Darwinian code dating
(In the movie ET, the alien had a six-character genetic code).Asking earthlings to define life is a little like asking a group of born and raised on a deserted island to define animals when they’ve never seen another animal. Some creationists worry that the NASA panel’s definition will force scientists to ignore or cover up findings of life forms that didn’t evolve.NASA's Darwinian definition does indeed embody the theory of evolution, he said.And if the theory applies universally, it predicts that you won't find parentless humanoid beings popping into existence.Thus, there is no lineage of descent and no population that can evolve. One isolated person isn’t capable of Darwinian evolution - we can’t reproduce without a partner.
Crystals grow and reproduce themselves with flaws, but the flaws aren’t passed down to offspring. In looking for signs of past life, a general definition of life is not as important as a set of search criteria, said Harvard biologist Andrew Knoll.Everything we can measure about this being confirms that it is just as much alive as you and me.It eats, moves, heals, replenishes, communicates, feels, defecates.After a triumphant landing, the Curiosity rover is ready to search Mars for signs of past life or suitability for life.Several readers have raised concerns that NASA scientists might fail to recognize life if it isn't based on carbon or is otherwise radically different from our kind of life.The panel put evolution front and center: Life, the panel decided, is self-sustaining chemical system capable of Darwinian evolution. “This definition is very Saganesque.” Creationists aren’t too happy with this, but biologists for the most part say it’s a reasonable guess as to what would tie together life through the cosmos.It’s something of a guess because we only have one example of life.Learning more about this being, though, we find that it has no ancestors, and that it does not age.It does not reproduce, and it is the only such being on the planet. This definition does not work."Ffame's Benner said this type of criticism rests on a semantic misunderstanding between life and being alive.You might find life like robots, but these, he are what he calls biosignatures - products of a living world.While NASA needs to think broadly about life, they can't very well go around declaring clouds and flames and crystals alive.