Wait, did you just say that trees are not life? There is no reason to continue this discussion, do at least try to educate yourself on the workings of this wonderful universe that we have the privilege to inhabit.
Nice one xD However, life isn't about "move = life, not move = not life". It's more about excitability. But, let's play with your one, I like it) So, if sand flies on air then I could say - it's alive? Like, If I'm on playground and there is moving sand - the whole playground alive?
It's called abiogenesis. There's been a lot of study on how life could have first come into existance. For example, we know that lightning can form amino acids and some proteins in certain chemical combinations. All that would be required for life to begin is that one set of protein or amino acids was self replicating, which partially happens already.
And even if we had no idea how life could begin naturally, that doesn't mean God created the first life. That's called the "god of the gaps" argument, when you say that proof of god is in the ever-decreasing group of knowledge that science has yet to discover.
I did. I was raised as a Christian. But then I started questioning how I knew things to be true, and not just lies told to me by others, well meaning or not, whether they believed them or not.
I realized that the only way to know for certain what was true and what wasn't was to judge it based on the evidence. And then I looked at the religious beliefs I had been raised with and even other religions and realized that none of them had good evidence for what they believed. So I could no longer accept that which had no evidence for it.
It doesn't make me close minded to not be gullible.
There are many religions that tie in evolution. One is namely deism (which is what I believe) where god created all but let it move along like clockwork; thus implying both the existence of god and evolution.
Science is the collective observation and experimentation of the natural world. Since the concept of god is that it is supernatural and unobservable, science cannot make any statements regarding the existence or non-existence of such a creature anymore than it can comment on the physical abilities of Superman. Thus, I am calling your bluff. Where did you read that "science admits that god exists"?
To be fair, you need to have a high IQ to understand such metaphysical implications. When talking about nothing, it really means nothing. That means that there are no laws that prevents nothing to become something.