It is not that science does not have an idea of how life started. It is that evolution is not concerned with it. It is concerned with how life developed. Determining how life started is a different area of science.
Science is attempting to answer the question. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7041353.stm If you can mix up some elements in a dish and put a spark in it and create synthetic life, then the implication would be that it occurred in nature at some point in the billions of years of the universe's existence. Now, I don't know what problems may come about by unleashing synthetic life forms on the earth, it could turn out like bringing nutria to La. (sorry nutriaitch, no offense!) !!! These scientists are looking at the possible benefits, and I am sure they are looking at the risks, but they really want to do this, so they will probably rationalize it and go ahead and do it. But if man can create life, then it will have been demonstrated that a god was not necessary to create life. Science does not figure everything out at once. Organized science has been going at acquiring knowledge for a few hundred years, and we just haven't answered all the questions yet.
Who says science has no answer for how life began? Science has a very good understanding of exactly how and where life began and more details are being discovered every day. Just Google "How life began" to bring up hundreds of pages of evidence. Simply put, comets brought water to the planet creating the ocean and in this water certain chemical actions involving amino acids, the presence of oxygen in the water and photosynthesis produced bacteria that evolved into algae. The algae produced huge quantities of atmospheric oxygen which cleared the cloudy CO2 skies and let the sun warm shallow oceans where animate and plant life developed and spread to the continents.
Then what is sciences idea of how life started or how the substances that started life came to be? Why wouldn't evolutionist be concerned with how life started? Is not the beginning of life the beginning of evolution?
There are no "Evolutionists". Evolution is not a scientific discipline, it is a biological process. Biologists are very much concerned with the scientific origins of life, as are palentologists, zoologists, and botanists.
I said science will never tell us how life began or how the substances that started life came to be and so on. Where did the comets, the water, chemicals, oxygen, and bacteria come from?
And I said that you are misinformed. Science tells us all of these things. There are answers to these questions if you only bother to look for them. Your assumptions that explanations do not exist are simply wrong. There is a History Channel series playing right now called The Universe and it will answer many of your questions. Google can do it, too. It's good that you have questions, but it's wrong to assume that no answers exist. They do.
Evolutionist 1. a person who believes in or supports a theory of evolution, esp. in biology. 2. a person who supports a policy of gradual growth or development rather than sudden change or expansion. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=evolutionist
Oh, there is a word all right, just not a scientific discipline. Evolution is embraced by all of the Bio and Geo Sciences.
Then why not post the answer here? I'll post my reply to it (and for each subsequent post you make) now. Then where did that come from?
