Describe your research.
Yup.
(filler)
1 Like
I am not trying to contradict you or anyone else - I am pointing out that “the essential steps of life” are not as well understood as may be inferred from your comments. There are reviews on this subject that range from “the chemistry leading to life is, and will remain, a mystery to science”, to the other side that “we are just about there and a few more experiments and we will understand how life began and evolved”.
My comment is to show the former is closer to the state of the art, and not the latter. No mention of pixy dust 
Hi Chris:
Thank you for your interest.
What we are proposing is a new branch of biology that goes deeper than cellular biology and deeper again than molecular biology, down to the atomic level where the action really is, for the construction of living cells and entities. This is why we are calling it Atomic Biology.
We are way beyond Intelligent Design.
Design implies a one time work to prepare a plan or blueprint before something is constructed.
We at RealityRandD are researching the essential physical work required to build each complex part of each new cell using the right atoms, then to install the cells in there proper sequence and hook them up with nerve wiring and capillary plumbing to build a living entity.
You can think of the DNA in a cell as a “blueprint”, but each blueprint in each cell that has a DNA molecule, has to have that molecule constructed with the right numbers of the right atoms precisely placed and sequenced using super-intelligent knowledge, dexterity, speed, quality control, reliability, and obvious care.
When you talk of billions of tiny little factories, they, of course, have to be built with atoms as well. Do you think that may take some intelligence? Believe me, it is not just “lava flow” chemistry or the laws of physics that are doing all this brilliant work, Chris. We have a Creator.
I know this is a new concept, but the closer you analyze it, the more logic becomes evident.
It will take some open-mindedness to follow the evidence where it leads.
That loud clap you just heard was the sound of my hand hitting my forehead! 
Thanks for the correction, @beaglelady
1 Like
Do you have 28 years?
Hi Thomas,
I have an Ivy League degree, but I am clueless as to how what you have written would be translated into an actual experimental design. I suspect that whatever it is you are trying to accomplish would end up looking like any number of experiments that already occur in biochemistry labs, though.
Maybe we would understand your goals better if you could spend a few paragraphs giving us the details (specific materials, equipment, measurements, hypothesis, etc.) of an experimental design that RealityRandD hopes to conduct.
If your ideas have merit, you should be able to express them in a clear, concise manner. Einstein was able to express relativity in a simple equation with 3 terms, for example.
Cheers,
Hi Steve:
I am pretty sure it was Craig Venter who said, "Make no mistake; we are not creating life from scratch."
And certainly things obey the laws of physics, but laws cannot do the essential intelligent physical work required to assemble living cells with atoms, and neither can straight chemical reactions.
GodsBiology:
You probably learned in about grade five science that material things are made of atoms. This means that our cells, being material things, are made of atoms.
[quote=“beaglelady, post:59, topic:5251”]A strange way to put things.
[/quote]
And condescending too, particularly since plenty of modern biologists study phenomena at the atomic level.
Thomas,
What does your “atomic biology” have to contribute to our understanding of the keto-enol tautomerization that underlies most spontaneous transition mutations in living things?
Isn’t that plenty atomic, or more specifically, doesn’t go beyond your atomic biology by being sub-atomic? 
1 Like
Thomas,
Why not just admit that you don’t have a real scientific hypothesis to present? [quote=“GodsBiology, post:50, topic:5251”]
What better empirical predictions do you need?
[/quote]
Real ones that arise from your hypothesis. You don’t seem to be getting the fundamental nature of science.
1 Like
You’ll need to give me a reason for spending God’s resources on your merchandise. You could start by answering the very straightforward and reasonable request I made to you.
If you are unable to do so, I will be forced to conclude that the contents of your merchandise are not worth the expense.
Ball’s in your court.
Your comments, then, seem to have nothing to do with my statement, since I said nothing at all about either evolution or the origin of life. I said only that the processes that occur in cells involve ordinary chemistry; the atoms involved do not need have a special “breath-of-life” added to them.
