> "Science" has not "discovered" the transition from amino acids to single cell animals.
All the steps have been seen. Proto-life has been observed forming in the lab. Life itself has been assembled from non-living components.
> That is merely the ego of man filling in the gaps with fantasy.
Wrong. Filling in the gaps with fantasy would be to say something like "Some god or other did it." What's going on in this case is perfectly appropriate theorizing based on availabel evidence.
"Life itself has been assembled from non-living components."
Example?
>All the steps have been seen. Proto-life has been observed forming in the lab. Life itself has been assembled from non-living components.<
What a bunch of crap!
What are you calling "proto-life"?
And what in the heck are you referencing regarding "Life itself has been assembled from non-living components."?
What's going on in this case is perfectly appropriate theorizing based on availabel evidence.
I can't believe I JUST noticed this.
Theo-rizing. or more so... Theo-ry
God's place.
"Proto-life has been observed forming in the lab"
Now that some bright scientist has solved simulating millions of years in the lab, lets move on the real problem of synthesizing that pesky cell membrane.
After that we can throw those cells into a nourishing environment, stand back and watch something new crawl out of the petri dish.