It is beyond them. They see Nature naked and it blinds them. Stunned by the nakedness they see all hows as "as is".
In science one starts with a hypothesis and then looks for evidence to support it, or refute it. There is no need to choose in particular which logical state(T/F) one begins with.
"you merely assert evolution because you can't admit of any other possibility."
It is not true that other possibilities are ignored and rejected on their face. Your claims for design are rejected, because it is not consistent with the physics. Each and every process in nature in the theory of evolution is and can be shown to be the result of reactions following a possible low energy path.
None?
Ever hear of the Nylon-eating bacterium? Not only does it do something never before seen on Earth (there was no nylon for it to eat before the 1930s), we know exactly how it evolved this function.
BTW, I'm not sure of the technical definitions, but to me this sure seems like a case of a mutation both adding information to a genome and subtracting information.
It no longer is efficient at eating sugar, but it can eat nylon, which it couldn't do before.
This is but one example; there are a lot of others. A lot more than "none".
Another repetition of the fallacy of assuming the conclusion.
Nonsense -- it's stating a fact. A simple chemical cycle like this is far less complex than the amount of complexity that evolution has been directly observed to be able to produce.
None of the things that exist have been shown how they got there or even how they could have gotten there.
Wow, you really *are* ignorant of the countless research findings in evolution, aren't you? Evolution has been directly observed creating functional complexity countless times. That's a far higher number than the "none" you claim.
They are there and you merely assert evolution because you can't admit of any other possibility.
Stop lying about my reasons for my conclusions, please.
But the lack of other possibilities in your mind is not evidence of your conclusion. That is the fallacy of the false dilemma.
It would be if that were the reason for my conclusion, but it isn't. I strongly advise you to stop posting your insulting, false presumptions about me as if they were facts.