[dr_lew]

Yet the science has hardly changed. We are almost as much in the dark today about the pathway from non-life to life as Darwin was when he wrote, “It is mere rubbish thinking at present of the origin of life; one might as well think of the origin of matter.”

This seems a strange claim to make. Darwin knew absolutely nothing of genes, and so he was entirely ignorant of the physical basis for the phenomenon of variation which was crucial to his theory.

Crick and Watson founded a whole new realm of life science. Even in the last few decades the techniques of this realm have undergone a revolution which increased the experimental capabilities by orders of magnitude.

Then there's the Woesian Revolution of the new Archaean Domain, which provides a new basis for thinking about life's origin.

Of course, one could always say that we are still far from any sort of ultimate knowledge of this process, but we ain't done yet! In fact we are still picking up steam, in my view.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

There is a difference between evolution and the origin of life.

Darwin acknowledged that explicitly in the title The Origin of Species.

How did the first living organism arise?

That’s the real question to ask “evolutionists” who think they know everything.