Evolution proponents don't have the definitive skinny on the origin of life and they admit that. Evolution proponents (I include myself) know how life progressed from lesser to more complex forms, but the actual origin can only be speculated on. What the creationists due is put their faith in a book that was written by bronze age dwellers of the middle east. Being it is faith it is undesputable to them....so be it. I cant see why there cant be evolution as started by God and as they say "The Lord works in mysterious ways."
No, you don't. Absent the observation of such, all you have is speculation. And even this is tenuously done, since you have no fossil intermediates which have stood the test of criticism. Even evolutionists bemoan the lack of intermediary structures in the fossil record.
but the actual origin can only be speculated on.
Actually, the speculated origins of life on earth upon which empirical science can actually be brought to bear (i.e. excluding exotic nonsense like panspermia or "aliens brought life to earth from somewhere") are positively excluded by an understanding of simple chemistry. There simply was no abiogenesis of life on any early earth.
What the creationists due is put their faith in a book that was written by bronze age dwellers of the middle east.
You are aware that the evolutionary philosophical system relies upon a cosmogeny which is still basically the same as what people in the Stone Age believed, right?
Evolutionists put their faith in a book written by a man on a long sea voyage with nothing better to do with his time.
Evolution proponents (I include myself) know how life progressed from lesser to more complex forms, but the actual origin can only be speculated on.
I would say you only think you know, actually you only believe in your theory, no more, because you have no proof only the beliefs of like thinking individuals.
V..Evolution proponents (I include myself) know how life progressed from lesser to more complex forms, but the actual origin can only be speculated on.
As the essay reveals, there is NO SOURCE within evolutionism for absolutes. Yet your statement is a ‘declarative’ or absolute in that: Here is how it happened.
By it’s own Laws of Logic-—for which evolution has no source either, since by its nature evolution is anti-intellectual (no mind, no reason, etc)-—theories must be based on something which is testable. Since NO ONE has ever seen bacteria evolve into fish, or fish into proto-apes, the theory of evolution is based on wishful thinking.