Muhd writes:
Atheists all have faith to believe that one day, somehow, scientists will be able to explain something coming from nothing, or life arising from non-life which to me seems to require more blind faith than believing that some higher power did it.
I don't know. Maybe scientists will one day find out that life has always existed and that the earth was just seeded from outer space. But I doubt that it requires
more blind faith to believe that life arose from non-life than it does to believe that some higher power did it, because the former means that you only have to believe that life arose from non-life, whereas the latter requires you to believe that some higher power did it, as well as that said higher power has either always existed or arose from some lower power, or, God forbid, from non-power. The tally is: one thing to believe for the atheists, and two for the creationists. In the game of Blind Faith, the creationists are firmly in the lead.
looking for a naturalist answer to the Origin of life is like looking for a natural process that creates wristwatches
I own no less than eight mechanical wristwatches and I can tell you that, without exception, they were all the result of a natural process. Although I do admire their extraordinary skills, I do not think that watchmakers are supernatural entities. Do you see the error in your rhetoric, or do you need someone to spell it out for you?
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.