Are those figures assuming that atoms can combine higgledy-piggledy in totally random ways, or did they take the valences into account, did they assume that one could get a molecule of a hundred hydrogen atoms all strung together, or a carbon bonded to 12 other atoms?
That assumption vastly simplifies the calculation, but in no way reflects reality, and hugely inflates the final number over what is chemically possible.
I’m sure they have taken everything into consideration- These were secular scientists coming to these conclusions- I’m sure they were fully away of variances and took those into account- Again- the possibility so exceeds the upper probability limit, for even just one mutation, let alone billions needed to move a species kind beyond it’;s own kind, that it’s impossible- just one is impossible- extremely impossible- not just a little- and again for emphasis- we’re talking about bucking the impossibility odds billions of times-
Last night my 14-year-old daughter repeated this nugget: The odds of winning the lottery are the same as experiencing 235 near lightning strikes.
It occurred to me that no one has ever been “almost struck” by lightning 235 times, nor ever will be. OTOH, people do win the lottery. The probability of the two, therefore, cannot be equal, no matter what statistical analyses one may apply.
Still, she was willing to accept this factoid as true, just on, I guess, the premise that “big = big.”
Aha, the evolution of matter! Adaptation and advantage figured out long ago.