This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Theo's Profile

Theo's Avatar Joined over 7 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by Theo

More Discussions by Theo

Latest Comments by Theo

Go to: Biologists on the Verge of Creating New Form of Life

Theo's Avatar Jump to comment 39 by Theo

Strange, I was under the impression that this was done already. I guess it was probably due to previous article spin.

Nucleic acids in a fatty acid bubble is still a veeery long way from actual life. It is good to see that a little progress has been made though, hope they keep it up.

Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:02:00 UTC | #234845

Go to: God and Science Collide in Nation's Capital

Theo's Avatar Jump to comment 102 by Theo

Lee,
I find it nonsensical that I can answer all your points by copying and pasting my previous points. Please re-read and if you still need answers, then I'll copy and paste.

Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:39:00 UTC | #218081

Go to: God and Science Collide in Nation's Capital

Theo's Avatar Jump to comment 100 by Theo

irate_atheist

Shit. I stop posting on this site for a single day and a twat like Theo turns up.

Yup. Waited until you left so that I could turn up on this thread, I was too afraid to tackle you face to face considering your formidable interlect :)

In capital letters, just so you can't miss them:
THEO - WHERE'S YOUR FUCKING EVIDENCE

I guess you probably missed it seeing that I did not type it in capitals; it is there from comment 75 on this thread.

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 14:32:00 UTC | #193524

Go to: God and Science Collide in Nation's Capital

Theo's Avatar Jump to comment 98 by Theo

Comment #195754 by fizhburn

Just because the only place we have observed protobionts is in the laboratory does not mean that they must only occur because they were purposely created.

Protobiont life has never been observed in the laboratory. It exists only in the minds of theorists as a hypothetical cell. The reason for this is that the most primitive form of life ever observed is, in the minds of some, too complex to have been assembled spontaneously. This has lead some scientists to hypothesize a type of life that is simpler than the most primitive form of life yet complex enough to fit the criteria for life i.e. self sustaining and replicating (to put it in a nutshell)

So, the fact that they are in a sense the product of intelligence (setting up the lab and initial conditions on purpose) does not confer the status of not-naturally-explicable.

Now when I said that life fits the criteria for artificiality, I did not state this on the basis of scientists using intelligence to create "protobiont life" as I explained above. I understand that they are merely using their intelligence to recreate the natural conditions of primitive earth hence if life is ever produced, it will not be on the basis of intelligence but by natural processes existing on primitive earth. What I am saying however is that that protobiont life fits the criteria for artificiality because it is:

1. Naturally inexplicable
2. Analogous to intelligence (possesses complex specified information)

As a result of this, I conclude (scientifically that is) that protobiont life is artificial until it can be demonstrated that nature can spontaneously generate complex specified information (as opposed to just modifying it Darwinian natural selection).

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:52:00 UTC | #192479

Go to: God and Science Collide in Nation's Capital

Theo's Avatar Jump to comment 95 by Theo

Will be be busy for a few days. Hope to reply ASAP

Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:21:00 UTC | #185798

More Comments by Theo