Are we ready for "ARTIFICIAL LIFE?"

[brownprose]

---

Science says that we are less than 10 years (Artificial Life Likely in 3 to 10 Years) to creating a synthetic organism - not from a modified or genetically engineered organism but developed entirely from basic parts or what they call "wet life."

If and when the time comes these artificial life forms were to be introduced in the natural world, what could become of them? what could be the implications or the outcomes if they went out of control?

Are we really ready for it?

Artificial Life Creation 101 --> NOVA | scienceNOW | Let's Make a Microbe! | PBS)

[brownprose]

(I have to post the full article here as this has been removed in APs website. Source of article that's is posted here are from this link --> [Medianews] Artificial Life Likely in 3 to 10 Years )

Artificial Life Likely in 3 to 10 Years
Aug 20, 2007 1:49 AM (ET)
By SETH BORENSTEIN
Associated Press

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."

That first cell of synthetic life - made from the basic chemicals in DNA - may not seem like much to non-scientists. For one thing, you'll have to look in a microscope to see it.

"Creating protocells has the potential to shed new light on our place in the universe," Bedau said. "This will remove one of the few fundamental mysteries about creation in the universe and our role."

And several scientists believe man-made life forms will one day offer the potential for solving a variety of problems, from fighting diseases to locking up greenhouse gases to eating toxic waste.

Bedau figures there are three major hurdles to creating synthetic life:


- A container, or membrane, for the cell to keep bad molecules out, allow good ones, and the ability to multiply.

- A genetic system that controls the functions of the cell, enabling it to reproduce and mutate in response to environmental changes.

- A metabolism that extracts raw materials from the environment as food and then changes it into energy.

One of the leaders in the field, Jack Szostak at Harvard Medical School, predicts that within the next six months, scientists will report evidence that the first step - creating a cell membrane - is "not a big problem." Scientists are using fatty acids in that effort.

Szostak is also optimistic about the next step - getting nucleotides, the building blocks of DNA, to form a working genetic system.

His idea is that once the container is made, if scientists add nucleotides in the right proportions, then Darwinian evolution could simply take over.

"We aren't smart enough to design things, we just let evolution do the hard work and then we figure out what happened," Szostak said.

In Gainesville, Fla., Steve Benner, a biological chemist at the Foundation for Applied Molecular Evolution is attacking that problem by going outside of natural genetics. Normal DNA consists of four bases - adenine, cytosine, guanine and thymine (known as A,C,G,T) - molecules that spell out the genetic code in pairs. Benner is trying to add eight new bases to the genetic alphabet.

Bedau said there are legitimate worries about creating life that could "run amok," but there are ways of addressing it, and it will be a very long time before that is a problem.

"When these things are created, they're going to be so weak, it'll be a huge achievement if you can keep them alive for an hour in the lab," he said. "But them getting out and taking over, never in our imagination could this happen."

[rodsky]

They won't be "out of control", because control is a term that is to be seen from the human perspective--they would just evolve into other forms naturally.

From my perspective there is no "artificial" nor "natural" life, because they are all made up of the same thing--starstuff. It is only the process/manner by which their components came together that's different.

-RODION

[hizuka007]

OT: this is not true, only God can create life forms...
...so i will lock this thread ! jowk...



OnT: sus! maimagine na nako ba nga after 100years (starting from the year that the scientist can successfully create life form), makahimo na silag tao then kanang bagong tao (male/female) mao nay ibutang sa laing Planet then .... kabalo namo mo sa storya, naa na pud na silay ilang Genesis of Life, unya wa jud na silay alamag sa planet earth, hubo pud tanan, etc..... ^_^x ... aguy kalingaw.

[cromagnon]

mura ug mystery of a scientist who can be able to create nanochips mad of organic material and can reproduce it self.

this is posible . humans are turning godlike.

[bluedes]

nakabasa na si master kebot ani?

[cromagnon]

thank gad , walay kebot diri na sub forum . anti-science raba to. libog pa sa lokot.

[brownprose]

They won't be "out of control", because control is a term that is to be seen from the human perspective--they would just evolve into other forms naturally.

My fear bro rodsky is when such technology gets into the hands of those who will create artificial organisms for aggression.

From my perspective there is no "artificial" nor "natural" life, because they are all made up of the same thing--starstuff. It is only the process/manner by which their components came together that's different. -RODION

sakto jud ka bro...we're all but just products of chemical reactions.

[bluedes]

My fear bro rodsky is when such technology gets into the hands of those who will create artificial organisms for aggression.



sakto jud ka bro...we're all but just products of chemical reactions.

i beg to differ..

we are definitely more than just products of chemical reactions..
or to put how the ancients have described it, "Soul is a quality of Life." Only living things have soul.. we can't really prove it, but what is there to prove when its right there in front of us. If it moves autonomously, reproduces, metabolizes, its alive. That's more than just the products of chemical reactions.

but its pretty amazing though when one begins to understand all the minute chemical reactions happening around us.. I begin to question what is the limit of my "consciousness".. awareness really blows my sense of presence to large proportions like I've never imagined before.

the trick sometimes though is that I tend to "backslide" and take it for granted.. like a part of my mind is "switching off" and telling "myself" that its too many details to consider at one moment and just let it go unnoticed.. i dont want that.. what if what i have "chosen" to ignore was important.. everything is important..

oh well, basig dili na ni scientific..

OT: sir brown, most people at S&O are confused with Lamarckian theory of evolution to Darwin's.. just adding some info I've learned.. its good to know what you're arguing against..

[bluedes]

thank gad , walay kebot diri na sub forum . anti-science raba to. libog pa sa lokot.

libog mu.lng.. iya pud tong choice tingale..