I'm amazed Mike, at how little excitement this generated yesterday - no reports of church intervention, or protesters or anything. 

I was intrigued to read how they hoped to maybe use it for food production (think Star Trek replicators) but also at the researcher who called it potentially "pollution".  That was food for thought. 

Really, this is on a very minute scale, and still hopefully a long ways from creating a cob of corn or even farther from a hamster.    How do we regulate this, or track its 'pollution' impact on crops.  If man-made bacterium was used to digest compost quickly, what is the quality of the compost afterward that we use to grow food in? 

I think it is another question as well, about how we define GOD & creation.

Crossing my fingers that good things come of this.

well, that's an answer for everything isn't it :) 

my husband says if God meant for us to walk a lot, he wouldn't have created Henry Ford.  

You're right though - of course it isn't the technology that is evil, or even the motivation behind the technology.  It's greed that can turn it into a weapon or pollution.  And with our systems being all based on economic growth & inherently greed becoming the driving force, we lose control of technology and hardly even notice.

Funny, is it not, when a scientist makes this statement it seems desirable and innocuous.

Apparently the history of the science of eugenics - and its outcome - have been forgotten.

In 1913 Theodore Roosevelt wrote

Some day we will realize that the prime duty, the inescapable duty of the good citizens of the right type is to leave his or her blood behind him in the world; and that we have no business to permit the perpetuation of citizens of the wrong type. The great problem of civilization is to secure a relative increase of the valuable as compared with the less valuable or noxious elements in the population.

My question still remains who decides who is the "right type" or the "wrong";  what is desirable, valuable or noxious?

I personally find blackflies noxious, but they apparently serve a number of good and necessary functions in nature ( What Are Black Flies Good For, Anyway? )  I suspect the same can be said of humans as well and in our quest for perfection we will end up losing something valuable because we were blind to all its elements.

LB

Cheeky bastards, you're running around science like kids wi' guns
Creating a new world, while the one you've got is stinking
Go on, 'ands up, 'ands up anyone who thinks you've got it right
Yeah, there's always one I can see you
If you want the position of God, then take the responsibility

     Orbital, You Lot

LOL   internal combustion engine

Thankfully they stopped making Ford Pintos a long time ago. 

Well we are always going to push forward. How many people are killed by and in cars every day? Or by electricity? Most people still like them well enough. And everyone has a different idea as to where to 'draw the line' on science and progress. Fact is, the line will be continually moved ever forward by us on purpose. Doesn't mean there won't be dangers or problems in the future. Its been clear for some time now that true human level AI will be achievable. Time line would put that at some point in the next 40 years or so. And functunal, human-like robots will be a reality even sooner. Maybe 20 to 25 years in that case. Add to that all the advances like the one first mentioned in the opening post and we have a very different world opening up for us. But in many ways not so much more different then this one was for some of our parents.

Guess its really all the woman's fault for getting those apples from the Tree of Knowledge. I mean, Adam was happy just laying around and eating whatever and hang'in out with Eve. But oh no, she had to 'fix' things. ?;-)

What I find laughable is the twist the Creationists have taken on this.

Up until this story, they touted the inability of science to create life as "proof" of intelligent design.

Now they are touting the ability of science to create life as "proof" of intelligent design.

I think the ID people need an inoculation of scientifically created honesty gene.

Gee Mike, first off I don't know why you thought I was saying any of the advances I talked about would fix things. An advance is like anything else. Its how you use it. And I'm not going to agrue time lines with you either, because they are simple projections. If it makes you feel warm and happy to think we will never achieve these things then go ahead. You find yourself in a similar position to Creationists eventually though if you live long enough. Technology is a tool. It doesn't have 'superpowers', and I'm not even sure where that idea came from,  but simply saying no to it and trying to deny everything is as pointless and trying to say problem x will be fixed by such and such advance in technology. Its up to man to deal with the issues he faces. Technology is just one of the tools he uses to do so.

And I like RitaTG posts about the joke. Though how a creation from basic elements would be wrong or misuse i'm not sure. People have their opions and they are right to have them. But often we all have different ideas about what is to far and what isn't. I've heard that genetically modifying a fetus to remove, say the predisposition to heart problems would be wrong, but those same people say pacemakers are okay. This is a very personal belief for most people and I can understand that. Its nice to hear others thoughts on it in any case.

Jim ...you are very perceptive .... thank you!

Hugs

Rita