Do you think scientists will be able to create intelligent life (say...dog IQ or higher) from scratch within the next 50 years?
The playing god argument is such bullshit. Are people really that afraid of advancement that they have to morally justify their stupidity? "Sure, we could create intelligent life and learn about ourselves in the process, but that'd be 'playing god' and that's bad," Neanderthals, the lot of you.
It's possible- but wrong. Some of those scientists better quit playing God and do something more beneficial- they can already create learning AI (and who knows how far they'll get in the next few years?), but they can't clean pollution or patch a hole in the ozone?
I guess it depends on how you define from scratch. Doctors have been creating intelligent life using invitro fertilization for decades.
Scientists can't even answer everything about the brain; even if they do in the next fifty years recreating it is a whole different story. There is always AI but that is not true intelligence. True intelligence would require a brain that only God can create not scientists.
Sex-crazed robot here I come!
won't happen. ever. even if it was possible, it would be illegalized before it could occur
Hey the world's ending next year so nope
... I'll be surprised if civilization will even last another 50 years. Science is too underfunded and undercut by frugalities. Until we clean up our act, we remain pawns not gods.
@ALL OF YOU: it won't happen in the next 50 years. We as a species get caught in frugal matters such as the economy and stocks. This argument proves it because humans haven't even figured out how to stop killing each there let alone dictate the flow of evolution...
Well it also depends on your definition of life.
50 years is a lot of time. Anything could happen.
even if they could it isn't right to play God.
A lot can happen in 50 years plus we might die next year anyway
Only God can make a living breathing life form from "scratch". We are made out of dust
@Locke. I mean using a base other than amino acid chains. We have never seen that before and likely never will....
Sigh.... that was the real me...
I am not verItas... or veritas..
@veritas: I'm not sure what you mean by scratch. Do you mean we should break this down to giving scientists who have no prior knowledge of biochemistry atoms of different elements and saying have fun? Or maybe you would rather have them make their own elements?
@locke. From scratch... no. Basically from scratch.... probably. Carbon has certain qualities that silicon doesn't that makes it more conducive for protein formation than silicon. That is really complex stuff beyond our breadth. Unless, of course, you happen to be an organic bio-chemist....
@veritas: but the point is that we do have the basis to create carbon based life. We shouldn't boil all of this down to "from scratch". Silicon is interesting. Is anyone familiar with the positronic brain concept?
@Locke. To the best of our knowledge they are necessary for carbon-based life.... but other elements? Silicon is the next most viable. I might be possible but who knows.
@byte - good point - The 'Show of Hands' [person] actuall spoke up here and stipulated that they meant 'non-organic'.
As for creating amino acids for organic life it can be done. There it is not a impossible leap to creating cells, then more complex life.
Most of you are assuming organic life.
We have the rudimentary components today that could lead to intelligent non-organic life. There are mobile robots with learning "brains" based on nuerons and have intelligence greater than a cockroach. Combined with nano-bots, carbon muscles ect. It's possible
@veritas: I think everybody who is a legitimate poster named veritas should retire the name and not tell people what you switch to. As to the question. I think you are over-analyzing the question. To the best of our knowledge life can only be made with AA's. It is a molecule that is necessary.
@Locke. Yes we can make amino acids but that wouldn't be from scratch. It would be copying what nature made. Yes, technically it would be....but it wouldn't be FROM SCRATCH. This is the real veritas...
@verItas. $@!# off ALREADY!!!!!! ITS NOT FUNNY...... FOR ANYONE!!!!! Actually I am giggling because I know you have no job and live in your mom's basement. Enjoying life?!
I agree. The veritas I have debated before would not say these things. So @veritas...: please change your screen name. Besides this I think you are missing the point of the question. We aren't going to create a planet and then let it sit there to develop life. We can synthesize proteins and AA's.
man, can veritas STFU?
Wow verltas you did a good job at impersonating but veritas wouldnt say that
This just proves that GOD created Earth.
...... Be astonishing. We HAVENT EVEN BEGUN starting to create life COMPLETELY FROM SCRATCH. It took billions of years the first time to get it right. And that was pure CHANCE. EARTH GOT LUCKY AND LIFE WAS MADE. To do the same again is sadistically so improbable, it won't happen.
@Locke. You are missing the point. IT IS PRACTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO CREATE LIFE ENTIRELY FROM SCRATCH! Proteins are the building blocks of ALL LIFE we have EVER KNOWN! All proteins are made of amino acids. To create life without using amino acids to form more and more complex structures would.......
@veritas: The problem is that we have no idea how long it took for life to be created. We know how long the Earth didn't have life. We know how long it took life to evolve to our level. But for all we know it could have been one lightning strike in a pool of primordial sludge that created life.
@Rhino. I said "we can put all our pieces together." A DEAD BODY HAS ALL THE PIECES PUT TOGETHER but has no life. How do we create life? I don't think we will be able to any time soon if ever.
@veritis good argument but if we can make all the pieces why can't we put those pieces together?
@Locke. It took nature over 2 Billion years to create life (don't bring Genesis into this). We have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA how to synthesize life. We can put all the pieces together (organs) but we don't know how to actually make life itself... My guess...never
@higuys: your own arguments work against you. Since humans are so powerful and complex then they could do anything in 50 years. And since the IQ sought after is only a dogs it should be even easier.
a human is essentially 100000000000000000+ lines of code. all of this runs on the same amount of energy as a 100 watt light bulb. try and recreate that in 50 years
obviously all those who said yes to this have no clue how extremely complicated the brain is. here's a close up. the average human brain performs mor calculations than the worlds fastest super computer. it has 100000000000 cells and 100000000000000 connections.
the sheer circuitry of the brain is overwhelming. human and ape brains are significantly more intelligent because of a unique combination of neurons. we don't even have a clue how our brains work or how to genetically import this to any other species. one day yes but we are just too far
Depend on what you consider making intelligent life as. For example, in 50 years I believe we could create a totally new species without breeding existing animals but be playing with DNA. However if you are saying let's start with a dish of microorganisms, then definitely not.
Aren't we already so close?
well we can clone mammals (though they don't live long) so it could be possible
My computer is smarter than my dog.
@Rhino - This is where it belongs.
@FrankZappa - that was under a different thread.
...many possible* sources...
@Rhino: I would like to begin by saying that I disagree with the people that say God is the only one who can create life. BUT! Religion is extremely relevant to this debate because if you had studied any philosophy you would know that the basis for life and intelligence have many sources. God is one
@Rhino God is not religion.