As far as i can tell, the Theory of Evolution is BULLETPROOF. Come at me with your BEST counterarguments and counter evidence to Evolution!

@pancakeslam Where did "god" come from then?

@NortiusMaximus I didn't state that I have a bulletproof theory... but I would say that God always existed.

@pancakeslam We may as well say the same about the universe as a whole, no need to postulate a god. Life is just a chemical process capable of self-replication.

@NortiusMaximus if it's that simple why can't scientists create life in a lab? with simple chemical reactions.

@pancakeslam Maybe they have initiated such chemical processes. The problem is that when laypeople say "life", they usually mean complex, highly evolved, cell based life. Life didn't start like that at all.

@NortiusMaximus ok... well seeing as we are laypeople, I think ,maybe you can point me in the direction of the article that scientists created life in the lab and I'll start to be more accepting of this idea

@pancakeslam I doubt you'll find a layperson's explanation but you can find some relevant paper here - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6162031/ Can you offer a better, coherent and consietent, explanation?

@NortiusMaximus No. But the spontaneous reproduction from a mud puddle theory makes about as much sense to me as: the theory of an asteroid with microbes crashing on Earth, aliens seeding the planet with life, or creation by a higher being. This is probably what scientists are thinking as well.

@pancakeslam Panspermia, the idea that life on Earth was deposited by asteroids or extra-terrestials, doesn't explain the origin of life itself, it just moves the question to somewhere else in the universe. Random chemical reactions seem more plausible.

All life on this planet appears to be related, traceable to one instance of abiogenesis. Creationists claim that the probability of life spontaneously arising is so unlikely that there must be a supernatual/magical "creator". The problem there is that they can't explain where that creator came from and why the same explanation can't be applied to the univers (and life) itself. Considering this is the only planet where we know life exists and that all life here is related, it's possible that abiogenesis is so unlikely that it has only ever happened once - here on Earth.

@NortiusMaximus You stated on the one hand that it's extremely unlikely, and you are also claiming that it's the most plausible of all theories? Seems contradicatory. So we're only here because of some kind of fluke? A chemical [big]miracle[/big] that only happened once?
If I were interested in arguing for abiogenesis, I'd probably say that life could easily arise in a puddle, and likely happened in other places, and I'd be all in favor of the alien origin theory. But you aren't saying that.
Creationists don't have to explain the origin of a creator. The very idea of origin calls for a beginning, middle, and end which are human concepts. There doesn't have to be a beginning to God. He just exists. If you want to argue life always existed that's fine, but that doesn't seem to be your belief.

@pancakeslam

[quote]ok wise guy. where did the very first living thing come into being, [/quote]

Well let's be clear: Evolution deals with the diversification of life, not its ultimate origins.
Whether life arose from natural processes or from divine intervention, the evidence that it has since evolved is bulletproof.

This becomes clear when we use examples less "controversial" than evolution.
For example: We can observe gravity without knowing how matter came to exist.

[i]P.s. Did god always exist? Maybe. But if one can accept that postulation then on what logical basis can one reject the postulate that the universe has always existed?[/i]

@pancakeslam [quote]You stated on the one hand that it's extremely unlikely, and you are also claiming that it's the most plausible of all theories? Seems contradicatory. [/quote]
The creationists' objection to abiogenesis is that, according to them, it's highly improbable. What they overlook is that, no matter how small the probability, it can happen, even on the first attempt. Consider rolling a die. The probability of rolling a six in 1 in 6. That doesn't mean it has to be rolled six times before a six comes up.

I said it's possible abiogenesis is so unlikely that it might have only happened once. This is the only planet where we know there is life. Life from random chemical reactions is still more plausible than an intelligent supernatural being of unknown origin.

Creationists also claim that the universe is too complex to have occurred by chance. If that were true a intelligent supernatural being must be even less likely to have popped into existence from nothing.

@NortiusMaximus how are you so certain it was the Abiogenesis theory rather than the Extraterrestrial Origins theory also proposed by scientists? You seem rather wedded to your belief, because as you stated the meteor theory doesn't explain things as neatly.

@pancakeslam Panspermia might be how life got to Earth but it doesn't explain how life began.

@pancakeslam

Hey, what do you think of me response regarding the relevance of bio/abiogenesis with reference to evolution?

@Pikachu well if so then how did the second life form evolve? It had to have an ancestor to evolve from. That's why the origin is related.

@pancakeslam

Well we have observed single celled life evolving into multi celled life which is pretty dramatic.
But i don't think you're actually responding to the point i made.

Whatever the origin of life, the evidence is clear that it has since evolved.
In the same way that we can observe the effects of gravity irrespective of how matter arose.

how do you respond to that?

@Pikachu I can accept that you aren't discussing origin. But still.... are you saying that the theory of evolution is perfect and beyond criticism?

@pancakeslam

No i think there are indeed gaps in our understanding of exactly how evolution works.
But that organisms share common ancestry and that populations diversify over time is beyond question just as much as the theory of gravitation or the germ theory of disease.

That's why i made this thread. There is still more to learn about evolution but i hope you can now see that the ultimate origins of life do not negatively impact the evidence for the [i]evolution[/i] of life.

@pancakeslam [quote]ok wise guy. where did the very first living thing come into being, in your own words.[/quote]

Spiritual or physical?