mheannb Posted May 1, 2016 Posted May 1, 2016 (edited) The scientist who grew a human ear at the back of a mouse has suggested it may one day be possible to grow a liver. Edited May 1, 2016 by mheannb
zapatos Posted May 1, 2016 Posted May 1, 2016 This is no more tampering with creation than is hydroponics.
mheannb Posted May 1, 2016 Author Posted May 1, 2016 This is no more tampering with creation than is hydroponics. hydroponics? i don't understand. Or I am just thinking literally about the art of growing a plant without soil... Thanks for the reply by the way. This is no more tampering with creation than is hydroponics. what do you call it anyway?
ajb Posted May 1, 2016 Posted May 1, 2016 The problem is your use of 'creation'. It suggests a creator. And what is the news here?
mheannb Posted May 1, 2016 Author Posted May 1, 2016 The problem is your use of 'creation'. It suggests a creator. And what is the news here? What is wrong with the use of "creation"? Are you saying that a mouse is not a creation? Maybe for you it is not a news but its an interesting topic i feel like posting.
ajb Posted May 1, 2016 Posted May 1, 2016 What is wrong with the use of "creation"? Are you saying that a mouse is not a creation? Like I said, the word is usually associated with a 'creator' like a god. Your title 'Tampering with creation' is just loaded.
Klaynos Posted May 1, 2016 Posted May 1, 2016 Mouse is an evolved lifeform, not created. Calling it a creation implies a creator. I'd say that we have tempered far far more in other ways, building houses and roads, selectively breeding animals, cutting down forests over almost all of Europe! 1
John Cuthber Posted May 1, 2016 Posted May 1, 2016 The scientist who grew a human ear at the back of a mouse has suggested it may one day be possible to grow a liver. Part of "creation" (whether it be created by a God, the big bang or the spaghetti monster) is mankind; and mankind does that sort of thing. So the mouse with an ear on its back is a part of creation. Preventing that sort of thing would be "tampering with creation" just as much as allowing it would be. So what was your point?
swansont Posted May 1, 2016 Posted May 1, 2016 ! Moderator Note This is old, so it's not news, no link was provided as is expected here, and no real topic for discussion was presented that relates to science. The OP might try again, if the discussion was better outlined, referenced, and posted in an appropriate section.
Recommended Posts