“Abiogenesis is Irrelevant to Evolution” (is it now?)

www.apologeticspress.org ^ | Nov 19 2012 | Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

[kimtom]

(article photo) The Law of Biogenesis tells us that in nature, life comes only from life of its kind (Miller, 2012). Therefore, abiogenesis (i.e., life arising from non-living materials) is impossible, according to the scientific evidence. How then can atheistic theories like Darwinian evolution be considered acceptable? There is a growing trend among evolutionists today to attempt to sidestep the problem of abiogenesis by contending that evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life, but rather is a theory which starts with life already in existence and explains the origin of all species from that original life form. However, this approach is merely wishful thinking—an effort to avoid the logical import of the Law of Biogenesis.

Historically, evolutionists have recognized that abiogenesis is a fundamental assumption inherent in evolutionary theory, and intuitively must be so. In 1960, British evolutionary physiologist, G.A. Kerkut, listed abiogenesis as the first assumption in a list of non-provable assumptions upon which evolution is founded. “The first assumption is ........

[kimtom]

“To search his letters for evidence of conjecture is not to fully understand the process and/or the nature of scientific inquiry. Miller looks even worse for this inability to understand the basics of the process...”

I do not understand your point.

But he (Miller)clearly is not attributing (words)to Darwin himself (the man)anything claimed in article.

[UCANSEE2]

Thanks for the link.

[UCANSEE2]

how did the organism get there???

[UCANSEE2]

less on how the universe came into existence.

Unless it was 'always' here.