Quote from kungfoofighting:
Your example is satisfactory if you are interested in playing with semantics and have a limited understanding of what cell replication implies. When I stated that a living cell cannot be shown to create itself out of nothing, I mean specifically in the sense of a living cell constructing itself from prebiological material--not a cell replicating. Further, a cell that has replicated has not "built itself". The daughter cell that you claim has built itself is a constructed copy of the original cell. The daughter cell did not build itself. The two cells are not the same entity. Therefore the original cell cannot be said to have created itself. Did the egg create the chicken, or did the chicken create the egg? Which was there first? We are discussing evolution, are we not? At the heart of evolution is the belief that living organisms came into existence from non-living precursors. For cell replication to occur, a cell needs to exist. A fifth grader understands that a cell has instructions within its DNA that control its own replication. How did the first living cells come to arrange themselves without a prior cell to use as a template?
If your demonstration of a living cell "building itself", were adequate, you would have solved the enigma of evolution. All living things by reproducing/replicating, are constantly coming into existence out of nothing, and could presumably have been around forever...
