[b_sharp]

"You look at the complexity of the simplest living cell, and you run a mathematical simulation to see if it could have possibly come together by random chance, with absolutely no intelligent design whatsoever. "

That will not work. You are using assumptions that start with a current living thing rather than a prebiotic organism, that is came together all at once, it is the result of 'random chance' rather than predictable chemical interaction, and that it and only it is a test for abiogenesis. Even the tiniest probability that it could not come about by random chance does not make ID the only other possibility. At best this is a test to disprove random chance. You need a test that will show it is ID not tests that show it isn't something else.

[dynoman]

"You look at the complexity of the simplest living cell, and you run a mathematical simulation to see if it could have possibly come together by random chance, with absolutely no intelligent design whatsoever. "

That will not work. You are using assumptions that start with a current living thing rather than a prebiotic organism, that is came together all at once, it is the result of 'random chance' rather than predictable chemical interaction, and that it and only it is a test for abiogenesis. Even the tiniest probability that it could not come about by random chance does not make ID the only other possibility. At best this is a test to disprove random chance. You need a test that will show it is ID not tests that show it isn't something else.

Whaat do yo have to say about this from the The Origin-of-Life Prize ® web site;

Mathematically, it is impossible to go backwards from 20 AA to 64 codons. There is no way to know which of four or six codons, for example, coded a given AA when one tries to go backwards against the "Central Dogma." Prescriptive Information has been lost. Various models of code origin often pursue primordial codon systems of only two nitrogen bases rather than three. At some point, such a two-base codon system must evolve into a three-base codon system. But catastrophic problems such as global frame shifts would have resulted from such a change midstream in the evolution of genetic code.

Those guys are not creationists either.

I noticed your other reply to RussP the statement, "This is simply an argument from personal incredulity." . I don't know about Russ but for me the "argument from personal incredulity" works just fine especially when I read evolutionists themselves noting the mathamatical impossibility of some casually accepted ideas floating around out there.

How about that?

An argument from authority and an argument from personal incredulity, both in one post!!

Woohoo!!

Plus I'm happy, not a sour puss like Junior!