If scientists can explain the origins of life, why can they not create life?

Question

Scientists claim to know what ingredients were present when life spontaneously began. But they are unable to recreate life in a laboratory. In the 50's a scientist named Miller was able to create amino acids. That is as close as they have gotten.

Answer 1

The origin of life generally takes a 'reverse' reductionist approach, as far as I'm aware (disclaimer - I am a neuroscientist, so I am not as familiar with the most intricate details of the beginning of life as, say, an evolutionary biologist, but I do have some training in evolutionary biology ): 1) Small organic molecules, created by chemical reactions from the Earth's volatile early environment and events in the sea, formed amino acids. 2) These amino acids formed RNA. 3) This simple genetic code, combined with other organic molecules which formed a small cell membrane and cytoplasm, became the basis for protocells. 4) Protocells, through the changes in their RNA, became the world' first bacteria, developing a more complex cell membrane and an interior similar to that of archaebacteria. 5) Bacteria conglomerated into small groups for survival purposes; these became the world's first eukaryotic cells. 6) Cells began to clump together, for survival, and became the world's first multicellular organisms .

Answer 2

Because that Divine spark that creates the life force cannot be artificially made.

Answer 3

Its the whole DNA thing. They can't figure out how to make it, and its necessary in creation. And they'd have to be able to make the most simple life form first, which is in and of itself complicated.

Answer 4

Because they are not god...