Quite an interesting thread.
I'm not sure, though, why everyone thinks this is so astounding. Gene therapy and gene manipulation in bacteria has been going on for years. So has replacing the genome of a cell with another (I believe that is how they cloned the sheep). Relative to creating the genome from scratch, I would bet that this is quite misleading. While they may have synthesized all the DNA that went into the genome, I bet they did not make up all the genetic code (the series of nucleotides). In other words, the new cell requires proteins to sustain life and reproduce. Those proteins are synthesized by the cell via the DNA. Did they use sequences of DNA that are already known to produce those proteins and just reproduce large segments of DNA that they already knew would sustain life and reproduce (and add their own codes to this) or did they make up an entirely new DNA sequence that encodes new proteins that contsitute a new way of sustaining life and reproducing? I would bet on the former, which to me is not all that different from what has already been done. It is different...but not much.
It seems to me that using Adrian's definition of "synthetic life" that this has been done for the past 25+ years via genetic engineering, gene therapy, and cloning.
Lastly, I see nothing in any of this that would/should have any impact on whether or not one believes in God or even what one would belive about God (unless the person was oblivious about what has been done previously with genetic engineering, gene therapy, and cloning).
I'm not sure, though, why everyone thinks this is so astounding. Gene therapy and gene manipulation in bacteria has been going on for years. So has replacing the genome of a cell with another (I believe that is how they cloned the sheep). Relative to creating the genome from scratch, I would bet that this is quite misleading. While they may have synthesized all the DNA that went into the genome, I bet they did not make up all the genetic code (the series of nucleotides). In other words, the new cell requires proteins to sustain life and reproduce. Those proteins are synthesized by the cell via the DNA. Did they use sequences of DNA that are already known to produce those proteins and just reproduce large segments of DNA that they already knew would sustain life and reproduce (and add their own codes to this) or did they make up an entirely new DNA sequence that encodes new proteins that contsitute a new way of sustaining life and reproducing? I would bet on the former, which to me is not all that different from what has already been done. It is different...but not much.
It seems to me that using Adrian's definition of "synthetic life" that this has been done for the past 25+ years via genetic engineering, gene therapy, and cloning.
Lastly, I see nothing in any of this that would/should have any impact on whether or not one believes in God or even what one would belive about God (unless the person was oblivious about what has been done previously with genetic engineering, gene therapy, and cloning).
