Blacknad ... Your second posting is more evidence of lack of knowledge of science than evidence for the existence of a deity.
Lets take a few for example so as not to use too many electrons:
1. Homochirality somehow arose in the sugars and amino acids of prebiotic soups, although there is no mechanism by which this can occur.
This statement is absolutely not true. There is a known mechanism and I posted an article about it here at SAGG within the last 6 months. One possible solution is the selective adsorption of amino acids on calcite. Others involve clay. And there are numerous publications on RNA directed solutions. The point is you are pointing to a place where we don't have "the" answer yet and claiming that god exists in the darkness. The problem, of course, is that with every scientific discovery ... your god has to find a smaller and smaller place to inhabit.
6. Neither RNA nor DNA can be synthesized in the absence of enzymes
Finding god in the dark spaces again eh. Lets assume that RNA is manufactured in four years without the use of enzymes? Then what? And even if this is true, which it might well be, are you ready to declare it impossible for enzymes to form through natural processes?
7. Adenine synthesis requires unreasonable HCN concentrations.
And who defines unreasonable? This is poppycock my friend and you know it. HCN exists everywhere in space. It was one of the first organic compounds discovered in nebulae.
9. Mixture of amino acids the Murchison meteorite.
One meteorite. One. One out of zillions. And this proves what? That one specific meteorite contained stuff that didn't solve one specific problem. This is grasping for straws. This is desparation at its very worst. Would you be willing, right this second, to swear that god does not need to exist for life to form if I can show you the natural creation of cytosine?
The miracle Blacknad is that any precursors exist in space. 100 years ago your religion denied this was possible.
Oops!
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=438950 You've been lied to.
And lying is a sin.
So I guess #3 bites the dust too.
My point here is that given two hours I could destroy every single claim made above. You don't have evidence of god. You have evidence that science has yet to discover ALL of the answers. That is not the foundation of religion. And you have strong evidence that the source of what you posted has in some cases intentionally lied by omission.
You should be asking yourself ... if truth is on our side ... why is it necessary for the defenders of the faith to be anything less than scrupulously honest?
