[[Are you suggesting that if a chemist demonstrates a reaction in the laboratory, that this implies the reaction cannot occur outside the laboratory?]]
Nope- We’re just pointing out how intelligently and carefully controlled those experiments are, and showing that in natural conditions, these conditions do not exist, and that in natural conditions, it would be essentially impossible for such results to happen and survive for a great many reasons- each reason adding it’s own essential impossibilities to the next- until we posit that it is unreasonable to suggest that nature is capable of such a finely tuned intellgient creation and assembly- however, the discussion is about the article, and not whether lab conditions coudl reasonably be duplicated in nature- the article is discussing hte chemical purity and assembly and cosntructions and inter-reliancy of all the subsystems which support hte megasystem, and whether nature is capable of these incredible intracacies and self-assemblies in their pure form and IC state, and with hte ifnromation needed already present and somehow accoutned for and fully functional or not-
So things that happen carefully controlled experiments can't happen outside this experiments?
I'm having difficulty following your logic.
Miller's experiment could be replicated by a 12 year-old. The reason for the careful controls is not that careful controls are necessary for the reactions to take place, but that controls are necessary to rule out contamination as the source of the products.