Creationists: Can you please explain the barrier that makes abiogenesis "chemically impossible"?

That is just it, Because you are a Taoist/Atheist You would view any evidence from Creationist as Not credible and you know this already and are already planning because of a Bias presupposition against Creationism to discredit ANY creationist answer so your even asking this question is shrouded in deceit that I am willing to wager you will find some way through some warped sense of ethics to justify, Now watch as This answer is Given over a dozen Thumbs down and worthless rebuttals from hate filled intolerant people

it quite is what Aristotle calls the version between Psyche and Techne. It pertains to essence. a ingredient at modern after it dies is chemically an identical besides the fact that it quite is not alive. existence is the call for the version. i understand that sounds sophistical yet think of that the non-existence of a ingredient at modern after it dies is diverse (in essence) than while alive, and that distinction is existence, or soul in older language. it quite is not an element in a mixture. it quite is not something that develops from the main appropriate aspects the two.

RNA to DNA. Of course, even RNA's "creation" is highly questionable, as it was hardly accomplished in a "natural" environment.

Why don't you ask the scientists that have tried to create life but cannot. i am sure they can let you in on numerous barriers.

If you think that a creationists' failure to explain abiogenesis somehow proves that the theory must be true, then your logic is even more seriously flawed than I first thought.

Only after they explain the process that prevents changes in the genome over many generations from meeting the requirements to be considered macro-evolution.

I asked for that ages ago, so it is only fair that they answer my question first.

What odds do you think we should give on:

A creationist answering.

A creationist answering with a logically put together statement.

A creationist actually providing the information requested.

Wow - 4 answers in and 3 out of 4 don't even understand what abiogenesis means. And the 4th who does understand it seems not to be a creationist.

Then why doesn't life spring from my peanut butter jar!?!?!?!?!

....

Just kidding.

I'm interested in this answer. I'll be following this.

Having been on this forum for a while now, it's clear that most theists don't even understand what abiogenesis is. Some confuse it with evolution & even the big bang (LOL)

The ones who do vaguely know what it is, don't understand how it works; which is no doubt instrumental in their decision to blindly deny it.

Bronze Age goatherders' creation myths vs scientific proofs? I know which one I'll be going for.

You are talking to people who believe in micro-evolution but not macro..... you will be disappointed.