Ok, this will be my final post in this thread, unless you come up with some kind of an argument that actually makes sense, instead of just basically saying "I don't believe it". As far as I can tell you are making a case that only (unobservable) intelligence can create life. I have been making a case that life is the result of observable chemical reactions. Therefore your position, which you have stated previously, is that God is the only way to explain the presence of life in the universe. My position is that there are observable laws of nature which can be used to explain the development of life without the direct intervention of God.
What I am trying to say is that life is basically a large set of chemical reactions contained in a cell. Non-life is a large set of chemical reactions not contained in a cell. You are saying that there is no way to get from one set of reactions to the other without having God step in and say "let it be so". I see no reason why there could not be a transition from one state to the other under natural law.
Of course your interpretation of the creation of life is based on the creation story in the Biblical Book of Genesis. Most cultures have different creation stories. These stories vary widely in just how the world came to be created.
Here is a Chinese creation story. The story is quite different from the biblical story. Now if I want to believe a religious creation story I have to sort through all of the different religions to find the one I want to believe. I really prefer the scientific version, which at least is consistent with our observations.
Bill Gill
