No observation from the first single cells of life to a full skeletal system. You just need a lot of imagination to think how this could happen without God.
As long as you can dream up a starting point like an existing species, then evolutions seems to be possible. Start from single cell life billions of years ago. Or start from no life at the time of the Big Bang.
True, Abiogenesis is hard. Single cell to multicellular is not that hard to imagine. Algae found to live in tandem and stay together even when original stimulus to join was removed.
Whether something is Continuous or categorical is really just an artifact of measurement, not a limit on reality. The loss of compatibility to mate is a threshold marker to define limit between species. Do you consider donkeys and horses the same species?
Okay.
Divider seems to think microbes are just goo. Life around the undersea vents wasn't that gooey.
When you do not understand something possibly look inward and apply yourself.
"When one species becomes another", or when a new species is generated?
Either way is fine by me.
Do you mean, because we've never directly observed either one, who cares?
Seems simply a matter of semantics.
So how does that look? A mother of one species gives birth to or lays multiples both male and female who can only marry each other to multiply? Basically every species is ultimately a product of full sibling incest?
When it comes to science, it's best to keep imagination completely out of it.
Adaptation uses already existing genetic information. Nothing to see there.
So here you use the usual evolutionist trick of equivocating terms. In this case "evolve" with "adapt". Shame on you.
Again, an ADAPTATION based on ALREADY EXISTING genetic information.
Perhaps in once sense, but nothing NEW is coming into existence. There is no mechanism for building complex integrated systems based on accumulating mistakes.
No, based on a naturalistic philosophy (such as yours), it's IMPOSSIBLE.
That's because you have a vivid imagination and a complete lack of scientific knowledge.
Proving absolutely nothing.
No, but they are obviously the same kind.
No, I don't. Even the simplest microbe is quite complex. Far beyond what could happen by accident.
Is there a point?
Speciation is not upward progress. So that is irrelevant.
You're fixating on species which does nothing to help your "theory".
"IMPOSSIBLE" is rhetoric. By their own admission the 'odds' are extremely long. "Impossibly" long, you'd say (I'd tend to agree), but this is an interpretation, that supports your own personal narrative, because "impossible" means to many people that the odds are zero----that there is zero-point-zero-zero-zero-infinity chance of it being true.
No, it's actually a fact.
The odds are zero.