I didn’t say he had started from scratch. I said he’d synthesized a DNA molecule, something you said humans couldn’t do.
1 Like
Did you know that colorless green ideas sleep furiously?
I just don’t think it’s right for people to come here and use BioLogos as a platform to market their strange ideas and sell books. Especially when they won’t answer questions about the nature of their “research.”
Beaglelady, I just offered that information to someone who actually seemed to want to know more about the new branch of science we are proposing.
I have endeavored to portray the basic concepts in a simple manner.
I now have to get back to work.
Hi Thomas,
(1) I asked for a few sentences. I did not request a price list for merchandise. I am astonished that you could not distinguish between the one and the other.
(2) I am also surprised that you are either unable or unwilling to talk about your research in any detail.
Happy Fourth, though.
So, we may be missing this interaction for what it is. From @GodsBiology’s bio:
He has studied at three universities and two institutes. His work background is in engineering, research, construction, international manufacturing, exploration, and now publishing. The education and experiences in these fields helped him in researching and understanding the intelligent physical work required to design, construct, sustain, and maintain living entities.
About The Authors - Darwin's Replacement
If there was any doubt, @GodsBiology’s bio makes it clear. He does not do anything we would recognize as scientific research.
Still, I find this exchange to be enlightening because @GodsBiology’s seems to be a real “vitalist” (see Vitalism - Wikipedia). Is that right @GodsBiology? do you believe, like wikipedia defines it, that “living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities because they are governed by different principles than are inanimate things?” It seems like you believe that living things require God’s precise intervention at every point to be alive.
I think what @GodsBiology is saying is so hard for us to understand because he may be the first vitalist that any of us have ever encountered. Not even YEC go this far. I, for one, find this whole exchange facinating.
I’m reminded that the Bible has power to bring us to correct knowledge of Jesus, and a saving faith in Him. There should be no doubt, God’s purpose with it is not bring us to correct knowledge or Biology.
1 Like
Chris, There are volumes written about evolution, and none that I have read contain logical steps for the reliable construction of live cells and entities.
This will be my last endeavour for now to simplify, our atomic biology hypothesis:
Living cells are constructed of the right numbers of the right atoms. This requires intelligent selection, counting, and precise, planned placement of the properly selected atoms;
Atoms have no internal means to move themselves into a precise position in a cell;
Therefore, an intelligent external force is required to find, select, count, and precisely place the right numbers of the right atoms to construct each complex part of each complex cell;
Also, these inanimate atoms do not have ‘life’ of their own, therefore life must be added to each new cell (‘the breath-of-life’ without which no cell lives or functions).
Then all the various types of newly constructed cells have to be precisely assembled in proper sequence and hooked up to build the unique entity that the builder (Creator) desires.
If that is not clear enough, then I probably cannot help you.
As far as research is concerned in coming up with a new branch of science that may ultimately replace Darwinisms, and bring God back to our classrooms, I was certainly not sitting on my hands.
I certainly knew there would be resistance from those who do not seem to want God to be acknowledged as the Creator of individual plants and creatures, including us.
Swamidass, it may be a good idea for all scientists to study at least some engineering because planes have to fly and bridges have to stand. Engineers are way past philosophy and speculation. What they do has to be practical and work. You can see from my bio that I was involved with designing things and building or manufacturing things. As an employer, I needed to hire various specialists to help get the work accomplished.
So it is with developing and distributing these newly assembled, practical, and beneficial new concepts. It will take time and work.
I will be spending more time with some of the approximate 113,000 known scientists and medical professionals in the US that already disagree with macro-evolution and are bold enough to admit it.
Of course most of them are not under the anti-science duress to speak only evolution as the cause of life, notwithstanding their disbelief.
I am so happy to see that you are at least open-minded and positive enough to find the concepts of atomic biology to be ‘fascinating’.