From Wiki:<quoted text>
I've already explained why what Venter did is rightly called the synthesis of DNA. Your comment is typical: a bare, unsupported, unexplained and unjustified assertion.
It's typical of you to prefer to attempt to argue than to attempt to elucidate. As I said, you are not here to exchange ideas or explore truth, but to fight. As a result, it takes a half dozen posts or more to communicate what collocutors engaging cooperatively in dialectic will typically accomplish in one or two.
"Synthesis refers to a combination of two or more entities that together form something new; alternately, it refers to the creating of something by artificial means."
What Venter did was artificially synthesize something, yes?
This whole debate started when ChrisM posted that humans have created life and she used Venter's experiment as her "proof".
It was laughed off as it should've been, because Venter didn't create anything, he simply used existing matter and rearranged it.