(February 16, 2016 at 9:29 am)Mathilda Wrote: Refuted a myriad times on this forum already. You are using a strawman argument. No one is arguing that a bacteria cell assembled its atoms merely by chance. You are looking at a bacteria cell now and assumed that it spontaneously came into existence. The first cells would have been more primitive and may not have reproduced. The very word chance is misleading. If you have a completely random process over aeons of time using a whole soup of chemicals then you will be exploring a search space. This means that any configuration that more effectively minimises free energy will be settled upon. In the same way that a crystal does not develops by a process of self organisation and not by chance. Yet each snow flake is unique.
Today scientists are capable to produce any soup which you can imagine. Today’s science is sophisticated enough to produce life in matter or at least produce a primitive living cell only if nature would allow scientists to do so. No matter if all possible soups boil in whatever environment trillions of years, there is zero probability for life to appear within any soup. This is a naked fact.
The great example is Abiogenesis that has already tried to create all type of soups to create life. What in your opinion Abiogenesis had proven? Nothing!
Abiogenesis has not given any details about the source of first life form, about the mechanism that built-up first life form, and it even failed to confirm whether first life form was a single primitive cell or a whole monkey. Every assumption in abiogenesis is totally based on conjectures.
Nobel prizes are not given to stupid people. If that was the case, then Richard Dawkins was the one to win all Nobel Prizes.
(February 16, 2016 at 9:29 am)Mathilda Wrote: Meaningless word salad. At best taken out of context. Code system? Also logically inconsistent. If a code system cannot be created without a mental process, then what created the initial mental process that created the code system? Did it not itself use a code system? And if not then why are you using the example of a code system (whatever one is).This paragraph is laden with such ambiguous terms. For example, what exactly is free will? Are you talking about classical information or information in terms of quantum mechanics? Your bullshit relies on equivocation and is disingenuous sleight of hand.
Here I give you one more delicious salad. Try to digest it if you can.
“The six feet of the DNA coiled inside every one of our bodies 100 trillion cells contain a four-letter chemical that spells out precise assembly instructions for all proteins from which our bodies are made … No hypothesis come even close to explaining how information got into biological matter by naturalistic means.”
Lee Strobel
Former legal editor of Chicago Tribune
