Whether God "did it" or not does not depend on the number of words I use. It doesn't even depend on whether or not I personally acknowledge that He "did it."
Having said that, I find it curious that something like over 200 universal physical constants have to be, not only just-so in themselves, but must all function together seamlessly and harmoniously, in order that a universe such as ours — one evidently primed for Life — could exist in the first place, in an "orderly" form that evidently persists in evolutionary time. That such a universe could be produced in some sort of abstract infinity by means of "pure, blind chance" is a sheer statistical (and logical) improbability....
So, what does that tell you, tokenatheist?
[[That such a universe could be produced in some sort of abstract infinity by means of “pure, blind chance” is a sheer statistical (and logical) improbability....]]
Their counter argument- from all I’ve gathered i nthe yearso n here and in other forums, is that Macroevolution isn’t ‘pure chance’ but a directed purposeful process (as though the process is forward looking- intimating of course intelligence) and that statistics don’t count- why? Because ice crystals forming show a process of negative entropy (ignoring again the fact that static law abiding moot examples of geometric patterns showing SLIGHT negative entropy in no way compares to highly dynamic, highly complex self organizing, irreducibly complex law violating living systems- their best argument against statistics hinges on irrelevent examples of negative entropy in non living, geometry abiding formations of crystals- yet apparently htis is ‘enough’ for them to discount statistical impossibilites.
‘That such a universe could be produced in some sort of abstract infinity by means of “pure, blind chance” is a sheer statistical (and logical) improbability....
So, what does that tell you, tokenatheist? ‘
It tells me that you throw out statements without anything at all to support them.