An unorthodox belief in God.

[Mister Agenda]

I was flipped before I got here, flipped now, and will be when I leave. The " Flaw of the first step in any how life began theory" is striking evidence for God.

Again, I appreciate these posts that give me something to chew on. There is no scientific theory on how life began. Abiogenesis is hypothetical, its ideas can't yet be tested, and it may never be possible to find out exactly what happened billions of years ago to get life started. However, it is certain that there was a time when there was no life on earth, and that the earliest life forms that show up in the fossil record are single-celled organisms.

Even the first step in the scientific theory of evolution does not work in my view.

Abiogenesis is not part of the theory of evolution. Evolution is about how populations of organisms change over time, not how the process got started. God could have 'poofed' the first bacteria into existence four billion years ago and it woudln't affect the theory of evolution at all.

The weird one I can think of is that life evolved in Hydrothermal Vents deep under the sea.

There is an informal fallacy called the 'argument from incredulity'. It amounts to 'I find this hard to believe and/or understand, therefore it isn't true.' It's a form of argument from ignorance: 'My ignorance about this topic entitles me to say that your claim isn't true'. Note that if you find this an acceptable line of argumentation, it follows that all I need to say to refute you is that claiming a God made everything is a weird idea, and people will do anything to move their idea of God into the picture. Do you think that's a good argument?

People will do anything to move God out of the picture; believe anything.

This illustrates the fallacy known as 'appeal to motive'. Even if people have a motive to say what they're saying, it doesn't mean what they're saying isn't true. The truth or falsity of a statement stands or falls on its own logical and emprical merits.

They are unaware that biological evolution is a natural process installed during creation.

That's actually what some of them believe. There are scientists working in this field who are theists and accept that the scientific theory of biological evolution is correct. That is pretty much the official position of the Roman Catholic Church, for instance.

No first step could create a totally functioning ANYTHING!

This is an unsupported assertion. How might you go about finding out if its true or false?

And I challenge anyone to prove it can.

We can certainly prove that complex molecules can form spontaneously in conditions we believe replicate those of the primordial earth. RNA strands of around 40 nucleotides in length have been observed forming under such conditions. Under the RNA world hypothesis, the precursor of life was a strand of self-replicating RNA. Once the first such strand formed, natural selection would have worked to select the variations most successful at replicating, eventually leading to the most primitive biological organisms. Evidence for this includes the role of RNA rather than DNA in some of the most basic and ancient biological processes.

I am going to peel the skin off of atheism, and let you watch while I do it!

Atheism isn't complicated enough to have a skin. It's just not believing other people's claims about gods or God. Presenting an argument for the existence of God that doesn't contain a fallacy along with a piece of evidence that points only to God rather than just as easily to natural processes or human folly...that would convince a lot of atheists. To me, one of the best arguments for atheism is how flawed all the arguments for theism are; logic alone can't get you to God, but a really good argument would make you famous.

Even you Stimbo. Lets have it. I like you're name, but you're game is off. Like the rest of you're team, and I am going to slowly dismantle you.

Have you heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect? It's the tendency of unskilled people to overestimate their ability while more knowledgeable people tend to understimate their superiority. Your ability is too limited for you to even understand how badly you're doing. I believe you can do better if you try, and along with learning how to do better, you'll learn some humility. The person bragging about how great they're doing in an argument usually might as well be carrying a big sign with an arrow pointing down that says 'idiot'. You don't have to be that guy. You could become one of our best contributors. If you try to up your game and take on board new information.

---

For last? What are you going to do?

Oh it was him who used his position to intimidate me, I am going to reverse that, and use his imagined position to intimidate him. Well not entirely imagined , you're Mods must protect you; he is a mod, and I am the new threat; but I am more than he has ever encountered;

He will not be embarrassed, he knows that; so I have him.

What's it feel like Stem, to be had?

Don't threaten the mods. Just a suggestion. It makes it sound like you want to be banned. In fact, a lot of the things you say make it sound like you want to be banned.