Ossat writes:
I see your point but still see them as interdependent theories and see evolution as based on a naturalistic view of origin of life.
You may well see it that way but it's totally incorrect from a science perspective - and that's what evolution is, science.
The Theory of Evolution deals with the Origin of Species not the Origin of Life. That's why Darwin called his book 'On the the Origin of Species' and stopped at that.
If you deny evolution, abiogenesis/panspermia become helpless, no one would expect a mammal to appear from non-life.
Creationists do.
If you deny abiogenesis/panspermia, evolution loses its base.
Which is what creationists believe.
If a God could create life, why wouldn’t create it in all its variety, like we see in the world?
Which is also what creationists believe.
But you've missed out in all your scenarios the facts that simple life could have been put here by a God, by aliens, by a passing comet or - which is the general scientific opinion/hypothesis - it started by itself, naturally as a purely chemical reaction.
Logically the two processes are separate.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
™ Version 4.2
