I am almost tired of saying this to the ignorant. Because we do not know something currently does not mean it will never be known, nor does it mean a "designer" had to do it. Yes those ideas were speculation. The reality is though, self-replicating molecules exist. Many, many, many types of them. If you are interested to see the vast number of them simply google scholar "Self replicating molecules".
Each day, each month, each year, biology, chemistry, physics and geology understand early earth more and more. Not only that, but we are building more evidence on the origins of life.
This is not speculation that because its "what I needed for evolution". I understand you are dumb and unwilling to budge in your silly beliefs, thats fine. Understand your beliefs, are simply beliefs. Also, evolution does not require a natural origin, no where in the theory of evolution is there a disclaimer that a "god" could have not provided the first cell. I however disagree with that belief, nothing has ever been shown to be of supernatural origin. I don't think that is going to change anytime soon.
Reality based theorizing? Do you really just how stupid you sound? You want reality based theorizing, yet you have stated that you believe it was god who created. So let me get this straight. You want more reality based theorizing, yet you want to appeal to the supernatural to solve your problem of the origin of life? Jesus.
"What if God created?" makes at least as much sense as "What if a self-replicating molecule became a living, reproducing, growing, cell?"
I understand that self-replicating molecules exist.. you can stop trying to win that point, b/c I've agreed with you from the start. I know how they reproduce. We aren't arguing that either. I know how living cells reproduce, we agree on that as well. In fact, I think you've conceded each point so far... except that you think multi-step evolution had to happen, and I think it's literally impossible. There are things your theory cannot answer (what was the origin of matter/energy?) and things mine can't answer (what's the origin of God).
Neither belief is stupid, in my opinion. You simply believe what you've been taught by the sources you trust (you didn't do all the research yourself) and I believe what I've been taught by the sources I trust. We both used multiple methods of examination and study to determine which sources we would trust, and the ones you trust are different from the ones I trust. You think I am ignorant and stupid, uneducated and stubborn... I think you are gullible in a sense as well as stubborn. But, here's the key difference... I respect your beliefs and opinions and you don't respect mine. You, my friend, are arrogant.
Lastly, I hope that anyone who reads this can discern the truth...