I think those who are NOW saying that the TOE has nothing to do with the origins of life are fudging their side of the arguement. The TOE is a direct challenge to the existence of God and His having created life as we know it.
That’s ALWAYS been the arguement.
So now... it doesn’t matter HOW life began as long as we believe that we’ve evolved from amoebas and tadpoles?
I STILL don’t get it. Any genetic mutation is NOT the dominant specimen. It just don’t work no matter how you wanna slice it.
Darwin's book never dealt with where life came from, only how it changes over time. Abiogenesis is an interesting area, but it is independent of the TOE.
The TOE is a direct challenge to the existence of God and His having created life as we know it. That’s ALWAYS been the arguement.
Some people want to score political or religious points using scientific theories, but the rest of us should ignore them. In any event, theistic evolution (the idea that evolution can be part of a creator's plan) is accepted by many religious sects, including the Catholic Church.
So now... it doesn’t matter HOW life began as long as we believe that we’ve evolved from amoebas and tadpoles?
That's correct, essentially. There is nothing in the TOE precluding a divine actor from poofing life into existence.
I STILL don’t get it. Any genetic mutation is NOT the dominant specimen. It just don’t work no matter how you wanna slice it.
I'm not sure what you mean by this- can you explain?