If I weren’t so dedicated to actually going to sleep in a few minutes, I would absolutely love to talk more about the topic I am about to mention. And hopefully I will take the time in a few days — until then, feel free and add your own comments with your thoughts. For me, I will simply make one observation here about the coverage of the news.
Did you hear about Dr. Craig Venter’s “creation” of “artificial life”? It was apparently all the rage today, and I have only caught it now just as my yawning and eye-drooping was kicking into gear and my pillow began to look so, so head-friendly, but it’s a topic rife with opportunities for thought and discussion.
But how do you get your information about what to say? How do you get your facts? I’ve looked at three different articles (actually four, but the fourth had such horrendous banner ads I refuse to link to it here), and depending on which one you read, you might draw different conclusions.
Read them for yourself:
- The UK’s MailOnline: “Scientist accused of playing God after creating artificial life by making designer microbe from scratch – but could it wipe out humanity?”
- The BBC: “‘Artificial life’ breakthrough announced by scientists”
- The Washington Post (via the Boston Globe): “Partially synthetic cell created”
(An earlier article from two years ago in the Globe actually set the stage for this event: “Making cells like computers”)
To me, these three articles presented the topic not just from different perspectives, but in such ways that the reality of the result would be interpreted completely differently depending on which article you read.
I will let you guess which article I prefer of the three (that is, which gets it most right, though they all contain worthwhile elements as well as “off base” elements). You might be surprised — then again, maybe you won’t be. I’ll say which coverage I preferred next week when I can post about the topic in more detail.
Is there much to talk about in such developments? Yes, I do think so! When is someone “playing God”? When is he simply “exploring creation” or crating new tools to benefit humanity? Is this a truly significant achievement or not? What is the real potential of it, for good or for evil? Should research along these lines be pursued? What is God’s judgment on such activity? Is anyone in the scientific community asking that last question? (I know, I know — the last question is almost a joke. And how sad that this is the case.) What relevant scriptures come to mind? Anything prophetic?
For this post, I’ll let you say what you think, so comment away! I will try to add my thoughts early next week. But for now, I’m going to sleep — where hopefully I will not dream of Dr. Frankenstein’s Bacteria…