Atheism is impossible, I don't see how life can be created naturalistically.

[theVOID]

I have it on DVD so no I was not mistaken, program called "How life began", I've got it in my hand right now, it's a good viewing.
Cells did not formulate alive it took thousands of years of combination elements, they then formed a cell wall and a chemical reaction took place , it settled then ta da life.

But cells are necessarily alive, even when none of the constituents are, thus I took issue with your saying cells were once inanimate, though now it seems to be a simple case of miscommunication. Cells being 'alive' means little more than they are a system of constituent parts that displays the functions I listed above - it's much the same as a star, none of the individual atoms, nor the strong, weak, electromagnetic or gravitational force are stars yet they coalesce into a system with various properties, the descriptive term for which we have given it being a star.

What I've always kept an eye on is that if you leave a pile of bricks on the floor, if you come back in a million years you don't expect to find a house do you? it takes intelligence to make things happen.

No, but that is because there is no viable mechanism by which that could happen. In contrast to this is a seed, if you planted it in fertile soil and came back some time later you would likely find a tree. All this shows is that there is no natural mechanism for producing some systems, but there are for others.

This whole world is coincidence after coincidence with life fighting for it's existence, it had a will, will does not come from inanimate objects .... think about that.

There is a fairly massive difference between coincidence and the product of an algorithm, it's not entirely a coincidence that my fingers are attached to my hand or that my brain produces electrical signals that I experience giving me a sense of my functions and while there is some element of randomness or coincidence by and large the result of my being is a product of two interacting algorithms, biological/chemical evolution and natural selection - these two aspects are in some sense coincidental, it is a coincidence (or perhaps more specifically a reasonable probability) that chemicals can coalesce into self-replicating systems and it is also in some sense a coincidence that these systems can be destroyed or damaged which provides a selection pressure and gives rise to natural selection (though in this case it's extremely likely, indestructible systems are by their very nature much more improbable meaning natural selection is pretty much inevitable).

Cool that's solved, you, I, we don't understand how life began, we know the mechanics but not the first spark ..... that's what the NASA guy said.

I'm not so sure there is a "first spark", but yeah, we know how some of the mechanisms could work.

Ok I can play that, as a deist I personally think one of two things either God started the Universe if i am to believe the Big Bang theory (lets not go there) but in all honesty I think that's the easy option and a childish one, "there was nothing then kaboom there was life" ...... no I don't think so.

That's a straw-man, "nothing" is impossible namely due to two well established physical principles, the conservation of energy and the conservation of information. There was always something, rather it was either a non-universe or a different universe/multiverse, which one we have no idea, that sort of knowledge far exceeds our current understanding.

I'd be keen to discuss the Big Bang topic with you over PM if you are interersted.

In essence to help the OP's cause, for him to give up on any notion of God you would have to show him undoubtedly that something can come from nothing.

That's entirely fallacious, for both the reason I stated above about "something from nothing" being a misnomer and also it's an argument from ignorance/incredulity, inferring the existence of a deity because x is unknown is an epic failure of reason.

Until that time Nicholas you may confidently walk the path of the righteous with your head held high and take no notice of these disbelievers!!

I hardly see how presuming there is a deity, let alone that he has a son called Jesus, makes anybody any more "righteous" than someone who rejects those concepts as being unsubstantiated, "self-righteous" sure, anybody who claims access to such knowledge is.

..... I will revise those links you put out, it better not be about abiogenesis I know this already from the programme.

Talk Origins is a massive archive of information related to everything abiogenesis/evolution, but as far as I'm concerned what you said about abiogenesis "we don't understand how life began, we know the mechanics but not the first spark" is perfectly reasonable, if you're interested in learning more about the hypothesis I'd recommend you spend a few hours scouring Talk Origins but otherwise we share the same opinion.