Abiogenesis is impossible

[Esquilax]

You could not answer the simple questions of the other topic.

Grace, maybe you're not paying attention to the usernames here, but I'm one of a few of us who did answer your simple questions seriously, and in order. I did so within the first few pages of the thread, and you have so far failed to respond to that post. The record simply shows this to be true; my response, and your absence of acknowledgement, are still there, right now.

You have not challenged this topic either.

I'm challenging you directly, right now. I want an exchange of ideas, but a part of that would be you providing evidence of your own, like I have done with multiple links all over this thread and all your others. Thus far, you've provided nothing but a bare assertion, and my question before, as it is now, is can you support your claim of a god beyond the mere argument from ignorance that you can't see how a secular perspective could answer the questions that you have?

---

Atheistic origin science assumes no magic. But to explain the vast complexity of the life forms on Earth, atheistic origin science requires a multitude of miraculous events, one right after another, in an exact sequence, and in an exact manner. That is ludicrous. It also violates the very assumption of atheistic origin science.

That's not exactly true, but then, so far you've seemed impervious to responses, let alone rebuttals. You understand that nothing in reality happens in a vacuum, right? And that every development toward the current state of life on earth is scaffolded by the ones that came before them, and the physical laws of the universe that they inhabit? There's nothing miraculous about this.

This atheistic origin science is false.
So its opposite, theistic origin science, is true.

Except you're not adhering to mere theism, aren't you?