Life As We Know It Nearly Created in Lab

[Prrkitty]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,479777,00.html

Yes this is Fox. But forget that fact for the moment and just concentrate on what the article is about.

As quoted from the article: "Now scientists have created something in the lab that is tantalizingly close to what might have happened."

Yes it's a maybe, might, could have been like this... etc. Ultimately I doubt we'll ever know "exactly" what happened to create life (as we know it) here on Earth.

But the possibility of what these guys have done... is very intriguing.

[Russ]

They created RNA. That's still nowhere near enough for a cell to be formed.

[rock_nog]

They created self-replicating RNA, which answers one of the big questions about the origin of life. It has been thought for a long time that RNA was the ancestor of DNA, but there was a problem with that hypothesis, in that it was believed that RNA could not replicate without the presence of DNA. This experiment has demonstrated that yes, it is entirely possible for RNA to replicate itself.

I would say it's neat that (yet another) major argument put forth by the fundies has been shown conclusively to be utterly wrong, but it really doesn't matter, as those freaks are so out of touch with reality that no amount of evidence or argument will ever be enough for them.

[phattonez]

I would say it's neat that (yet another) major argument put forth by the fundies has been shown conclusively to be utterly wrong, but it really doesn't matter, as those freaks are so out of touch with reality that no amount of evidence or argument will ever be enough for them.

Probably because logically it's pretty much impossible to disprove God, of course for some reason those science fundies who believe in logic so much seem to ignore it.

[rock_nog]

Probably because logically it's pretty much impossible to disprove God, of course for some reason those science fundies who believe in logic so much seem to ignore it.

Proving/disproving the existence of God has nothing to do with it. Me not being able to disprove the existence of God has absolutely nothing to do with idiots who dismiss scientific evidence simply because it goes against their superstitions.

[Dechipher]

Probably because logically it's pretty much impossible to disprove God, of course for some reason those science fundies who believe in logic so much seem to ignore it.

No, this is a good point. If I told Phattonez that I have a firebreathing unicorn that can time-travel, in my dorm room, he'd have to believe it because logically it's pretty much impossible to prove that firebreathing time-traveling unicorns can survive outside of their natural habitat, despite the evidence that they can easily live in a dorm room.

[Shazza Dani]

Probably because logically it's pretty much impossible to disprove God, of course for some reason those science fundies who believe in logic so much seem to ignore it.

Kinda like how you ignore every religion other than your own.

EDIT: What I'm saying is no religion is any more valid than another, so either you're asking scientist to assume that every religion is true; or only your religion because it's "more special". I'm sorry, but that reason isn't enough to convince anyone.

[The_Amaster]

*ignoring the religious crap*
Well, cell-like shells form naturally in certain chemical soups, this has been known for a while. So, if this self-replicating RNA can be found to naturally evolve a "symbiosis" with these shells, you're almost there.

[Aegix Drakan]

Awesome.

We are now a little bit closer to understanding the universe. I wonder how much further we can take this particular research...

[Beldaran]

Probably because logically it's pretty much impossible to disprove God, of course for some reason those science fundies who believe in logic so much seem to ignore it.

I'm guessing that you're trolling, because the alternative would be that you're the stupidest person I've ever talked to.