why is it that scientist have not been able to make? why scientist haven't made a real human?
454187
most things that scientists have made are duplicates of what God has already created but they have not be able to make LIFE. They cant make "real human" because the source of life is with God.
292505
Sure.  But they can not always be responsible for how other humans decide to use them.  Scientists are responsible to "discover" and invent.
408320
Very niave!  We have been shown that there are other living organisms on other planets that we have have snet out to study.  Just because they are not in human or (our) peoples form does not mean that the planet is not alive. We have also been shown to where some planets have shown previous life on them.
731606
in the Psalms it says a fool says" There is no God"\n\nIf you put all the necessary "ingredients" together to make a single living cell ...ONE, not billions...how long would it take? would it happen at all? to have a creation there must be a Creator.
369526
Watch, listen and be prepared to learn from others. A good scientist (much like a good person) will always be willing to accept new ideas and beliefs as fact until they can prove otherwise.\n\nNever let personal agendas or beliefs get in the way of your work.\n\nAlways be prepared to put your hand up and admit you were wrong. Then go and work out why you were wrong, if you're still convinced that you're right say so and be prepared to back up what you say.\n\nIn summary - courage, humility and a strong sense of self belief.\n\nBTW I'm a scientist ;D
717386
My  hobby is to encourage youg people to embrace science.\nDo your best but remeber science and career is not everything. Be human!
281261
I think a great deal more needs to be done in animal cloning before humans get involved. Besides the ethical issues, there are real physiological difficulties that seem to erupt in cloned organisms. It seems that having two sets of genetic material really is important.
218315
Never, Only God can create soul, humans can't and won't. we don't understand what it is. We create AI and we did as a matter of fact, but their will be always limitaions. for we can't give the machines or computers "free will" or consciousness. so cheer up mate, they won't control you!
909881
Though you will ignore the answer, I'll try anyway.  \n\nYour question, with explanation was a classic straw man, so I'll answer your question.\n\nI do not support ID as per se, but, all they are saying is the following:\n\nStep 1:  dna exists.\nStep 2:  later, new dna exists which could not have been eluciadated from existing dna, because there is unquestionably new and unique information in this new dna, which did not exist before.\nStep 3:  how did it happen?  \nStep 4:  it either happened by some still unknown natural or biological mechanism, or it was caused, created.\nStep 5: the natural or biological mechanism seems unlikely as the cause for strictly reasonable and logical reasons.  However, if it could be discovered, it would be one of the most important discoveries ever, and would be communicated as such.  This is still one of the mysteries in biology.  \nStep 6:  new information is not created by natural and random processes.  This just does not occur in nature.  Based on experience and logic.  \nStep 7:  based on the above, it seems that design is involved.\n\nThis is not hard logic.  The point is that you have closed your mind to the issues the ID people are trying to consider, and ID people are fully engaged in science.  What happens if you are wrong?\n\nBasically, ID does not say design is perfect, however, it could very well be optimal, and that takes intelligence, and then it is not a flaw.  ID people have answered your question many times.  Many you need to do some reading.  I cannot say the retina is shoddely wired.  Your remark was a rhetorical and opinionated remark.\n\nNot trying to give you a hard time.  Just the facts.\n\nEdit:  Anything that is proven by science, I agree with.  Duplication is well known.  I hope I was clear.  The issue is:  Here is dna without a certain new function, like a lung, or kidney, or brain, or eye, or skin, of bone, or hair, of tear duct, or immune response, etc.  Later, a 100 lines, or millions of lines of new dna exist with this code.  Duplication is not the mechanism, for the function did not exist, and requires some pretty profound new engineering to create.  The unanswered question is:  how did it happen?  Randomness cannot be part of the solution, since the improbabilities are far too great.  \n\nCan this question be answered, or is it still open?  The answer I usually get is, well just because we do not know, does not mean we should accept the possibility of a creator.  I say, you should consider both, until we have an answer.  You may lean one way or the other, but both are still possibilities.  \n\nThe most knowledgeable scientists agree for example, in cosmology, the closer we get to the beginning of the universe, the more the questions become philosophical and theological.  You are discounting a vital side of the story.
1034844
Science does NOT state that non-believers are 100% right! There have been and currently are plenty of scientists that have proved that creation is real. You do know that Darwin/big bang are theories right? You are familiar with the definition of theory correct? IF you answered yes, than you must know also that 97% of scientists world wide CANNOT explain how the eye was formed and they have admitted that there is virtually no way that it could have evolved right?
1077238
If science didn't work, you wouldn't have your computer or this website to ask your questions.\n\nFew people understand a lot about every area of science.  There are too many fields and the work performed in each too specialized for anyone to be proficient in all.\n\nI know relatively little about physics, but have a PhD in pharmaceutics.  Many amazing geologists know little about biology.\n\nUntil you study it, you will not understand it.  but once you start understanding a little, ther rest makes more sense.\n\n------------\nFollow-up:  Why does everything have to be a God v Science throwdown?  Religious people aren't idiots and scientists aren't heathens.\n------------
574470
I don't know, other people have made it, why not me?
486813
people are made from bacteria..\nactually,a human being is a big bacteri..\nwhen a single celled bacteria was formed with another celled bacteria ithey will form a multi celled bacteria..\nwith these process,a human being is created..\nactually,a brain is made up of multi cellular bacteria..\n\nthere is also another theory that explains that we came from monkeys..\nanother one tells about adam and eve.. \nfrom the bible,it states there that god created men from his replica..\nI guess all of it are actually correct..\n\nwell,you just need to choose an answer..\nnobody really knows the truth..
1112902
The anunaki supposedly engineered modern humans and we are The 7Th genetic experiment on earth. very interesting ideas i keep an open mind on all things until somethings proved  100%. fact .            good question
928801
In identical twins one is is a natural clone of the other.  If science ever really created an artificial clone, it would have the same right to life as anyone else.  But I do not expect a responsible scientist to do that.  What they're up to is creating stem cells for use in curing a variety of diseases.  Those who oppose this are phonies about their respect for life.
451328
Bacause Nothing is impossible. Just because you can't make it possible, doesn't mean that someone somewhere sometime can't make it possible.
616969
Impossible. We have not been formally introduced.