[edsheppa]

Your post is, again, nonresponsive. Let me help you. You made the claim that either it's "all chemicals" or it's design. I challenged this claim. The proper form of a response is either 1) a deductive argument whose conclusion is that there is no other possibility than "all chemicals" or design or 2) an admission that your claim is without merit.

[MacDorcha]

the mechanism, as we see is chemicals. life itself is more than chemicals. if you dont get that out of what i said, you are beyond my help. perhaps a philosophy course for thinking outside of your mindset would help?

i never once said that we dont involve chemicals. ive said time and time again that we are more than just chemicals.

how is a claim that we are more than we see without merit? we dont see it all when we look from only religious or only scientific aspects.

if it turns out that their is another possible aspect that is not chemical and design in nature, that is for YOU to present. my presentation merely states that being simple compounds in the right amounts does not make life. it is more than just that. and this i have provided for time and time again.