Please do not sidestep the issue.
I am asking YOU for YOUR EVIDENCE. I will not insert God. I will not testify to the Biblical account. I just want evidence, the stuff you claim theists don't have.
scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
Please do not sidestep the issue.
I am asking YOU for YOUR EVIDENCE. I will not insert God. I will not testify to the Biblical account. I just want evidence, the stuff you claim theists don't have.
scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
So what is the point of this thread if it is not about god?
Every single thread anti/pro theism goes into talk of evidence. Thats what I see constantly, no evidence of a God. Science must at least have some type of evidence to form a theory. Etc. FAIR ENOUGH!
I refuse to use the argument, you can't prove there is no God. That's fallacious.
So, I would like to see the evidence of ANY POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES.
scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
We don't have the answers yet. Can you be comfortable with that?
So you have faith that there will be answers in the future, but you have no evidence right now? So how can you believe something living can come from something nonliving with no proof?
scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
I will not insert a God in this thread. The attacks against theism is there is NO EVIDENCE for believing in such. Let's go with that, then.
Therefore, I would like to know what's the evidence of the alternative, which would mean living from nonliving had to happen.
Just please provide scientific evidence.
scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
But you would HAVE to conclude something living got started from something non-living, correct?
scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
bohm - Can you answer the question please. Whether it be simple, in depth, whatever. Just solid scientific evidence.
scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
I will not insert a God in this thread. The attacks against theism is there is NO EVIDENCE for believing in such. Let's go with that, then.
Therefore, I would like to know what's the evidence of the alternative, which would mean living from nonliving had to happen.
Just please provide scientific evidence.
scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
In other words, you believe something with no evidence?
scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living.
science is observable, science is reproducible.
a living thing coming from non-living matter has never been observed nor reproduced.. therefore, it takes faith in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with no evidence!.
Scientific method asserts nothing living can come from something non-living. Science is observable, science is reproducible. A living thing coming from non-living matter has NEVER been observed nor reproduced.
Therefore, it takes FAITH in an unknown process to believe that that's exactly what happened in the beginning, with NO EVIDENCE!
So please tell me in scientific evidence, how life originated. A simple clear concise answer.
1) And yes, I have studied abiogenesis
2) Please do not attack theistic beliefs. Lets stick to the question.
maintain your sense of.
how can we maintain our sense.
urgent now than ever?.
This was such a good article! The GB are seeing things develop better than the rest of us. Get your Go-Bags ready! You will be judged based on that!...