[WildTurkey]

For sequencing, you have one set of probabilities for such structures forming without intelligent intervention,

Oh, you mean that debunked probability analysis that assumes there is no order to nature and that everything is totally random. That would be like saying the sun had a 50/50 chance of rising the next day and if it did rise there was a 50/50 chance that it would be green.

[Southack]

"Oh, you mean that debunked probability analysis that assumes there is no order to nature and that everything is totally random."

You've seen no math to "debunk" the link that I provided, I assure you, though if you disagree you are welcome to post such math (you won't).

Likewise, you've failed to correctly characterize the debate. Big shock.

I'll do it for you (this is like being the teacher who gave you the answers to your tests in advance).

There are two possibilites:

1. That the origin of species is due to an unaided, unintelligent, natural process or processes... or

2. That the origin of species is due to an aided, intelligent intervention of some sort.

Those are your only two choices. There are no others, though it is *feasible* that both may be valid (at this point, we don't know).

This does *not* mean, as you incorrectly stated above, that everything must be "random." In fact, mathematically, we already know that there must be some form of bias. This bias may turn out to be from a natural process and/or from an intelligent intervention (i.e. one or both of options 1 and 2 above).