Why does science always upstage God?

[Amarok]

Yep.


It's interesting anyway. Got links to peer-reviewed sources?

For protenoid microspheres, look up articles by Sidney Fox. These are older: back to the 1970s. For lipid microspheres, here is a good one to start with (unfortunately behind a paywall):

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/art...via%3Dihub

I actually suspect multiple lines of chemical changes leading to the first life. The iron sulfur aspects, for example, probably came from deep sea vents. Some of the early polymerization was more likely to happen in small ponds undergoing cycles of drying and re-wetting.

It is a fact that we have not produced artificial life. But it is also a fact that we understand much more about the basic chemistry required than we did 30 years ago. And, that new understanding makes abiogenesis more likely rather than less.

Your just wasting your time . He won't read it or will only read what he thinks supports his points(thou they never do ) Then will retort "that does not prove anything" or "That's not good enough" And the goalpost moving will continue. Because he does not care about the evidence . His conclusions are carved in stone . And no evidence will shift it. And worst he will twist anything you say to argue for hypocrisy were none exists  and religiosity were none exists . He argues in bad faith .