Where did the universe come from? Atheistic origin science has no answer.

[snowtracks]

that the moon formation event and the moon itself provides the earth with 1. magnetic field, 2. radioactivity to drive plate tectonics, 3. stabilizes the earth's axial tilt, thus avoiding the chaotic zone - http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v36...615a0.html - all three are vital to advanced life.

They are vital to the particular life forms that evolved in that environment, which should come as no surprise at all. You pretend to grow tired of the puddle/hole metaphor, yet you continue to display exactly the ignorance that it describes. It's not that the universe or the planet were properly prepared for the life that would come to live on it. Life developed in accordance with the environment it found itself in.

faulty logic in both realms:
evolution - there is one sample size (earth) so no general principle can be deduced.
creation - God needed only one human type species on one planet to fulfill His purposes.

[Rampant.A.I.]

Actually, evolution has predictive power. Evolutionary biologists can predict the type of organisms that will be found in a given environment with a high degree of accuracy.

This is possible because the general principles and mechanisms are well understood, and thoroughly tested.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA210.html

http://www.theguardian.com/science/lost-...-evolution

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13...ctive.html

[Tonus]

faulty logic in both realms:
evolution - there is one sample size (earth) so no general principle can be deduced.
creation - God needed only one human type species on one planet to fulfill His purposes.

The 'general principle' of evolution can be deduced through the evidence it leaves and that which is discovered through research and experimentation. The fossil record, genetics research, lab testing and real world observation of life... all of these work to refine the theory and build and improve our understanding of it.

The 'general principle' of creation is whatever you decide it to be, and it can be shifted at a moment's notice if you find it to be convenient to do so. Behind the premise that god can do anything, creation can be molded in an infinite number of ways to fit any scenario and to accept any evidence. The only research and experimentation ever done on behalf of creation is done via human imagination.

[Esquilax]

faulty logic in both realms:
evolution - there is one sample size (earth) so no general principle can be deduced.
creation - God needed only one human type species on one planet to fulfill His purposes.

If there's a problem with a sample size of one with regards to evolution, then there's an equal problem there for any claim of creation or design you'd care to make.

[Brakeman]

faulty logic in both realms:
evolution - there is one sample size (earth) so no general principle can be deduced.
creation - God needed only one human type species on one planet to fulfill His purposes.

No, that is incorrect. It would be statistically invalid to make inferences about "universal evolution," defining that as all life in the universe has followed evolutionary progress, but evolution is only making claim about the progress of life on this planet and of such it has billions of datapoints of DNA and fossil evidence.

There is 0, zip, nul, nada, evidence that a bearded male god that likes golden chairs and is concerned with seating order and the tips of men's penises, exists and had anything to do with the progression of life on planet earth.

[Cyberman]

Thanks, Esq, you saved me the trouble. That's exactly what went through my head.

[Chas]

What the hell do you think you're proving with this stuff? Because it's not what you think it is, I'll tell you that for nothing.

that the moon formation event and the moon itself provides the earth with 1. magnetic field, 2. radioactivity to drive plate tectonics, 3. stabilizes the earth's axial tilt, thus avoiding the chaotic zone - http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v36...615a0.html - all three are vital to advanced life.

#1 and #2 are simply not true.

Earth's magnetic field is driven by its molten iron core which was there before the collision.

And the same for radioactivity. Those heavy elements were already present.

The collision would have been a glancing blow and involved only the crust and mantle.

[Cato]

If there's a problem with a sample size of one with regards to evolution, then there's an equal problem there for any claim of creation or design you'd care to make.

Not to mention God is a sample size of one with no evidence.

[RobbyPants]

evolution - there is one sample size (earth) so no general principle can be deduced.
creation - God needed only one human type species on one planet to fulfill His purposes.

Evolution - observable sample size of one

Creation - observable sample size of zero.

[Esquilax]

faulty logic in both realms:
evolution - there is one sample size (earth) so no general principle can be deduced.

Actually, there's a lot more faulty logic here than you'd think: we have immense collections of evidence for evolution here on earth. Now, there may be other life-forms that don't evolve, that much is true, but this doesn't alter the fact that evolution happens, and that all the species we know of go through this process. We have zero evidence to suggest that a life form exists that doesn't evolve, and the time to believe in that possibility is when such evidence exists.

As such, your "faulty logic" here doesn't even make sense.