The author swerves back and forth between origin of life, which is only dimly perceived, and evolution, which is verifiable.
Please tell me how evolution is verifiable? You can’t test it.... since you can’t test it you can’t repeat the test and get the same result (verify it) and since you can’t test it you can’t falsify it. It lies outside the limits of the scientific method.
It is therefore philosophy that is based on the non-existence of a creator and the need for a process to explain the existence of and the diversity of life.
I would argue that the laws of nature argue powerfully for a creator.
It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive in some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, lights, heat, electricity, etc. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.
– Darwin
Evolution is junk science. It is taught in schools and colleges without any standing evidence. Like where is all the transitional fossils? Why hasn’t any animals evolved if they have been around for millions of years. It is the thought process of the atheist that run the education systems.
evolution is not verifiable.
You can breed dogs for a million years and never get a dolphin, or a non-dog.