this happening, it must have been impossible, there MUST be a God!", to you I say -- not so fast, Samantha. We cannot cognitively conceive of the chances involved here, so how we FEEL about how possible or impossible this theory may be is irrelevant. What DOES matter is the science behind it and the fact that it is logically possible. No amount of feeling or emotion can derail the truth -- that this theory is much more plausible than anything religious quack science has come up with.

Yes, I know that much of what I'm debating here seems to suggest that the only remaining sensible ideology is nihilism. Well, deal with it.

Double Edit: And yes, I *am* suggesting that life was very, very lucky to originate. That makes perfect sense to me. My consciousness, my sense of self, would be utterly different if any of the other millions of sperm my dad ejaculated became me. My life itself is EXTREMELY lucky. Everything that has occurred in my life to bring me to this point has been the result of incredible fortune. If you deny that there was luck involved in the entire process, I'd probably call you crazy.

[HandofDeath]

You dont even know that the universe is 'expanding'. Thats just another theory.

Yep, the progression of light frequency from other stars indicating red shift from the Doppler effect, is COMPLETELY THEORETICAL. Laughable..

The big bang must make a lot of sense to people that cant understand what caused it! Put 2 big heaps of nothing together and it goes boom!

There are complicated energetics and quantum mechanics involved. If you took the time to understand them, you wouldn't be making such a myopic statement.

[HandofDeath]

For instance if I were to ask you if since the big bang created elements such as hydrogen and helium, where all the denser elements come from and how something as complex as DNA came to be from nothing, you wouldnt have an answer off the top of your head. It's something scientists cant even try to explain now.

Very wrong. These are easily explainable phenomena that occur commonly within the core of every star. It's called nuclear fusion, the combination of atoms into an atom with a higher atomic number. It's highly energetically favorable and produces massive energy (hence the heat and light that we get from the sun.. or are you going to deny that too?).

Basic astronomy students learn about how elements up to iron are produced in stars. Why haven't you?

[HandofDeath]

To you it is as simple as 'mutating RNA into DNA' but if it were that simple it would have been done already.

Okay, as I read more and more of your posts I'm increasingly annoyed. Changing RNA into DNA is REALLY FREAKING EASY, all you do is get rid of one of the hydroxyl groups on RNA (which, if you know ANYTHING about chemistry, is an exceedingly simple conversion) and you have DNA, hence the name *deoxy*ribonucleic acid. Changing it back is just as simple.

[Zerzera]

Now you are just making up big words because you don't have Jesus in your heart.

[Centurion]

tl;dr = OSHI- GODBATTLE!!!!11

Man, ya'll went and fucked this thread up.
It had potential before you slapdicks went and turned it into another run of the mill LOLRELIGION v. SCIENCE shitfest that every forum on the internet has had 1,723 times in it's past.

There is no longer hope for this thread, barring a sudden and unexpected bam__ Ashlee appearence.
All that's missing is a Goddess post.

In b4 she arrives after searching for any posts mentioning her.

[HandofDeath]

tl;dr = OSHI- GODBATTLE!!!!11

Quick, save it by replying to my original post!

[Singularity]

Okay, as I read more and more of your posts I'm increasingly annoyed. Changing RNA into DNA is REALLY FREAKING EASY, all you do is get rid of one of the hydroxyl groups on RNA (which, if you know ANYTHING about chemistry, is an exceedingly simple conversion) and you have DNA, hence the name *deoxy*ribonucleic acid. Changing it back is just as simple.

As a chemist I am highly interested in how you would change a strand of RNA into DNA in a exceedingly simple way and the other way around.
Yes, you can make cDNA and transcribe DNA into RNA but actually changing it?

[Ara]

I see what you are saying, but what about countries like Germany who obviously made decisions on who they were able to defeat in battle based on the technology they had created. the Vbombs, the Uboats, the Panzer tanks, the new fighting techniques (blitzkrieg etc). I personally feel that with all of the advanced technology Germany had at the time that it bolstered up their ego a bit when it came to deciding who they could beat. I know Germany didn't purposefully try to draw America into the war, but surely they knew that there was a possibility of the Zimmerman Note being intercepted and knew the risks. They obviously thought they could handle it.

Now as far other ways that scientifically advanced cultures have destroyed themselves is by becoming too secure in their technology over more real world things. Athens became a theological state more than a state of war, and because of this they had children growing up wanting to be poets, senators, artists, sculptors and engineers over growing up wanting to be soldiers and blacksmiths. I would argue that liberalism is doing the same thing in America as we speak, we are all so foolish that we think countries like China and Russia will never attack us, so we go on our way wanting to be rock stars, and sports stars, we want to be politicians, but we have a lack of people who are actually willing to fight even today in America. So based on that I would conclude that not even America will last forever, because eventually we will be attacked by a Spartan culture who has constantly been preparing and readying for war, while our attention is divided to other occupations and paths in life.

--

Yeah and I know that isn't exactly what you meant either, and you are right no country has destroyed itself using the technology that it invented for itself, but it has been a factor in the destruction of several civilizations.

