The only evidence which we have in our possession says that all cellular life forms contain DNA.
The central question that the math proof for this thread answers is "How did DNA (or anything else, such as a book) get its data?"
Did the data get there randomly/naturally, without intelligent aid? The math in this thread permits us to calculate that precise probability/improbability (I'm presuming that you actually read the math under discussion).
Or did the data get into the DNA via an Intelligent Intervention (such as we have documented in scores of labs around the U.S. for genetically altered pigs and other animals which are growing organs for human use)?
That's it. This thread is all about whether large amounts of data can sequence itself naturally, or else requires intelligent intervention.
As for Life appearing su generis, rest assured that the first pig to be programmed genetically to grow a fully formed human heart will appear su generis from an American bio lab. Likewise, the first computer program to become sentient could very easily be formed su generis, ready to roll from moment one. That's what happens with Intelligent Design, after all.
As for your claim that "nobody" believes that such Life can form su generis, I direct you to other various Luddites who deny the power of technology. They're the most likely group to agree with your already-disproven assertation, after all...
I asked you before, don't believe you replied. Do you still think feedback indicates intelligence? If not, do you agree that feedback is one of the differences between the two problems?
Regards.
The is a math proof that the probability of getting a particular number with a fair die is 1/6. Why is it important to mention that it's fair? Because the proof assumes all numbers have equal probabilities. If this is not the case the proof can be thrown away. That's exactly why the proof in the article is junk.