Yeah, this oversimplification is absurd. I'm all for abiogenesis (after all, for life to always come for life, life must have always existed - which we know isn't true - so life must have come from non-life), but they make it sound like you just need light and any random assortment of atoms to get life. This is as much a theory as string theory. No testable predictions makes it little more than a hypothesis.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
![[Image: LB_Header_Idea_A.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i280.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fkk172%2FBlaziken_rjcf%2FLB_Header_Idea_A.jpg)