Sunday, December 05, 2010
Fantastically silly
News item:
Huh? In the first place, this bacterium isn't a "new form of life" at all. It's just an unexpected adaptation, an unexpected ability to switch to a different chemical pattern.
Plenty of animals can switch their chemistry, including several kinds of fish and arthropods that trade the water in their cells for ethylene-style antifreeze to survive cold and dry periods. Fish are vastly more complex than bacteria, so the new discovery is not all that dramatic.
In the second place, how does a new discovery of an unexpected complexity in life work against religion? No sacred scripture says anything about the specifics of carbon-based chemistry. Genesis talks (literally or figuratively, you choose!) about life being created from dirt or dust. It doesn't give the exact elemental composition of the dust, nor does it say "arsenic-free dust". If the dust is meant to be typical of Earth's composition, it would contain some arsenic, which is a fairly common element.
In general, each discovery of increased complexity makes it harder to assume uncaused randomness and easier to assume an intelligent creator, though I doubt we'll ever reach a conclusive proof by this path. ¶ 6:56 AM
The discovery of what is apparently an entirely new form of life -- a bacteria based on toxic arsenic rather than phosphorus, one of the six building blocks of all life on Earth -- has set the scientific world abuzz, prompting White House inquiries to NASA and threatening to upend longstanding beliefs about biology.
But some say the announcement also signals an end to religious faith, or at least the beginning of the end, because it implies that life can spring forth unexpectedly on Earth or even on other planets, and in unexpected forms -- developments that seem to run counter to literal readings of biblical creation accounts.
Huh? In the first place, this bacterium isn't a "new form of life" at all. It's just an unexpected adaptation, an unexpected ability to switch to a different chemical pattern.
Plenty of animals can switch their chemistry, including several kinds of fish and arthropods that trade the water in their cells for ethylene-style antifreeze to survive cold and dry periods. Fish are vastly more complex than bacteria, so the new discovery is not all that dramatic.
In the second place, how does a new discovery of an unexpected complexity in life work against religion? No sacred scripture says anything about the specifics of carbon-based chemistry. Genesis talks (literally or figuratively, you choose!) about life being created from dirt or dust. It doesn't give the exact elemental composition of the dust, nor does it say "arsenic-free dust". If the dust is meant to be typical of Earth's composition, it would contain some arsenic, which is a fairly common element.
In general, each discovery of increased complexity makes it harder to assume uncaused randomness and easier to assume an intelligent creator, though I doubt we'll ever reach a conclusive proof by this path. ¶ 6:56 AM
