Creationism Museum...WTF

[BlueDevil]

It occurred to me awhile ago whilst breaking in my new Volcano that on a topic most basically about geology, we've haven't heard from any actual geologists! Surely a professional in the field counts this forum among their bookmarks! Who knows, maybe someone here has their very own Randy Marsh a la Southpark.

I would love to know not only his or her personal feelings on the thread topic, but also:

-What is in their experience the general attitude towards nature's ultimate website of truth, Answersingenesis.org.
-What do they think of the AiG Statement of Faith, that being "No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record."
-How would one equate the above with The Scientific Method?
-Does having a BA in mathematics and a Phd in History of Geology make Terry Mortenson an active, practicing scientist on the cutting edge of current day geology?
-Difference in fields aside, based on accomplishments is Mortenson in the same class as someone like Douglas Futuyma?
-Does it matter that Mortenson is not a member of the History of Science Society (America's peer society) and hasn't published anything in any of the world's acknowledged historical journals?
-Does it matter that the only peer review he partakes in comes from other Young Earth Creationists?


Inquiring minds want to know. I'm not a geologist, and I'm damn sure natureboy here isn't either - so please, if there's a pro in the house, by all means sound off!
Regardless of your personal feelings on creationism, it would be great if we could get some industry insight into the merits of the geology that supposedly supports it.

TIA!

[jamstigator]

Did you see that article recently talking about the imminent creation of artificial life? Looks fascinating, human beings creating new lifeforms themselves (for assorted purposes, mostly industrial). Apparently, most of the problems are close to being solved, starting with a membrane to hold the DNA information. They said that once they've created the life, they're going to let evolution do the hard work and fine tune the organisms for them, since we aren't yet smart enough to do what evolution does, selecting the most robust individuals for species propogation and survival, but the actual creation of basic life, we *are* smart enough for that.

Another interesting thing is that while standard DNA is comprised of four chemicals, they're talking about adding an addition eight to the artificial life's DNA, for twelve total, which would greatly increase the information-storing capability of the DNA. Heck, if we can do that, that exceeds what's already been done, by nature or God or whatever. Maybe our form of life, with four-chemical DNA, was created by some alien race passing through. Maybe *we* are artificial life, also, in other words. I've seen no proof to contradict this. Seen nothing to support it either, but hey.

Nice to see that scientists are actively using evolution as a tool in the lab, even as the less educated members of our society are denying the very existence of same.

[LegalizeTheGreen]

rofl, the sad thing is it isn't even the "less educated". Hell, our president denies evolution and he is the leader of this country.

[jdmarcus59]

Unless they start sending people to my door asking me to come to the museum, I've no beef.

I like your responce,there does not have to be so much hatred:thumbsup:

[JD1stTimer]

Lol, eight base pairs.. WTF? Like every living thing doesn't offer enough complexity for our corporations to exploit?

[DreadConches]

If you are talking about the same attempt as I am Jamstigator, then they are not using DNA. The articles I read said that a team is trying to create a basic organism using something other than DNA, RNA or anything used by natural organisms.

And nature, why is it that if people do not see why Creationism is so "TOTALLY TRUE" they are either ignorant or stupid?
Caution:not actual nature quote.

[jamstigator]

Here's the (short) article relating to artificial life:

Wired News - AP News

And here's the quote about the 'brains' of the proposed new lifeforms:

"Szostak is also optimistic about the next step - getting nucleotides, the building blocks of DNA, to form a working genetic system."

So maybe it will be 'real' DNA, and maybe it won't. I'd think using actual DNA (e.g., the nucleotides, standard double-helix model) as the blueprint to get started might make things easier on them, but I'm not a genetic scientist, so I don't really know. 'Working genetic system' is a lot more characters than DNA though, and I'm lazy.