Evolutionists [stand up] EXPLAIN your ambiogenesis
that 'first cell that evolved via natural selection
that is the first evolution [in theory]

here is what i have so far on YOUR theory

quote#

''first cell mutated into protobionts
then prokaryotes
then eukaryotes'

so THEN what?
what dna [science] sequencing verified it happend
what was the change to what dna strand
what formed the cell membrane ?
what substances formed the membrane /
has science replicated the membrane ?
or evolved their first cell?
and where the amino acids , hormones , telimeres etc origonate
[of the first evolution?

needless to say i am only an ignorant 'creationist'

but im aware of my own ignorance

so how did this first cell evolve into the next evolution?

what was this first cells definative name [or species]
[or whatever you think your science [evolution] says the ambiogensis definatively is]

now i have no doudt spelled things wrong [but hey im one of thjose gullable creationists[we swallow everything [so i have been told]

so here i am [put it in writing ]

ps i know ambiogenisis is denied to be AN evolution BUT
how did this first cell mutate into being the first cell?

i know there is clever people here
so please explain your theory

[in explaining PLEASE treat me like a 5 year old,and be nice]
if you cant post facts
please refrain from insulting my belief[and my ignorance]

ps links are nice [but if you need a link to explain
think why you cant explain it without the link
paraphrase it for me
[to show you know the facts underpining YOUR theory

that you put above god][ok i know quite a few believers have fallen for a theory too,but you guys[and gals] can help explain it as well

please let the evolutionists [only] explain

one under god

^i know there is clever people here ^

You is right.
There is many clever people here.

one under god

^but im aware of my own ignorance^

We all are aware of your ignorance.

one under god: << PLEASE treat me like a 5 year old,and be nice >>

I don't think that this is an appropriate forum for 5 year-olds. Try here:

http://www.abc.net.au/children/bananas/

as you can see by the 3 replies so far
yet no attempt to explain

i guess its easier to believe a THEORY
than explain why

well i have used one right of reply

just to explain to you ; SEE they believe the theory
but cant even explain why

ha ha
your revealed

the link explains more about the poster than the topic

but feel free
you that believe a THEORY to explain it at anytime

what you afraid of
you cant explain it now so how you going to explain it to god then

ps the topic isnt god [i know]
you can reply your theory herenow or not]

the topic is evolution EXPLAINED
please see NO ONE HAS even tried

yet you dare tell the theory to your kids as science truth
just as you were decieved by your teachers
it is a childish theory that satisfies only children

please grow up

see your faith in the theory
is the same belief [faith]
we have in god

but we try to explain ours [that is the difference]
but this isnt about belief

[explain science fact
[please]
if you can

One under god, you may think all these things are unlikely, but how much more unlikely do you think it is that a creator capable of _creating_ these things spontaneously occurred.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that both creationists and evolutionists take a number of things on faith because they do not have explanations for all that they observe, the issue then becomes for me, whose faith is the least rational.

I'm afraid that yours is definitely the least rational because it doesn't align with the facts as we can ascertain them through the physical universe. That's why most Christians aren't creationists. Revelation is not the sole preserve of the Bible.