Both of you have mentioned abiogenesis and differentiated it from evolution.
Andy defines it thusly, “Abiogenesis means life first coming from the inorganic assuming the natural universe did not have outside help in producing life.”
Do you agree with this, USFRIEND?
Next, you made a big mistake saying inorganic, that makes no sense. Nonetheless, we can skip that.
The question why do you separate this life coming about from evolution?
I’ll try not to repeat what I said in other posts.
That definition seems reasonable to me (depending on how you define “inorganic”, which, in this case I take it to mean “not coming from life”).
It’s also important to note (as others here have) that ‘abiogenesis’ is not the only ‘scientific’ theory of the origin of life.
As for why to separate the origin-of-life from evolution (origin of species):
a) Darwin did — you simply cannot have a logical discussion about Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, if you insist on defining ‘evolution’ differently than he did.
b) it opens up the possibility that “life” was created, by the Creator — but, the various forms of life are the result of evolution.
c) The Theory of Evolution is based on the notion of “natural selection” — which Darwin meant to compare with the planned selection used by breeders. Few disagree that selection (natural or planned) can create different breeds of a species (micro-evolution). The creation of different species through selection (macro-evolution) is another matter altogether. As is the creation of any life form from non-living material. IOW, you can believe in natural selection, without believing that it can result in new species. Similarly, you can believe in all of Darwin’s ToE, and simultaneously believe that the Creator created life from non-living matter.
Both of you have mentioned abiogenesis and differentiated it from evolution.
This sure sounds like evolution:
"those molecules which were protected from the elements survived longer and reproduced more."
"One theory goes like this:RNA, the compliment molecule to DNA, was the first to evolve naturally from materials already common in the pre-biotic Earth. Self-replication was achieved through catalytic actions in RNA-based molecules, called ribosomes, or possibly through an intermediary molecule.
This step still remains unverified to science as of this writing."
{ and after that miracle }
"Once self-replication had been achieved, the forces of Natural Selection took over. For example, those molecules which were protected from the elements survived longer and reproduced more. So, any molecules which found themselves with a lipid bubble (which also forms naturally) would have a better chance of reproducing. After many incremental steps, the lipid bubbles eventually became cell membranes, and the molecules DNA.
For more information on the probability of life forming this way, please see this article."
http://evolutionfaq.com/faq/how-could-dna-have-evolved