Come on! Too broad. This isn’t hard to understand. There are people who don’t believe in the historical fact of speciation due to natural selection. Come on, I expect slightly better than that.

I would agree with you except for all the evidence. You know all that falsifiable information collected by thousands of scientitst over hundreds of years and across multiple scientific disciplines. You can’t go to a philosopher and be like so what makes everything untrue? And he says well all information is biased by the interpretation of the evidence and everything is just an opinion that is falsifiable by other with differing opinions. And then use that philosophical position to refute actual scientists. These people that use thier brains to think and come up with new ideas, if they had to listen to your demarcation argument would just laugh and turn away because there is no point in arguing with an idiot because they will just drag you down to their level.

The mistake you make here is in concluding that the complexity equals impossible complexity.

"The 29 observed reactions include the formation and/or interconversion of glucose, pyruvate, the nucleic acid precursor ribose‐5‐phosphate and the amino acid precursor erythrose‐4‐phosphate, antedating reactions sequences similar to that used by the metabolic pathways."

http://msb.embopress.org/content/10/4/725

"We show that precursors of ribonucleotides, amino acids and lipids can all be derived by the reductive homologation of hydrogen cyanide and some of its derivatives, and thus that all the cellular subsystems could have arisen simultaneously through common chemistry."

http://www.nature.com/articles/nchem.2202

"We have demonstrated for the first time that we can make uracil, cytosine, and thymine, all three components of RNA and DNA, non-biologically in a laboratory under conditions found in space"

https://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-ames-reproduces-the-building-blocks-of-life-in-laboratory

"The results demonstrate that the initial dissociation of the formamide molecule could produce a large amount of highly reactive CN and NH radicals, which could further react with formamide to produce adenine, guanine, cytosine, and uracil."

http://www.pnas.org/content/112/3/657

One of the reasons we don't know yet how life originated on earth, is that there are so many ways that the processes can happen - ice, clay, space, hydrothermal vents, etc. etc.

If you would like to falsify abiogenesis - name the process that can't happen - nucleotide formation (check), lipid-based membranes (check), metabolism (check), self-replication (check), etc...

It’s a fact, sorry to say, thank god who doesn’t exist it’s not 1500 years ago, because if I was a scientific person, and you were a theological person, chances are you would hold some sort of world view that would allow you to attack and kill me.

As it is mostly a godless supposition that allows someone’s mind to fully understand speciation from natural selection, I don’t expect a good portion of the population to even read the associated data pertaining to the scientific discoveries of evolutionary scientists.

Fortunately, an incredible amount of data now exists in the form of genetic expression models, and ring species characteristic identification from these models. The archeaological data must be taken into consideration, as well as blood protein synthesis, superfluous organs, and cell morphology. The list is really endless when it comes to the interpretation of genetic diversity and speciation, making it in my view one of the most difficult predictive scientific models that has ever been devised by humans.

So I can see why some people would have trouble with it, and if semantics are your thing, and you can proport that evolution isn’t factual because of x y z, than your just another one of the 4 billion people on earth that have a worldview that extols theological teachings, but forgets or ignores the FACT that science doesn’t give a flying fig about opinions or viewpoints, and simply doesn’t require them in order to be true.