There is no evidence for a naturalistic origin of life.Posted by: LittleBallofHATE
At least I've never seen any. Atheists believe it, even though there is no evidence whatsoever to support it. So, let's be clear about this. I'm not asking if you believe it, or not. I'm asking if there is any evidence. If you're honest, you'll have to answer no.
Although scientists have come close to creating DNA molecules using the conditions of a primordial earth, I don't believe I can think of any evidence supporting a definitive origin of life theory. (But it all depends on what "naturalistic" means) in any case the fact that life does exist means there must have been an origin. (I am atheists, not sure what it has to do with this)
"At least I've never seen any" "if you're honest, You'll have to answer no. " <- lol wtf? Arguments from biased arrogance and ignorance aside, Scientists have recreated all four bases of ribonucleotides inside of laboratory simulated pre-biotic early Earth conditions, Including multitudes of amino acids known to be associated with life along with simple cell membrane like structures made of simple fatty acids which were recently discovered to bind to said amino acids and ribonucleotides, The question now is less that of the chemistry and now more of what specific environmental factors allowed said chemistry to achieve a hyper-cycle. Its clear that the person who made this poll is a heavily biased individual who would not care if said evidence slapped them in the fact like a sack of bricks. Rodrick from diary of wimpy kid explains the creationist/religious mindset perfectly, DENY DENY DENY no matter what DENY DENY DENY. I also love how they put this image of only one guy disagreeing in the no option, Shows bias right off the bat.