T Nation

And So We Created Life

http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/synthetic_genome.dtl

next step, oil shitting bacteria, then beer-urinating dinosaurs.

This isn’t really creating life. In fact, I would expect this kind of result given what we know about bacterial genetics. The techniques involved in handling that large chunk of DNA is impressive. Anything over 100kb becomes quite difficult to manipulate reliably.

When scientists create an entire cell from scratch, then that would be the creation of life. This is a reprogramming of an organism.

^ this is the right response

[quote]0mar wrote:
<<< When scientists create an entire cell from scratch, >>>[/quote]
They will have further demonstrated the necessity of a creator, in this case themselves, for it to have happened. When it happens by accident in a puddle in the parking lot of their lab, it won’t explain how we wound up with time, space or matter (energy) in the first place, but it would be pretty interesting.

Well, it’s a funny response for sure.

“…given what we know about bacterial genetics…”
We know a lot. Under various theories, time travel is possible. Or take atomic fusion, for a better example.
Actually doing it successfully is the hard part.

And why should they create a cell beforehand? For the sheer awesomeness?

This IS a titanic step for mankind.

If you don’t realize this and demand being “impressed” I cannot help you.

Yes, it is a huge step forward scientifically - and kudos to the scientists for all of their ingenuity and hard work - but it is still not creating life, it is manipulating live cells. . .

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Well, it’s a funny response for sure.

“…given what we know about bacterial genetics…”
We know a lot. Under various theories, time travel is possible. Or take atomic fusion, for a better example.
Actually doing it successfully is the hard part.

And why should they create a cell beforehand? For the sheer awesomeness?

This IS a titanic step for mankind.

If you don’t realize this and demand being “impressed” I cannot help you.[/quote]
You will not find a person alive with more appreciation for scientific advancement than myself.

[quote]0mar wrote:
This isn’t really creating life. In fact, I would expect this kind of result given what we know about bacterial genetics. The techniques involved in handling that large chunk of DNA is impressive. Anything over 100kb becomes quite difficult to manipulate reliably.

When scientists create an entire cell from scratch, then that would be the creation of life. This is a reprogramming of an organism.[/quote]

Correct, this was a chemically mutated gene, controlling a living organism.

I do want the oil shitting bacteria though.

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Well, it’s a funny response for sure.

“…given what we know about bacterial genetics…”
We know a lot. Under various theories, time travel is possible. Or take atomic fusion, for a better example.
Actually doing it successfully is the hard part.

And why should they create a cell beforehand? For the sheer awesomeness?

This IS a titanic step for mankind.

If you don’t realize this and demand being “impressed” I cannot help you.[/quote]

No one is more impressed than me (I’m a microbiologist), but the bottom line is that this is a technique breakthrough. It’s not a fundamental breakthrough. If you asked any scientist in the '70s about the expected result, they would have responded as I have.

The Venter group didn’t make any novel genes. They used existing genes and a very clever method of stringing them together.

I found a condom under my bed from like a year ago, it had a whole fucking civilization of bacteria in it. Do I get a Nobel prize now?

[quote]pat wrote:
Correct, this was a chemically mutated gene, controlling a living organism.

I do want the oil shitting bacteria though.[/quote]

The chromosome was artificially created, not mutated.

[quote]PAINTRAINDave wrote:
I found a condom under my bed from like a year ago, it had a whole fucking civilization of bacteria in it. Do I get a Nobel prize now?[/quote]

Only if it turns into a dinosaur that pees beer. Party at Dave’s house.

I want a T-Rex that pees beer!

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Correct, this was a chemically mutated gene, controlling a living organism.

I do want the oil shitting bacteria though.[/quote]

The chromosome was artificially created, not mutated.[/quote]

So is it a cyborg bacteria?

As far as the oil shitting bacteria, I think we need an oil eating one first for the gulf, then we can focus on an oil shitting one. Hell I’m sure we can make gold shitters and platinum shitters etc… The whole planet is going to be RICH!

V

http://www.getyourowndirt.com/

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Correct, this was a chemically mutated gene, controlling a living organism.

I do want the oil shitting bacteria though.[/quote]

The chromosome was artificially created, not mutated.[/quote]

Even if it was a synthetic gene, nothing was created.

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Correct, this was a chemically mutated gene, controlling a living organism.

I do want the oil shitting bacteria though.[/quote]

The chromosome was artificially created, not mutated.[/quote]

Even if it was a synthetic gene, nothing was created.[/quote]

The genome was designed and synthesized from scratch in a laboratory without using any natural DNA in the process.

So, I’m not sure what you mean by nothing being ‘created’. The scientists made the chromosome, themselves. If you mean that they didn’t invent a never-before-seen organism, then I suppose you are right in that regard.

While I agree that it doesn’t constitute creating life - which in my mind would require not only swapping ‘blueprints’ but also constructing the cellular machinery to go along with it - to say that all they did was insert a mutated ‘gene’ is incorrect.

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Correct, this was a chemically mutated gene, controlling a living organism.

I do want the oil shitting bacteria though.[/quote]

The chromosome was artificially created, not mutated.[/quote]

Even if it was a synthetic gene, nothing was created.[/quote]

The genome was designed and synthesized from scratch in a laboratory without using any natural DNA in the process.

So, I’m not sure what you mean by nothing being ‘created’. The scientists made the chromosome, themselves. If you mean that they didn’t invent a never-before-seen organism, then I suppose you are right in that regard.

While I agree that it doesn’t constitute creating life - which in my mind would require not only swapping ‘blueprints’ but also constructing the cellular machinery to go along with it - to say that all they did was insert a mutated ‘gene’ is incorrect.[/quote]

You must have missed my link:

http://www.getyourowndirt.com/

The synthetic DNA was still re-arranging existing material. Hence, nothing was created.

To actually create life, in the same sense of discussing creation, you have to start with nothing.

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Correct, this was a chemically mutated gene, controlling a living organism.

I do want the oil shitting bacteria though.[/quote]

The chromosome was artificially created, not mutated.[/quote]

Even if it was a synthetic gene, nothing was created.[/quote]

The genome was designed and synthesized from scratch in a laboratory without using any natural DNA in the process.

So, I’m not sure what you mean by nothing being ‘created’. The scientists made the chromosome, themselves. If you mean that they didn’t invent a never-before-seen organism, then I suppose you are right in that regard.

While I agree that it doesn’t constitute creating life - which in my mind would require not only swapping ‘blueprints’ but also constructing the cellular machinery to go along with it - to say that all they did was insert a mutated ‘gene’ is incorrect.[/quote]

You must have missed my link:

http://www.getyourowndirt.com/

The synthetic DNA was still re-arranging existing material. Hence, nothing was created.

To actually create life, in the same sense of discussing creation, you have to start with nothing[/quote]

No offense, dude, who’s even talking about religion here?

They “manufactured” a chromosome that contained instructions directing self-replication and other processes essential to life. That, and their ability to successfully transplant the structure into a different species of bacteria to result in a viable cell with complete replacement of the original genome is what is remarkable.

Where the starting material came from is irrelevant since no one has used this to take a shot at the existence of a god. And I’m not sure where you get the idea that creating life means you HAVE to start with nothing, but I guess it all ties back into that whole religious thing.

But if that’s all you want to take away from this, then more power to you.

ventor himself said they DID NOT CREATE LIFE - so the press is hyping something patently untrue.