Talk:US scientist says he created first 'artificial life form'/Comments

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

• Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
• Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
• You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Click here to add a new comment · Add onto existing comments

In less than 50 years, we are going to see this tech come into use. I mean, they already have a chip they can put in you to let you remote control something. Contralya 22:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

"using synthetic chromosomes made from chemicals." What, exactly, is meant by this?

It means assembling microscopic life. All they need to do is make it so they can program it to multiply, program it's instincts etc, and you have a prototype life form. Presumably, it could be used to make replacements for lost limbs and damaged organs. Contralya 05:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Or cloning. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 11:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I can't stand the misunderstanding that surrounds cloning. Most opposition to it is religion based, and it isn't like you put someone into a machine and make a copy. And, just because you clone a person, doesn't make it the same person, they wouldn't have the same memories, and any given individual's personality is determined by their childhood. It doesn't only have human implications, we could create a race of non-sapient life forms to be our slaves (humans have enslaved wild animals like cows and horses...)! These ideas are were bioethics get complicated. Contralya 13:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

created?

The story does not describe life being "created". To create life, you can't first require a living bacterium to modify.

• But this is talking about creating ARTIFICIAL life. Contralya 15:36, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm quite surprised there are so few comments on something this huge. This is big news. And quite frankly I'm scared of it. Rogutaan 22:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree with both of you. Then again, this sounds very similar to an experiment I read about in an old book... Mutton333 21:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)