ANSWERS: 6
  • It has not yet been possible to do so. However, they have succeeded in creating amino acids (the building blocks of life) from non living elements. We are not able to make these acids into a living thing as of yet.
  • As was stated in the first answer, scientists have not created life from something inorganic yet but the basic organic building blocks have been created from inorganic compounds. This experiment has been performed successfully many times since the 50s when it was first done by Stanley Miller. Remember that just because we haven't done it yet, doesn't mean we can't do it. We have only been doing for 50+ years what nature did over hundreds of millions of years. Be patient.
  • No. Science hasn't been able to do it yet. Perhaps they need Divine intervention.
  • No one has done it yet, even under extremely controlled circumstances, under careful laboratory conditions with the direction of scientists. People expect us to believe that something that the odds are more than Ten to the 300th power against getting one protein with an average amino chain lined up in the proper sequence randomly. The time it would take to run through this sequence once every second would take more than 100 trillion years to the 200th power. I don't believe they will ever do it.
  • One step toward that goal the construction of a completely synthetic virus, which was done several years ago. The virus was built up from scratch by synthesizing the RNA (or DNA, I don't recall) sequence of a known virus. The resulting virus was able to infect cells and replicate, just as the "natural" one did. Now, most people would argue that viruses aren't alive themselves. They require a living body to replicate themselves. Another recent experiment which is closer to modern living cells is this one: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080604140959.htm
  • Science hasn't been able to yet. I've noticed that the Miller experiment has been used as a source for the possibility of man creating life. Obviously, the significance of Miller's experiment----which to this day is "still" featured in many biology textbooks---hinges on whether he used an atmosphere that accurately simulated the environment of the early earth. Nobody knows for sure what the atmosphear was like then. Miller chose a hydrogen-rich mixture of methane, ammonia, and water vapor, which was consistant with what many scientists thought back then. But scientists don't believe that now. The next question is "What happens if you replay the experiment using an accurate atmosphere?" You do "not" get amino acids. Some textbooks fudge by saying, well, even if you use a realistic atmosphear, you still get organic molecules. As if that answer solves the problem. Organic molecules sounds impressive and promising---at least on the surface. Miller must have stumbled onto something right? Do you know exactly what "organic molecules" Miller produced in his experiment? Formaldehyde and Cyanide! You're not even suppose to have an open container of formaldehyde in a classroom because it's so toxic. It kills embryos. The idea that using a realistic atmosphear gets you the first step in the origin of life is laughable. Now, it is true that a good organic chemist can turn formaldehyde and cyanide into biological molecules. But to suggest that formaldehyde and cyanide give you the right substrate for the origin of life is a joke. Strike two against Miller. Do you know what you get when you combine formaldehyde and cyanide? Embalming fluid! Strike three on Miller. Miller is but one example of many failed experiments at producing real life. Will man ever produce life as we know it now? Take into concideration, including Miller, all that has happened in the scientific community in the last 50 years, and you tell me. Then ask yourself the question---"Why are scientists trying so hard to produce life?" What are their goals? What is the ultimate purpose for doing this? What are scientists trying to prove? We can't take care of the life that walks this earth now, let alone handle the clones and possible new life as well. Concentrating on curing the diseases that run rampant now, should be the main concern. Just my opinion.

Copyright 2018, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy