> Biogenesis? Talking about a non-sequitor.
Ahem: Who said: "he and his followers still can't explain how life begins."
Evolution explains how life changes, not how it began.
> You should read the post to which I replied before responding.
I did. He made no mention of biogenesis. You did.
You need some medical help. Where did the term "biogenesis" first appear in this discussion? Post #53 - your post.
Secondly, the NG article, along with the post to which I replied, attempt to state that evolution theory provides an all-encompassing explanation on the ORIGIN and development of species. You should read the article and the entire discussion before you start blathering.
This is verbatim from the original post I replied to:
"There is almost no serious debate within the scientific community about whether evolutionary change is responsible for the origin of new species."
Let me put this in words you'll understand: Ahem.
'Evolution explains how life changes, not how it began." Now that's a gimme. The game begins with evolutionist on the 1 foot line. First down, with 20 men on the field. The creationists on defense with 5 players. Thats fair. OK. Penalty. Spontaneous generation of life is your daddy. Explain the old man. Don't tell me you want a gimme of organic molecules, an oxygenated trophosphere, and nutrition substrate to begin with. Have a serious discussion or take your ball and go home. You can't do a bypass surgery if you never went to medical school and cardiothoracic residency.