You are confused, yes. I know what a transitory fossil is, there are no fossils that are themselves in transitions. Anyone can compare animals with similar features or amphibians to sea and land based life and claim 1-2-3 in order.
Supernovae, black holes, burnt houses and car accidents are all observed currently.
Abiogenesis is neither observed nor reproducible. It's an interesting hypothesis that requires suspension of belief. For example, the current claim that a sole replicating RNA kind could make life. Now all we...
What? There are things descended from other things, with sub-descendants. We agree on phy trees.
The Bible does not claim one ancestral source for all life.
I think I'm hearing you say that hundreds of millions to billions of people, who say they love God and know the truth that He is a triunity, are all children of Satan.
I've heard cult members like the JWs claim that only they have truth in doctrine. Those who number the Christian God as one or...
I am seeing some intense handwaving. I'd love for you to handle the facts, which are:
1) MIGHTY GOD prophesied the Messiah's characteristics shall include being known as Prince of Peace
2) Billions regard Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, God, Savior, King and Prince of Peace
But biblical Creation narratives are not just the first stories of Genesis. You are ill equipped to argue the Bible with your scant knowledge of the Bible, yet again.
You don't know what "half" is? I didn't say "apologetics exist to make fully formed wings half wings". I'm rather saying there are NO half wings in the record and no forms know showing evolution.
Neither observed nor duplicable means abiogenesis is one of several alternatives, indeed...
I didn't say "scientific method" as you wrote. I'm talking about when a hypothesis is safely established or safely rejected. It is unfortunate that you must twist my words and add sophistry.
Huh? This thread has reams of garbage like "Bu-bu-but only one RNA replicator would be needed for abiogenesis".
Name an RNA replicator here or not, and you'll see what I meant by "mouth foam".
Jesus is known as God to Christians, Wonderful Counselor, etc.
The prophecy says "He will be called" not "Athesis shall call Him". There are few atheists in Tanakh because people used to be smarter. :)
My concern is for you, YOU have heard Jesus called these names.
You could explain it better with an explanation of how multiple systems improve on existing structures simultaneously, as required. For example, sea to land has to take into account prey and predators, reproduction, thermal regulation, respiration, pulmonary, etc.
I don't back off the claim that billions know the Prince of Peace prophecy and that Jesus is the Prince of Peace. I don't back off the hundreds of Tanakh prophecies about Jesus. Why would I do so?
My definition is correct--so is any definition which sees and regards Jesus as the true Messiah of...
Base protein forms? The "simplest" life requires hundred of proteins. If I placed bricks into thermal soup or vulcanic ocean, would you expect skyscrapers to form, given enough time? Why or why not?
Science is inherently naturalistic, it cannot and will not evidence God nor should it...
The title here is telling "Evolutionary transition from a single RNA replicator to a multiple replicator network"
Now, please give me an example of an RNA replicator.
Phylogenetic trees show ancestor species, not billions of species lines from one single source over all time.
Yet we agree--species were all created or evolved complete, and will not give birth to other than their kinds. Thanks for agreeing with the Bible.