Yes, I know what that is and no there isn't any real proof now is there?
Depends what you consider "real proof."
Scientists have emulated what we believe to be early earth conditions and self replicating amino acids formed.
Another but of guesswork because that's the only thig to fit the agenda.
Back to guesswork are we? Good. Then you won't have any trouble giving me that "guesswork" in evolution, which you said there was so much of.
. But now what's your theory since it had to come from somewhere
Abiogenesis doesn't have to do with the Big Bang theory either. Please pick another card.
there is no God so there is no explanation since it wasn't created by a higher being and it didn't just appear.
There are explanations. We've told you some of them.
I don't suppose that there's any actual profe of that (back to abiogenesis)?
It's currently the most widely accepted theory, but there's not nearly as much evidence for it as evolution.
Mostly where it is at is "if conditions were like this then it would have been possible for it to occur this way." in terms of definitively proven.
Or what chemicles or how much etc.
I see you didn't google it.
if we can't even figure that out or recreate it than how did it happen so perfectly on accident?
Well, let's take a look at the whole picture.
How many galaxies are there?
How stars in each galaxy are there?
How many planets are around each star?
Out of those hundreds of thousands of trillions, it's pretty much inevitable from an odds perspective on those chemicals being combined.
I just looked up the definition of that on my IPod's dictionary and it says "the technical term for spontaneous generation"
Your IPod needs a new dictionary. Like I said, google it. Read the wiki at least.
stuff randomly appearing just like you said was disproven.
Spontaneous Generation has been disproved.
Abiogenesis is not Spontaneous Generation. If it was, it would be called Spontaneous Generation.
You just called it idiocy.
I called one literal interpretation of an event in the Bible idiocy.
Has man ever created life?
Depends what you mean by created life. If you mean an entirely new creature that you can hold in the palm of your hand, no.
If you mean manipulating genes and what not to create something different, yes.
A livig cell, a single love cell?
...what is a love cell?
And even if by chance it is done all that proves is that of takes great skill and knowledge to create it.
Actually, from what I know the problem isn't that we don't have the knowledge. We don't have the tools to work at such a level as to "put together" a cell.
like how it actually happened so you basically said I don't know without actually saying it.
If you mean I didn't assert something as 100% fact without having enough evidence behind my claim to say such, you're right, I didn't.
That's because I'm not a fool. We can only go with what we know.
If we don't know something, we try to learn it. We don't just ascribe every unknown thing to some magic man in the sky with absolutely no reason to do so.
I can tell you right here, when you say "know" and I say "know" we're not saying the same thing.
You're using "know" as "irrefutably to be such" while I'm using it as "from what we can see and logically infer."
You implied it.
Again, I said the literal interpretation of a single event in the Bible was idiocy.
Exactly my point, never been created from scratch even as advanced as we are but yet you think it's perfectly logical to think it happened by accident despite this fact and the lack of facts supporting it.
Abiogenesis does not state that a rabbit hopped out of the primordial ocean.
And yes you most certainly did imply it on many an occasion.
I won't deny many parts of it are idiotic.
Most of what isn't idiotic comes in the form of advice or wisdom. Almost all of the stories are logically bs if you take them literally.
