Tram law writes:
Why wouldn't Evolution be concerned with the origin of life?
It seems to be it should be, because how can life evolve without the earliest life form?
How far back do we need to take this? Life cannot exist without metals. So why isn't evolution concerned with the creation of heavy nuclei? And don't we need a universe that is not opaque to light transmission? Why doesn't evolution cover that?
And the thing is, if evolution doesn't concern itself with that, it will simply give the fundies more cause to blast away at evolution.
You can find threads here where posters do exactly that. There is a huge thread here dealing with a poster who insists, with Byers-like adamancy, that abiogenesis and evolution must be one subject.
Let 'em blast.
™ Version 4.2
