[QUOTE][b]but over 100 years of lab experimenting can't produce life from simple elements.[/QUOTE]
[/b]
You're changing the subject on us. At the start of the thread you were asking if evolution has done any good, implying that the validity of a theory is weighed morally. (Has String Theory done us any "good"?)
[QUOTE][b]Now also realize that we are deliberately trying to DESIGN life in a lab[/QUOTE]
[/b]
Who is trying to design life in a lab? I've heard of production of amino acids in a concept demonstration by Miller and by others as a way of probing the possibility of abiogenesis (and modeling the atmospheres of other Solar System bodies).
But since you bring it up, I really can't resist asking, have you managed to yet speak amino acids into existance? Now if you have not yet spoken amino acids into existance, why are you criticizing the current models of abiogenesis?
[QUOTE][b]and 100 years later we still haven't done it[/QUOTE]
[/b]
According to the abiogenesis models, it took millions of years in nature. And may I remind you that we are only barely able to manipulate individual molecules. Organic chemistry in the lab is still a sloppy science based upon thousands of reactions that are occuring as a result of essentially "random" molecular interactions that progress crudely to generate the expected result (with a lot of impurities and unwanted by-products).
[QUOTE][b]As to a literal 6 day creation, have any of you ever heard of RELATIVITY?[/QUOTE]
[/b]
If you are saying that 4.5 BY on Earth is six days to God then I don't have any problems with your perspective. In fact I could agree with you. But if your position is that the Earth was made in 6 24 hour days relative to an observer on EARTH then I disagree with you because it is contradictory to evidence.
[QUOTE][b]Because it is beyond your understanding, doesn't mean that it isn't true.[/QUOTE]
[/b]
Science works with the unknown based upon what is already understood. If you have a personal faith in some breakthrough 500 years from now that will validate your position that is fine for you but it is not applicable in science unless/until you can present evidence for that phenomenon. Ie, you have to discover it first.
[QUOTE][b]However, I'm afraid you will never be able to prove that evolution is real in a lab[/QUOTE]
[/b]
I'm afraid that evolution *is* a lab exercise. Familiar with emerging diseases? We're arguing with Philip on that point right now under the thread "Vestiges" and if you can add to it I welcome your input.
[QUOTE][b]and conflicting and erroneous data for evolution doesn't add up.[/QUOTE]
[/b]
This is begging the question, our exchanges on what you consider "conflicting and erroneous data" seem to have broken down.
™ Version 4.2
