[Westbrook]

Maybe because it was nothing but a load of "argument from consequence", founded in faulty premises and having no bearing whatsoever on the validity of the theory of evolution.

Really?

Doesn't the following come close to characterizing fundamental Evolutionist/Materialist premises?

• Everything came from nothing out of nowhere for no apparent reason.

• Life is just a curious side-effect of an unknowing, uncaring cosmos.

Does this not give rise to a hedonistic or nihilistic response? Since, when you die you are just so much compost, then the best we can hope for is a life of self-gratification and a painless extinction.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Everything came from nothing out of nowhere for no apparent reason."

Nothing to do with evolution.

"Life is just a curious side-effect of an unknowing, uncaring cosmos."

Nothing to do with evolution.

[Dimensio]

Doesn't the following come close to characterizing fundamental Evolutionist/Materialist premises?

Everything came from nothing out of nowhere for no apparent reason.

No.

Life is just a curious side-effect of an unknowing, uncaring cosmos.

No.

The theory of evolution says nothing whatsoever regarding where "everything" came from or why life originated. As such, it cannot come to the conclusions that you suggest on those matters. Since your questions were founded upon those conclusions and those conclusions are not accurate derivations of the theory of evolution, then your questions are founded upon faulty premises and as such meaningless.