Posted on 08/20/2007 9:23:32 AM PDT by Turret Gunner A20
WASHINGTON (AP) - Around the world, a handful of scientists are trying to create life from scratch and they're getting closer. Experts expect an announcement within three to 10 years from someone in the now little-known field of "wet artificial life."
"It's going to be a big deal and everybody's going to know about it," said Mark Bedau, chief operating officer of ProtoLife of Venice, Italy, one of those in the race. "We're talking about a technology that could change our world in pretty fundamental ways—in fact, in ways that are impossible to predict."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Naw. What could possibly go wrong by artificially creating something completely outside of the parameters of our own eco-system ?
Heck, imagine what the bio-weapons sections could do with that! While they’re at this, I want my own pet Targ...
From scratch means from “0”. Humans just refuse to acknowledge their limitations.
Maybe it is just me, but these concluding sentences from the article have just the right combination of adolescent enthusiasm and intellectual arrogance to sound alarm bells.
It’s possible. But, they way they are going about it won’t get them anywhere.
Interesting. Wonder how they rationalize this: Hoof and Mouth Outbreak
“From scratch means from “0”. Humans just refuse to acknowledge their limitations.”
You’re being too literal. I’d find it to be a feat to take the basic building blocks and make something that’s alive. I’m sure that even if they’re successful, it will be a single cell type organism.
As for humans refusing to accept their limitations, that would seem to be a good thing to me.
It amuses me greatly that knee-jerk opponents of belief in any type of intelligent design are engaging in . . . intelligent design. If they succeed, THEN will they believe in intelligent design? Or is belief in intelligent design a prerequisite for carrying it out? Deep questions to ponder . . .
I’m no Biblical creationist by a long shot, but mainstream science’s bull-headed opposition to the idea of any sort of intelligent design having possibly had any influence whatsoever on the development of life on earth, is every bit as irrational as the most clueless and bull-headed creationists. But at least the Biblical creationists admit they’re relying on faith to arrive at their beliefs.
He means that the changes will be big (a prediction he's willing to make), but that all kinds of unpredictable scientific and sociological things could follow.
And what good is the "science" if it can't make any definitive or useful predictions? You might as well guess.
This guy has plenty of ideas about what could result, and he could make predictions about that. He doesn't know the scope of the changes, other than that they will be grand.
Interesting question comes to mind: What do they consider intelligent?
Today we have computers with a pre-programmed “if-then” function. When we “invent” technology that learns from past “if-then” scenarios, it could be regarded as “intelligent.” Dogs and pets can be trained but are not considered intelligent by human standards.
What then are we trying to create when we create “intelligence” scientifically? Intelligence that develops into self preservation and begins to have morals, values, etc. gets dangerous. I believe this is where your post is going.
I would take it one further and suggest that technology that can learn and decide is also more able to make mistakes. A well trained dog will sometimes still bite its owner given certain circumstances.
Good thoughts....
other spin on this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1883712/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1883668/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1858047/posts
They're using pre-built materials already available.
I'm holdin' out for when they are able to make the pre-built materials, but my suspicion is that will be too complex, and a certain Grand Designer may have implemented steps that will forever preclude us from doing that.
Aw, the hubris! Man is an arrogant little creature!
Sauron
>>What then are we trying to create when we create “intelligence” scientifically?
Currently AI is working on noisy pattern recognition and natural language processing. The outcome is problem specific and amoral. We may eventually get to a point where we can talk to a computer and have it simulate feelings to facilitate communication, but abstract philosophical thinking and moral behavior is not along the current path of AI.
In fact, AI has gotten “dumber” recently, and backed away from serious problems that originated the field in favor of statistical text and image processing algorithms that end up being incomprehensible once trained.
I was speculating less about the future than about the past. My personal operating hypothesis is that intelligence evolved first as energy, which then began creating and tinkering with matter. That would explain why the nitty-gritty details of how matter-based life (eventually including intelligence) appear to have evolved on earth seem suspiciously neat and tidy and fortuitous. It’s not that they didn’t evolve, but that they were being tinkered with, or at least the starting contents of, and nearby influences on the giant petri dish of Planet Earth were thought through and planned — just like the petri dishes these scientists are working with in their attempts to creating life from scratch. This line of thinking leads to unsettling possibilities, like that we and our planet are some higher intelligence’s middle school science fair project that got an “Honorable Mention”.
We have enough problems with our computers doing things we don’t want them to do, without having them actually DESIGNED to make their own decisions with their own goals in mind.
>> I’m holdin’ out for when they are able to make the pre-built materials...
I think the endeavor starts from false principles, but still could lead to a better understanding of biological systems, so I encourage the experiment. We still know very little about how life works and this project is attempting to do more than we really understand—hoping to learn the details along the way. It will be interesting to see if the assumptions are proven false, but I doubt such a result will be acknowledged in favor of putting some spin on the results to appear as if they have made some progress and are hopeful for the future.
What if there are specific structural requirements for life that have no natural chemical path? What if the minimal life form is discovered to be nearly as complex as modern bacteria? What if the combinations of possible workable DNA sequences is severely limited to the point that only species known to have existed are capable of existing? I don’t think scientists are prepared for these scenarios.
God is so far beyond comprehension and intelligence that He doesn't need intent or design. This is Gnostic stuff and even pre-Christian.
No, God put no limits on anything. Sooner or later will create sentient beings.
For all we know some alien race created us.
John
He’s predicting unpredictable stuff will happen and that he thinks it will be big? Anyone can get that far; scientists ought to be able to do better than that. They should be able to get more specific than “It’s going to be big.”
IOW, he’s just guessing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.