Ever heard the term "Hasty Generalization?"
You are the one who proposed a paper where someone had to interfere in order to enable replication. Our argument all along assumed no designer...that it all had to be random to some point where the magic of genetic efficiencies could take over. And our result is that it's impossible.
Try not to assume that every quality that the model possesses is also possessed by the actual thing being examined.
What? A model is supposed to represent the reality of the subject, otherwise its just an exercise in mental gymnastics.
False premise. Chemistry is not random. If you put H2 and O2 together, you will not get a "random" combustion.
Yes. I'm also familiar with the term "non sequitur", which is what you're engaging in now.
You are the one who proposed a paper where someone had to interfere in order to enable replication
No, I am the one pointing out that your assumptions are invalid by showing you an example of a self-replicator that is much smaller than the one you propose. Hence, your assumption of 29,000,000 as the minimum length is unwarranted.
A model is supposed to represent the reality of the subject, otherwise its just an exercise in mental gymnastics.
Ridiculous. A model is supposed to faithfully reflect the aspect of reality we are interested in studying, not reflect every single aspect of the real thing. By your "logic", such as it is, studying the process of nuclear fusion tells us nothing about what happens inside stars, because neither thermonuclear explosions nor fusion reactors are nearly as big as a real star.
Try again.