[William Terrell]

For basic elements to eventually end in the vast diversity of plant, animal and insect life today by random action, you have to, at some point, have life come from nonlife, or the theory collapses.

The moment you presuppose life and start from there, to avoid an intelligent creator, you must explain how that life came into being. You try to avoid this corundum by stating that the theory doesn't need to address that.

It absolutely does. I'm not impressed so far.

[Quark2005]

The moment you presuppose life and start from there, to avoid an intelligent creator, you must explain how that life came into being. You try to avoid this corundum by stating that the theory doesn't need to address that.

1) Do you have factual information about who your great grandparents were?

2) Do you have a complete understanding of the origins of all life on earth?

3) Do you likewise think it's possible that we know something about the ancestry of life on earth without knowing everything about how it originated?

This ain't too hard to grasp, folks.

[jec41]

For basic elements to eventually end in the vast diversity of plant, animal and insect life today by random action, you have to, at some point, have life come from nonlife, or the theory collapses. The moment you presuppose life and start from there, to avoid an intelligent creator, you must explain how that life came into being. You try to avoid this corundum by stating that the theory doesn't need to address that.

It absolutely does. I'm not impressed so far.

Learn the method of science. It presupposes no such thing, life can be observed as a fact unless you think you are dead. It does not even address a presupposition of creation. The theory addresses what it states not what you suppose it should state. There is no corundum of creation for science. If you can provide the observed material fact of creation, science will explain it and thank you for it. You will be the most famous man that ever lived.