It's my concept of why all the creation/ID (im)probability computations (usually for processes nobody understands in the first place) are fallacious in the extreme. For that matter, however, many processes in nature are indeed so chaotic as to be intractable to straighforward analysis. Science handles this "chaos" just fine. The creationist attitude, OTOH ...
So which do you want? Predicatability based on laws that were established from the start, or laws that developed themselves out of a state of total unpredictability? Guess which of these two makes most sense to real scientists, common man, and the Bible?
Shrug, give up, cite any difficulties and any "improbabilities" as proof of the supernatural! The whole approach is and forever will be useless, whether or not you call it science.
This is not, and has not been the issue. The issue is whether common sense, based on the observation of constancy and predictability throughout history, may posit the supernatural as a possibly true explanation for why things are the way they are. Evolutionists can do no better. Eventually the must also make their own leap(s) of faith.