"ToE infers life arose entirely by materialistic processes."
First, as I have repeatedly instructed,creation is not in the ToE; so your use of "arose" is questionable.
Assuming you have understood what the science says in the ToE now, and that evolution only deals with "results of matter" (the definition of materialistic), I don't think you can say that and be intellectually honest.
Life IS different than minerals or chemicals just laying there. That said, you can't get science to investigate anything other than what can be observed. Science deals with practical reality.
Your belief in God is not threatened by the fact of evolution, UNLESS you interpret the Bible in such a way to be unable to accept that FACT. If as I believe, God created evolution, evolution is not entirely materialistic, is it?
Thus, your statement that evolution infers materialism is wrong.
"The story of life crawling out of the slime is all from YOUR side of the isle. Sorry but you evolutionists tarred yourself with this brush, you will have to live with the results."
No, you creationists tarred biologists with this brush. As I have repeatedly said, and I am beginning to think that you are not debating in good faith, abiogenesis and creation is not in the Theory of Evolution. IT IS NOT THERE! You are creating the essential strawman that makes your interpretation of Scripture palatable to you. Biology doesn't give a hoot about creation. Biology deals with the life we have and have had on this planet.
"If ToE pretends to explain speciation, then at what species does it start the story? Frogs? Lizards? Trilobites? Algae? Funny you guys massage this theory to AVOID and EVADE the evidence of the discoveries of science since Darwin. "
ToE does not "pretend" to explain speciation. It explains speciation insofar as our knowledge goes at this time.
ToE postulates that a single cell is the common ancestor of all life on Earth. This is a Theory incorporated in the ToE called the Theory of Common Descent. There is not as much evidence for this as there is for the fact of evolution. There are other explanations that could work, but so far all indications are that a single cell developed into all the life you see on Earth. God was pretty smart to be able to do this, wasn't he?
Uh, it is you and your buddies at AIG that ignore the science. I mean, really, you can't even accept the fact that biology doesn't care about initial creation and it is not in the ToE.
"This theory was only credible for about 30 or 40 years. And it is YOU guys that have to invent incredible variations of this theory to account for the real evidience of the fossil record which (against all your protests) still indicates the sudden appearance (creation?) of species. And no transitory species that are not simply labeling games by the devout."
Nice use of gratuitous assertions.
What contradictory evidence do you have that life was created specially by God in each instance? Why would God need to work that hard? Why would God make the Earth change so much that whole "kinds" like the dino kind disappeared and he had to specially create a whole bunch of other things?
The fact that there is continuum of transition among species and that they are hard to tell apart when close in relationship and that scientists argue about the extent of closeness, validates evolution.
It would appear to me that it is your side that uses games and rhetorical tricks to argue, since you have no evidence or facts on your side.