Amazon.com Widgets
  • They just did, so end of debate

    Scientists just made life from lab chemicals.
    So the definitive answer in this debate is yes scientists can create life and this debate can be closed once and for all.

    https://www.google.es/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8e67c552-f1b4-11e5-aff5-19b4e253664a.html&ved=0ahUKEwj_h7Lly9zLAhVFOhQKHWzyB-AQqQIIHDAA&usg=AFQjCNGzoMbuC4ctX457IZ3BOhg3ZxPMeA&sig2=FfhM67lZ70SS_TjOlWKu0A

    Let's hope that this life form is going to show evolution as well so creationists have even less arguments

  • They are already on their way

    Scientists have already been able to manufacture a new chromosome from artificial DNA in a test tube, then transferred it into an empty cell and watched it multiply – the very definition of being alive.

    Have they been able to build life molecule by molecule? No, the technology does not exist yet. But when that day comes they'll be able to create life molecule by molecule "from scratch".

    Is this playing God? I do not think so, unless you think that life is only physical (i.E. No soul, etc). The question of whether life is merely the current scientific definition of life and nothing more is a completely different debate altogether.

    But if we stick to pure science to define the yardstick, then my vote is yes.

  • Life is chemicals

    Most molecules created from scratch in laboratories are these days are fairly small in terms of their constiuent atoms. As computer simulations of checmical reactions become more powerful, it will become possible to design larger molecules and the processes by which they can be manufactured. At that point, the molecules necessary to come together to form life can be designed and introduced to each other in an appropriate way such that a man-made living organism results.

  • Yes, I think science can create life eventually.

    Science continues to grow and form in ways people never would have imagined. It is my understanding that even today some scientists have found ways to make clones or do genetic engineering. Someday science will be capable of things well beyond our scope of comprehension today. Therefore, yes, I believe science can create life, but it may take some time.

  • Yes, it can.

    One does not have to look much farther than test tube babies or genetic engineering to see that science has long had the ability to change and create life in a variety of forms. The more cogent question is whether or not such a creation is morally correct in our eyes.

  • Yes It Can

    We already know how to clone. Animals have been cloned. So science has created life. It will be time before cloning is safe to be used for human reproductive purposes. It's science. It's settled. We know how to do this. It's just that there are significant risks to doing this for creating humans that haven't been worked out yet.

  • They are already on their way

    Scientists have already been able to manufacture a new chromosome from artificial DNA in a test tube, then transferred it into an empty cell and watched it multiply – the very definition of being alive.

    Have they been able to build life molecule by molecule? No, the technology does not exist yet. But when that day comes they'll be able to create life molecule by molecule "from scratch".

    Is this playing God? I do not think so, unless you think that life is only physical (i.E. No soul, etc). The question of whether life is merely the current scientific definition of life and nothing more is a completely different debate altogether.

    But if we stick to pure science to define the yardstick, then my vote is yes.

  • Science cannot create life.

    All forms of life are huge miracles and initiated by God as conveyed to numerous people in the Old and New Testament. There may be life elsewhere in the universe, but it is the result of God's creative powers. Humans have tried to artificially create single-cell life forms for several generations and have not succeeded.

  • Copy life, maybe

    Test tube babies use sperm and an egg. Science did not create that sperm or that egg, so they are not really creating life. Cloning is a copy of already existing life. You cannot clone an animal without using DNA from an already existing animal. You did not create DNA and cells from nothing. Science must use already existing cells, chemicals, etc. not creating them from scratch.

  • They Have Not Done It Yet

    From my understanding of current science, there have been experiments done where they have tried to create life from nothing and failed. So, in that respect, as of right now, I do not believe science can create life. Outside of that context, I think science can manipulate life infinitely, so there are a lot of possibilities that someday they may be able to actually create life.

  • No we don't have the spark.

    If we could create life we should be able to bring the dead back to life. When the life force is gone so is life. Scientist don't have control of that force. Cloning is not creating life it is only modifying life.
    I guess a female can create life though.

  • Create Life from nothing.

    The heading says it all. Science cannot create life. They cannot throw a few chemicals in a test tube and create the most basic forms of life. (IE) create life from nothing. Not from some cloned whatever, not from genetic engineering, from nothing. They say that life started from a few chemicals wallowing around in a pool of amino acid, add sunlight and just like magic, we created life. If it was so easy why can't they do it now. The more they dig, the more they find how complicated even the most basic life is. It is design folks not chance.

  • No, I don't believe so.

    I do not believe that science is able to create life. Many things are out of the scope of human intelligence and I believe that creating intelligent beings is one of those things. Similar to how no one is able to wrap their minds about the universe, it is similar with the creation of life, in my opinion.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.