Scientists: Artificial life likely in 3 to 10 years

[Brasel]

Gray goo!

Grey goo refers to a hypothetical end-of-the-world scenario involving molecular nanotechnology in which out-of-control self-replicating robots consume all living matter on Earth while building more of themselves (a scenario known as ecophagy). [Wikipedia]

Completely off topic and probably uninteresting to anyone but myself, I browsed Wikipedia from Grey goo and ended up at Spongebob Squarepants...I need a new hobby.

[Dark Nation]

"...never in our imagination could this happen."

This *should* be in their imagination. Foremost in their imagination, even. They need to be thinking of ways to prevent it and to stop it if it ever does happen. On a slightly-related side note, "every ship that was ever called "unsinkable" by its designers/builders ended up sinking". Not sure if this was actually true or not, but I heard it a long time ago and it sounded relevant.

[biggiy05]

Sounds like it can't even do that. Any organism would need a survival mechanism. And from I've gathered from the article, such a mechanism would have to be engineered by scientists.

It was a poor attempt at a joke.

The human race will more than likely screw its self over one way or another at some point in time. This may be that way or it could another way.

[mrz84]

*looks in the distance* And here comes the religious groups to tell us to stop playing God. I don't want this to lead to a religious argument, but I gotta say that this is jsut wanting some groups of over zealous religous peopel to come up and smack the scientists' hands and say "Bad! No playing God for you!"

[Majora]

*looks in the distance* And here comes the religious groups to tell us to stop playing God. I don't want this to lead to a religious argument, but I gotta say that this is jsut wanting some groups of over zealous religous peopel to come up and smack the scientists' hands and say "Bad! No playing God for you!"

The bold is the general area I am referring to;


What would give THEM the right to? Honestly, most (if not all) religous groups are wayyy too arrogant :/

"religion is the only thing preventing the human race from achieving it's full potential" --- Some guy, I need to look up which guy. I recommend you guys read a book called "Brave new world"


Also, there goes Genesis (out the window), with more certainty this time.

[AtmaWeapon]

*looks in the distance* And here comes the religious groups to tell us to stop playing God. I don't want this to lead to a religious argument, but I gotta say that this is jsut wanting some groups of over zealous religous peopel to come up and smack the scientists' hands and say "Bad! No playing God for you!"

Hey buddy several of the most outspoken proponents of the Science vs. Religion We-Will-Shut-Down-Your-Thread crew have already posted and coexisted just nice before this.

I'd like to point out which side fired the first shot. Without a link to some stupid group actually complaining I believe this is nothing short of trying to stir up trouble.

By the way, Mr. Wizard, you misspelled "just", "religious", and "people" while you were in such a hurry to make sure you were the guy that started the fight.

[phattonez]

I don't think that Brave New World was about religion controlling us.

[AtmaWeapon]

Oh man the bait is so hard to NOT take:

Also, there goes Genesis (out the window), with more certainty this time.

Right because some scientists were there to artificially develop life at its origin right?

You forget that the primary problem that all theories, scientific and religious, have to deal with is it is very difficult to understand the concept of "beginning" for the universe, particularly because the concept of complete void is almost as difficult to imagine as infinity.

Scientists still have to create artificial life starting from void in order to claim they have unlocked the mystery of creation. This experiment is important though, because obviously we have no idea how to start with void and work backwards to nothing. However, we haven't really been able to start with something and end up with life, either. If we can accomplish that, then perhaps the insight into how life can form will provide further insight into how matter can be formed, leading to the possibility of creating life from void that would seem to invalidate the concept that God created the universe.

However, true Christians have this annoying property that they believe God is omnipotent. If man is capable of accomplishing a goal, then surely this omnipotent being could have done it as well, so man creating life from nothing will do little to disprove the existence of God. Additionally, Genesis will still hold since it discusses how life was created from nothing by God; science will simply omit the "by God" part.

Truth be told, no man can say whether that is correct or not until after death, and the dead don't divulge their secrets frequently.

Please do not turn this into a debate; I really want to remain neutral here, and I am trying to point out that the argument is stupid and nobody can win before it starts.

If you ignore that request, it's going to seriously turn into another 3-page "nuh uh" "yuh huh" fest as we continue to iterate the same point over and over again: athiests think God doesn't exist and want science to prove it and Christians think God exist and believe that it is impossible for science to disprove it.

It's really a shame that we can't just agree to disagree on the "this happened because God said so" part; personally the void is the hardest part of any creation theory for me to overcome because it suggests that for some moment the Law of Conservation of Matter did not hold. (Though I swear my Physics professor came up with some kind of crazy matter-antimatter scenario where matter can be destroyed and leave nothing behind; that suggests the reverse might be true? Beldaran can you confirm/deny this?)

*edit* Also I think phattonez is correct; I'd rather argue that Brave New World is about happiness.

[Orion]

...I think you've all been watching too many science fiction movies.

And when have scientists ever actually done something when they expected to get it done? AI isn't going to happen for a very long time, at least in any practical sense.

[phattonez]

^^The Human Genome Project?