If everything is made from an atom, why can’t we create life by assembling them?

Cells being vast with respect to the nucleus inside them, we’re looking at somewhere between all day and all week to make one cell. While the nucleus is very complex, the cell’s simpler but more massive parts also have to be handled that same old slow billion atoms per second.

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, will be to make the machine that plants a new atom every nanosecond (one billion atoms per second) and can hold the vulnerable cell it’s working on in a benign environment (can’t let it dry out!) – –

Call me when you have that working.

Is it true that the white throne judgement, God’s final judgement, occurs right before the new heavens and the new Earth are created?

Did you know that in 1054, 12 years before William the Conqueror came to Britain, there were two popes at the same time, one in the west and one in Constantinople. Guess, if you want to, how to reverse-engineer that split. We do know that it happened, ‘nuf sed.

They formalized the split by excommunicating each other, and the surface details had to do with the order of arrival of the Holy Spirit and the Son, the third and second persons of the Trinity, at the beginning of the Universe.

That, friends, is reverse engineering.

(( NOTE: Foes of the whole idea of the trinity pooh-pooh that idea because it evades human logic and comprehension. Hmmmm – we are talking about GOD, aren’t we? Our doctrine of the Trinity is as close as we need to come when trying to reverse-engineer GOD. We find the ‘what’ useful; the ‘how’ is well above our pay grade. ))

Early conversations around evolution and creation focused on a non-literal interpretation of Genesis. What led this to shift in America?

Now consider theology. It took 66 years from publication of Darwin’s book on the divergence of species (1859) to the Scopes Trial in 1925, regarding a man (Scopes) who tested the state of Tennessee’s Butler Act (made it unlawful to teach human evolution in any state-funded school) by teaching evolution. Over that 66 year span we saw terms coined like “monkey’s uncle.”

The not-quite-fluid flow of ideas managed to dig claws into the way people read Scripture, and the notion that Scripture’s description of how the world came to be might have skipped a few details was, to deeply conservative Bible students, like fingernails on a blackboard. And that shock wave has been causing slow snarls in discussion groups ever since.

As a reference, “Taliban” translates as “Bible Students” – you might dwell on the peril of absolutist thinking.

GOD made this world, but told us over and over that we would never figure it all out. Yet we have folks whose need to reverse-engineer the process leaves them feeling put-upon by “uppity science-religionists” who simply want to understand the data on the ground.

Can you explain how the various mechanisms of evolution coordinate so that some new feature, like a finger, has all of the systems needed to be of benefit, for example skeleton, vascular network, nervous system, including the brain programming?

DNA is like that. So if you have a complex structure on one end of the spine, a surprisingly modest change might plop an analog at the other end. From there to real functionality, hind limbs changing size to bigger / smaller, and the like, often hinges on nigglish changes in parameters.

Development of nerves, muscles, ligaments, bones, etc. probably built the same way. A bone that grows longer usually “prompts” the surrounding structures to accommodate its size. Can you visualize how cumbersome it would be for these things to “find” a working arrangement blindly? Evolution solves that one very elegantly, by “stumbling across” ways for adjoining structures to co-ordinate their growth. There is no plan and no purpose – – – this is, for me the most enormous proof of Intelligent Design – to make a Universe where DNA can happen.

Does anyone believe that it may be to soon to know how GM meat might affect our physical appearance since the modification makes the animal large and bulging in their body and look as if they have mental and functional difficulties?

Even then, any small stretches of DNA that make it past the gut into the bloodstream are ineffective. DNA has to reside in a cell’s nucleus in order to have an effect. Viruses do this: they consist of highly organized bundles of DNA which include things like augur-shaped bits that allow the virus to get inside a cell, where it hijacks the cell’s machinery to step aside from its ordinary function and simply churn out millions of copies of the virus. It isn’t pretty.

The only DNA you need to worry about is a virus; DNA from snake meat, for instance, doesn’t make you grow fangs.

Why didn’t other species like penguins or felines evolve to be sentient?

Nothing in their environment has made intelligence worth the candle. Brains require a lot more metabolic input that brawn. Survival in the wild requires optimizing cost-benefit tradeoffs, so brains never get much of a chance.

SO – why did hominids get brainy?

Two reinforcing factors.

First, before brains were very big, some hominid ancestor learned to cook food over whatever fire there was; lightning strikes, that sort of thing. That food was more easily digested, so getting more nutrients was simple. After that, maintaining fire paid off. The access to better food meant a metabolic boost, one effect of which was to reduce the relative cost of a bigger brain.

Second, over the past two million years the area in northern Africa where hominids were prominent underwent a series of about ten violent weather changes. New predators, new prey, different food plants, different strategies for staying safe and well fed, different strategies for surviving the annual period where food was hard to find. Ten of these, about every 200 thousand years. Each one favored cleverness and mental flexibility. Since brains weren’t as expensive as before, they could grow. So they did.

The above is a layman’s recollection from reading and reflecting. The real reason, though, that homo sapiens managed to grow a bigger brain was that it *could*.

Give the three key factors of the modern synthetic theory of evolution for very short Answer?

Fact one: there is no “theory” of evolution, but there is massive evidence that it has been happening, starting at least 3.6 billion years ago.


Fact two: the fellow who had the nerve to state in public that new species rise up on a continuing basis was Charles Darwin. In his day it may have been called a “theory” but, in today’s dictionary, the correct term is conjecture. References to “Darwinian evolution” miss the point completely. There is the fellow who first put the idea on public view, and there is the current sun-bright understanding of its history and the life-mechanisms, e.g. ever-changing DNA, that enable it.

Fact three: “synthetic” evolution imagines a future in which computer-aided researchers learn enough to the intricacies and hidden gotcha’s of DNA to begin writing their own species from scratch. DATAPOINT: the human genome contains more that 6 billion nucleotides, hence more than 2 billion codons. (A codon is a triplet of the letters A, C, G, and T, which provide 64 possible combinations.)

Skipping the math, the human genome compares directly, in terms of information content, with two thousand beach-read novels, each with somewhere in excess of 150,000 words. TWO THOUSAND! In other words humans must use enough computer power to write a couple of thousand beach-read novels. Trust me, the actual beach-read novels are a far simpler endeavor.