“I made simple contradiction because you didn’t offer any support for your original assertion.”
Why should I bother to support something that is self-evident? No matter how much you twist or turn, the fact remains that “science,” falsely so called, is predicated on a denial of the existence of God. They operate only on what they claim can be observed, though, certainly, they promote all sorts of things which have never been observed. When you make the claim that the evolutionists “don’t care” about the origins of cell life, you do spread a falsehood, since, obviously, there is no hypothesis for origins amongst actual evolutionary scientists that consist of the supernatural.
As you said, they’re more willing to believe in aliens, comets, or whatnot, to explain it, rather than to confess the supernatural. They must appeal to these ridiculous things because these wretches are at least somewhat aware with how complex even the “simplest” cell is.
“To crib from someone else who used to post around these parts: there are several ideas about how the life might have arisen on Earth, including direct creation, “
What Evolutionary scientist is proposing direct creation? What scientific journal was it published it? Can you tell me?
Don’t mess with me with these absurd comments of yours. I don’t care if you, in your own particular theology (or lack thereof) imagine that God created life on Earth, but then let evolution take over. You’re not a scientist. You’re not writing research papers. You’re not in the universities teaching. You’re not putting forward papers detailing how God would have created the first living cell. Instead, evolutionary scientists are putting forward papers on how life could have started on its own through random processes, and it is THIS explanation which has the backing of academia.
You seriously need to consider changing your screen name.
“You seriously need to consider changing your screen name.”
Again - you seem to have experience with that. What are some of your prior screen names here?
I see. You don't need to support your assertions because they're "self-evident," but if I don't support my responses, I'm a troll. Forgive me if I don't accept those rules of engagement.
the fact remains that “science,” falsely so called, is predicated on a denial of the existence of God.
That's not true. Oh sorry, I forgot, it's "self-evident."
When you make the claim that the evolutionists “don’t care” about the origins of cell life, you do spread a falsehood,
I didn't say evolutionists don't care about the origins of life. They're scientists, it's an interesting question, of course they "care" on that basis. What I said was that the theory does not care how life started. And it doesn't. Now who's spreading falsehoods?
They must appeal to these ridiculous things
I suppose the ridiculousness is another one of those self-evident things.
You’re not a scientist. You’re not writing research papers. You’re not in the universities teaching. You’re not putting forward papers detailing how God would have created the first living cell.
Scientists write research papers based on experiments they perform and the evidence those experiments provide. What research program would confirm creation by God? What would be the evidence? I don't mean the "I can't think of anything else so it must be God" kind of negative evidence--I prefer not to confine God to the ever-diminishing space left by what science has not yet managed to figure out. I mean evidence that would show exactly what God did, and when, to create life. Scientists would love to uncover such evidence--do you realize how famous the scientist that found it would be?
This is why I don't like to discuss this issue on a religious basis. People believe what they believe, and evidence doesn't enter into it. Believe what you want and go in peace.