If you're so interested in history, war and politics maybe you should start
studying it rather than creating false assumptions based on little information.
There were hundreds of factors behind the Nazi idea in Germany, not just an
assumption of technological superiority. The germans had had a long history
of wars and german empire ideas even before WW1, after WW1 the economy
was going down hill and people were unemployed, starving and poor, so there
was a need for a change. Germany is the largest country in Europe looking at
the amount of citizens, so they had good labour resources. Germans were
protestants, which meant that they believed in hard work. Mass hysteria
combined with fears of future and neigbours created by the people in power
lead to one of the greatest tragedies in human history. It wasn't liberalist
ideas that created fear and hate towards the "others", it was conservatism,
belief in good old traditions that the great empire of Germany had had, that
it should once again try to take it's place in the world order.

Are you saying that Athen people were weak because of their new ways
of thinking? It may all be just fancy thought games and higher thinking to
you now, but with out the Ancient Greek we could be a thousand years late
in technological advancement. They really were the first people to start
asking the right questions and writing them down. What made this possible
can be argued but one of the major factors were that they had established a
polis, a city-state, where you had citizenship which allowed you to have
ownership and take part in politics among other things. Only free men were
allowed to be citizens, women were not considered equal to men and thus
not fit for politics, slaves weren't considered to be human at all. As for the
Spartans, they were just another polis, like Athens and Thebes that won and
lost wars in the pursuit of leadership of Greece, which finally ended with
Macedonia taking advantage of the war weakened polies (Sparta was not
even a polis anymore at the time) and beat the two ruling polies Athens and
Thebes.

Back on topic ignoring some semantics about rome and greece, humanity will never achieve the level of 'God'. I mean cloning yeah, but actually creating life and engineering DNA? No one truly understands DNA or how its written. Furthermore, if some God didnt exist how was something as complex as DNA ever created? Some things are just meant for us to never fully comprehend

You sound like a conservative islamist to me.

[Fluffz]

Yes, I know that much of what I'm debating here seems to suggest that the only remaining sensible ideology is nihilism.
I'm debating that the only remaining sensible ideology is nihilism
I'm debating nihilism
nihilism

what

[Izor]

Changing RNA into DNA is REALLY FREAKING EASY

Why havent we done it? People that are smarter than you havent yet

[Kolar]

Why havent we done it? People that are smarter than you havent yet

And while we're on that subject, it's the year 2009; Where's my flying car?

[kthx]

If you're so interested in history, war and politics maybe you should start
studying it rather than creating false assumptions based on little information.
There were hundreds of factors behind the Nazi idea in Germany, not just an
assumption of technological superiority. The germans had had a long history
of wars and german empire ideas even before WW1, after WW1 the economy
was going down hill and people were unemployed, starving and poor, so there
was a need for a change. Germany is the largest country in Europe looking at
the amount of citizens, so they had good labour resources. Germans were
protestants, which meant that they believed in hard work. Mass hysteria
combined with fears of future and neigbours created by the people in power
lead to one of the greatest tragedies in human history. It wasn't liberalist
ideas that created fear and hate towards the "others", it was conservatism,
belief in good old traditions that the great empire of Germany had had, that
it should once again try to take it's place in the world order.

Are you saying that Athen people were weak because of their new ways
of thinking? It may all be just fancy thought games and higher thinking to
you now, but with out the Ancient Greek we could be a thousand years late
in technological advancement. They really were the first people to start
asking the right questions and writing them down. What made this possible
can be argued but one of the major factors were that they had established a
polis, a city-state, where you had citizenship which allowed you to have
ownership and take part in politics among other things. Only free men were
allowed to be citizens, women were not considered equal to men and thus
not fit for politics, slaves weren't considered to be human at all. As for the
Spartans, they were just another polis, like Athens and Thebes that won and
lost wars in the pursuit of leadership of Greece, which finally ended with
Macedonia taking advantage of the war weakened polies (Sparta was not
even a polis anymore at the time) and beat the two ruling polies Athens and
Thebes.

OK, I have kinda tried to stay out of this argument instead of explaining the obvious links between the Greeks and Romans but now that you decide to jump in. First off I never said that Germany went to war for one reason only, and said that it was because they were technologically advanced, I said that it was one of the reasons they made stupid mistakes that eventually cost them the war, like trying to take on Russia during winter. I think it would be ignorant to say that Germany's own ideas of superiority with technology didn't play a pretty obvious role in the battles they fought during the war. Besides that I never mentioned anything to do with Germany and Liberalism, I brought that up with the Sparta/Athens debate. Because since you are so well versed obviously you would know that there are many more similarities between Obama and Hitler than lets say.. McCain and Hitler. Especially if you look at the campaign, but I don't think you really want to go there being the liberal that you are.

Are you really going to try to argue with me that certain countries fared much better in battle when they thought less about culture, and more about warfare? I know you want to try to prove me wrong but this is an ignorant assumption, of course a warlike civilization is going to dominate a civilization who has so much time to think about what at the time could be said to be useless information.