Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderbird
My above post is the best definition of life we have in biology thus far. More to the point however and simply put.
No one as yet has claimed or exclaimed "its alive" in any lab anywhere.
|
The myopia of the challenges in this thread are bewildering. By the definition you shared, we very much have accomplished reproducing the steps.
Either way, the "definition" you shared relates more to early theories on the organization of thought. In the context of abiogenesis (life from non-life), the definition I've seen most commonly used in biological circles is that something alive must have
all four of the following characteristics:
1. Metabolism (both anabolism and catabolism)
2. Response to stimuli
3. Growth
4. Reproduction
I've read that many researchers in the abiogenesis field have added a fifth characteristic:
5. RNA/DNA directed protein synthesis
Further, some other researchers even add a sixth characteristic for their purposes:
6. Has a lipid bilayer membrane.
The presentations I've shared meet those criteria, and the challenge really is finding a clear and consistent way of categorically separating the living thing from it's environment, which your term Thunderbird, noticably does not.
Are you expecting them to dump some sugar and poprocks into a soda can and generate a flying squirrel? Give me a break. Stop with the myopic challenges.
