(February 7, 2015 at 2:33 pm)Lek Wrote: The science is solid in this case, but it doesn't show that a living organism can develop from non-living matter. You're referencing scientific evidence and using it to try to prove an unproven concept. If you want to believe that assumption, go ahead, but you can't prove it scientifically or otherwise.
Gosh, where is this overweening concern for evidence when it comes to your god? And it's not that we "can't prove it scientifically" -- it's that we haven't yet done so. Believe me, it will happen, and perhaps in our lifetimes.
At any rate -- we know for a fact that life relies on the principle of emergent properties, because, for instance, if you take salt out of someone's diet entirely, they will die. We also know that chemicals will spontaneously interact with each other based on proximity and valence. We also know that some chemical reactions are autocatalytic. We know that precursor chemicals existed in copious amounts on earth. And we know that they will form spontaneously in conditions similar to those pertaining shortly after Earth's formation.
This means that chemistry is much likelier an explanation than deity. Attempting to equate belief that abiogenesis can explain life's origin to belief that a supernatural deity did it is simply more evidence of your scientific illiteracy. One belief has a rational basis. The other, none at all.
