Forensics involves things that have happened, based on observation of available evidence. This is speculating on things that cannot happen, based on an absence of evidence.
[[This is speculating on things that cannot happen, based on an absence of evidence. ]]
again you are attempting to downplay the seriousness of the article- This isn’t ‘speculating’ but rather directly observing that it is impossible for nature to do the things mentioned. It is showing WHY things can not happen naturally, and is not simply relying on ‘the absensce of’ evidnece, but more so showign hte evidnece and showing why nmaturalistic means are wholly unreasonable- IF dirty chemicals can not be sparked into pure chemicals, and then result in hte complexities discussed i nthe article, then this is not speculating, but observing the science that hsows it can not happen. As mentioned i nthe article, we are only capable of purifying to 99.98% or so, and only after much manipulation and careful refining, while isolating and carefully preventing contamination, but nature supposedly soemhow, purified dirty chemicals perfectly? And kept htem pure through literally trillions upon trillions of mutations adding hteir corrupting influences through the process of megaevolution? No- Again this goes back to entropy, and hte contaminating effects of entropy-
Forensics involves things that have happened, based on observation of available evidence. This is speculating on things that cannot happen, based on an absence of evidence.An apt description of Darwinian Evolution.