The Atheist
05-29-2010, 06:53 PM
It just might be.
I refer to the astonishing news that Dr Craig Venter has manufactured a synthetic bacterium which replicated itself.
While he has come nowhere near cracking the problem of abiogenesis, what has done is quite amazing.
It's hard to find an unbiased article on the work, so I'll try to give an objective precis of what he's actually done. No doubt some of our resident biologists can weigh in as well.
Dr Venter and his associates have synthesised a genome, using genetic splicing techniques to create a strand of DNA which is both novel and man-made - it does not exist in nature - and which is relatively "programmable" in that we will be able to choose which traits to retain or reject.
This new DNA/genome has then been inserted into a bacterium whose own DNA had been removed. That new bacterium has replicated itself in the exact manner that bacteria do, meaning that we have created a bacterium which we may be able to program to make useful organisms. The prime use will be in enabling medical scientists to create vaccines faster and more cheaply than at present, while other potential uses could be:
A bacteria which produces oxygen.
A bacteria which produces oil.
A bacteria which consumes toxic waste and produces non-toxic excretions.
These are all fairytale-fiction still at the moment, but the potential is enormous.
Many reports have shouted that Dr Venter has "created life", which is not technically correct as he still needed to insert the code into a cell which had been alive to get it to replicate, which DNA does not do on its own.
Others have shouted out the deadly potential of such organisms, and while there may be a point to these fears, the genie has been out of the bottle for some time in terms of genetic modification and no tomatoes have attacked anyone yet. Comments like:
"We must ensure that strong regulations are in place to protect the environment and human health from this potentially dangerous new technology," said Eric Hoffman of Friends of the Earth. (from Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64P6OZ20100526)) are a bit pointless.
Still others shout about how this affects theism. The Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/7753609/Craig-Venters-research-is-scary-but-not-in-the-way-you-think.html), from UK, rather naively states: "The universe is a bleak and comfortless place when life's essence is just a sequence of chemicals." I doubt many theists are losing sleep over it, becasue atheists have been pointing out for many years that life is just a sequence of chemicals anyway. Them being proved right won't make many theists lose sleep, I imagine.
Whichever way, there is still a lot of work to be done, but I do feel that in time, this will be seen as a turning point for biology and humankind.
What are your thoughts/concerns?
I refer to the astonishing news that Dr Craig Venter has manufactured a synthetic bacterium which replicated itself.
While he has come nowhere near cracking the problem of abiogenesis, what has done is quite amazing.
It's hard to find an unbiased article on the work, so I'll try to give an objective precis of what he's actually done. No doubt some of our resident biologists can weigh in as well.
Dr Venter and his associates have synthesised a genome, using genetic splicing techniques to create a strand of DNA which is both novel and man-made - it does not exist in nature - and which is relatively "programmable" in that we will be able to choose which traits to retain or reject.
This new DNA/genome has then been inserted into a bacterium whose own DNA had been removed. That new bacterium has replicated itself in the exact manner that bacteria do, meaning that we have created a bacterium which we may be able to program to make useful organisms. The prime use will be in enabling medical scientists to create vaccines faster and more cheaply than at present, while other potential uses could be:
A bacteria which produces oxygen.
A bacteria which produces oil.
A bacteria which consumes toxic waste and produces non-toxic excretions.
These are all fairytale-fiction still at the moment, but the potential is enormous.
Many reports have shouted that Dr Venter has "created life", which is not technically correct as he still needed to insert the code into a cell which had been alive to get it to replicate, which DNA does not do on its own.
Others have shouted out the deadly potential of such organisms, and while there may be a point to these fears, the genie has been out of the bottle for some time in terms of genetic modification and no tomatoes have attacked anyone yet. Comments like:
"We must ensure that strong regulations are in place to protect the environment and human health from this potentially dangerous new technology," said Eric Hoffman of Friends of the Earth. (from Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64P6OZ20100526)) are a bit pointless.
Still others shout about how this affects theism. The Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/7753609/Craig-Venters-research-is-scary-but-not-in-the-way-you-think.html), from UK, rather naively states: "The universe is a bleak and comfortless place when life's essence is just a sequence of chemicals." I doubt many theists are losing sleep over it, becasue atheists have been pointing out for many years that life is just a sequence of chemicals anyway. Them being proved right won't make many theists lose sleep, I imagine.
Whichever way, there is still a lot of work to be done, but I do feel that in time, this will be seen as a turning point for biology and humankind.
What are your thoughts/concerns?