This:
‘Or could it be, rather, a master code that decrypts all the relevant information needed by the particular living organism being transmitted to it by a nonphemomenal, extra-spatial, extra-temporal source; i.e., a source existing outside the four-dimensional spacetime of normative human experience?’
isn’t an argument - it is the plot to a science fiction movie.
Fiction simply HAS to make sense to be believed.. reality does not..
Must God make sense to YOU?..
[[‘Or could it be, rather, a master code that decrypts all the relevant information needed by the particular living organism being transmitted to it by a nonphemomenal, extra-spatial, extra-temporal source; i.e., a source existing outside the four-dimensional spacetime of normative human experience?’
isn’t an argument - it is the plot to a science fiction movie.]]
You’ll have to do better than that- You’ve not explained why it isn’t scientific to concider what was proposed. You’ll also need to show that nature must be the ONLY explanation- why Natural explanations are the only viable exclusive answer to all we see and know about.
True, it is not an argument. False, it is not the plot to a science fiction movie. It is rather a statement which is part of an argument. Again, you are giving more evidence of your dismissive nature of argument, and further establishing your adeptness at strawman construction.