[CarolinaGuitarman]

"There was a molecular biologist talking about so-called 'random evolution,' with regard to a single-celled organism."

Your source is an idiot. Evolution is not concerned with the origins of life. Also, there is no way to calculate odds for the formation of life (abiogenesis). It's impossible when you have no clue as to what the pathways are. Anybody feeding you odds is pulling them out of their butt.

"If you can argue that any other scientific theory is in dispute to that extent, other theories should be included. I thought that was the PURPOSE of science."

There are no other scientific theories dealing with the variation and origin of species.

[ml1954]

Your source is an idiot.

LOL. Don't hold back CarolinaGuitarman. Tell us what you really think. LOL.

[The_Reader_David]

MDC's source is indeed an idiot. Anyone who invokes an a priori probability estimate--whether it's to 'prove' design, to 'prove' that a random process can produce complexity (the purported invitability of the complete works of Shakespeare arising in the output of a vast sea of typing monkeys), or to prove or disprove the existence of extraterrestrial life --is always talking rot.