Organic Molecules Found 400 Light Years From Earth

[The Grand Nudger]

Ok. You have made a good point. So I guess I don't have an objection. Thanks for walking me through your thinking! (It actually saves me time with the probability thing. I don't think I would have been able to do it cogently anyway. One can certainly calculate an amount of possible reactions based on time and numbers of atoms, etc. and one can calculate the probability of say a genome of a replicating organism. The type of calculations one would get from a ID website. I couldn't figure how to incorporate the fact that even within an organism there are variations that still work (certainly a valid criticism of the ID website calculations), i.e., I personally have no idea how to do that or what numbers would be reasonable to assign.)

It would be pointless, since RNA is pointed to rather than DNA and RNA -has- been created in a lab by combining chemicals thought to be present in the environment at the dawn of life.  The probability of that having occurred is unity, 1/1.  As in, we know that it can, does and did happen.   Anywhere that the conditions present in the lab experiment existed would have produced the same reaction.  Similarly, life converts rna nucleotides into dna nucleotides with regularity - so the probability of that occurring is, again, unity.  1/1.  It can, does and did happen.  

What I've been driving at with this, by playing whack a mole with these objections, is not attempting to establish that you -have- no objection, but trying to quickly cut through the morass of all the things that cover whatever that objection actually is.  It's nothing to do with how easy or difficult it is, it's nothing to do with the necessity of a supernatural mechanism, it's nothing to do with requiring a specific agent, and it's not based in any actual math that you've either done or that would be informative.....but some objection does exist; underneath all of that.  There's a reason for each piece of flak offered and it has nothing to do with the particulars of any of them - as expressed by your ability to drop them so quickly while simultaneously moving on to some -other- objection.  

What is it about abiogenesis that makes you object, even if/when whatever rationalization you offer doesn't pan out?  It's fair to assume that you haven't suddenly come to the opinion that life arose spontaneously in the primordial ooze just because your previous objections have been mooted, right?