How do you know? If the processes themselves are observed in nature then they are simulating the interaction.
And it still shows that intelligence is required to generate the conditions.
The fact that something is unknown or not yet known in no way leads to a conclusion of intelligence. It just means it is as yet unknown.
No offense, but that is one of the broadest non sequiturs I have read in quite some time.
FD, Its too bad that ‘non-sequitur’ was already taken as a screen handle, cuz it would have fit you to a T.
Every thing that you post has that “if you had read it before you hit post, you never would have sent it” flavor.
It’s easy, the whole theory hinges on conditions that existed 3.8 billion years ago, according to scientists and their theory of how life arose from non-life around this time. Natural conditions today are not that of what they were 3.8 billion years ago. And they won’t ever be those conditions ever again. You can never prove it.
And the experiment itself is proof that a guiding intelligence is required to get this to work. Nobody has ever found this occurring in the world on its own because the conditions don’t exist anymore. The conditions have to be engineered. If they did find a place (which they won’t, you can’t turn the clock back 3.8 billion years) we’d have heard about it night and day for a solid week.