[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

==I think we can all agree that living things have unique capabilities, so claiming restrictions on what life can do based on what nonliving things can do strikes me as an unwarranted logical leap.

But isn’t that the whole point of neo-Darwinian evolution: namely that evolution is a product of random mutations plus natural selection? Are you positing that random mutations aren’t random, and that natural selection isn’t natural?

I think my answers are yes; no. But I don't get the connection between your questions and my statement.

[GodGunsGuts]

Are not random mutation and natural selection both thought to be natural phenomena? Is not random mutation supposed to be explainable in terms of the laws of physics and chemistry? Is not natural selection based on the natural world “selecting” favorable (and quite natural) random mutations?