[Southack]

"How do you justify getting from 'cannot happen randomly' to 'non-natural'? It seems to me a more logical conclusion would be 'the natural process wasn't random in the way Watson described'." - Virginia-American

If you'll review the content of the posts in this thread, you might catch that I've already agreed that the math can be interpreted as saying that Life formed from a non-random process.

[Virginia-American]

Several of us jumped on the non-sequitor at once.

[mlo]

You say: ...I've already agreed that the math can be interpreted as saying that Life formed from a non-random process.

Right after having said: ...then the math would indicate some potential for Life to form naturally.

You can't have it both ways. This sort of basic logical problem has plagued all your arguments.