[dynoman]

How can you chop the continuous process of life from "origin of life" to "life as we observe it" into seperate blocks and attribute separate blocks to different theories? That doesn't make sense. This is why IMO

"Inanimate stepping stones of abiotic evolution are essential components to any natural process theory of the molecular evolution of life."

See?

[longshadow]

How can you chop the continuous process of life from "origin of life" to "life as we observe it" into seperate blocks and attribute separate blocks to different theories? That doesn't make sense.

How can you chop the continuous process of water from the "formation of water" to the "action of water as we observe it" into seperate blocks and attribute separate blocks to different theories?

See how silly the argument sounds now?

I've already answered this question; there is no contingency between the theory of Evolution and the Theory of Life Origin, so long as the Theory of Life Origin explains the existence of biology compatible with evolutionary processes, for precisely the same reason that hydrology isn't contingent upon what explanation is correct for the origin of water. Putting blinders over your eyes and ears doesn't change this.

May you be touched by His Noodly Appendage.