Replies

There was an intelligence involved in gathering the materials together into a presumed 'privitive' atmosphere. In other words, all the right materials were gathered and put in a closed, controlled environment. This does more to prove that an intelligence had to be involved in creating life than to prove that one was not necessary.

Your objection applies to all man-made experiments, which will always lead you to the conclusion that no matter what we do in the lab proves -- in your words -- "that an intelligence had to be involved in creating" [presumably] the world.

Show me the chaotic environment that generates primordial soup that then spontaneously generates life, then I'll be impressed.

No, you won't be impressed. To you, such a demonstration by man would only prove "that an intelligence had to be involved in creating" the world.

"No, you won't be impressed. To you, such a demonstration by man would only prove "that an intelligence had to be involved in creating" the world."

I presumed you'd know that 'chaotic environment' meant that no human intelligence had been involved in selecting or manipulating the elements to go into it. Perhaps I should have been clearer.

And yes, if you were to show me life occurring spontaneously in such an environment, I would be impressed.

"No, you won't be impressed. To you, such a demonstration by man would only prove "that an intelligence had to be involved in creating" the world."

I presumed you'd know that 'chaotic environment' meant that no human intelligence had been involved in selecting or manipulating the elements to go into it. Perhaps I should have been clearer.

And yes, if you were to show me life occurring spontaneously in such an environment, I would be impressed.