Arguments based on nebulous concepts, such as self-assembly, are doomed to fail. Usually one side is basing their argument on the failure of the other's argument rather than the merits of their own. Then too, any argument where one side or both is based on faith is pointless. To have a legitimate argument both sides must be observation based. Otherwise we are back to arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. The only way for creationists to gain any credibility among scientists is to base their arguments on observation and the natural laws as we know them at present. Once creationists stray into the supernatural they will be ignored as crackpots, and rightfully so. You have probably noticed that creationists focus on trying to argue against their own perception of various scientific hypotheses, which if true would be incompatible with their concept of "a creator," or in current terminology the concept of "intelligent design". Instead of arguing against science, why not argue for creation by a "creator"? Of course, the dilemma faced by all those espousing the existence of a creator is the non-existence of an intelligent argument in their favor. Thus they are reduced to precisely the kind of false logic I mentioned in my previous response to you. Their arguments invariably center on the failure of current scientific hypotheses to explain creation of biological life; ergo, by their false logic, there must be a creator... I have already given you my view of that that kind of logic.
Here you go: How design engineering shows God created life. The title of this article talks about how engineering shows that God created life. The basis for this claim is straightforward. Consider information: An information-controlled system needs to be designed by an intelligent being then built. Computers and computer driven machines such as cars and microwave ovens are controlled by a combination of hardware and software. The software is useless without the hardware. The hardware is useless without the software. There is a minimum level of completeness needed for both hardware and software before either can function properly. Engineers understand that it is impossible for unguided, gradual, step-by-step processes to provide the required minimal level of completeness to build an information processor. Living cells also have a complex body of information and special hardware to use it. Just as with computers, the information and hardware need to appear fully formed simultaneously. This requires design then fabrication. However, in a cell the complexity observed for both the information stored in its DNA and the cellular hardware to read it far exceeds anything a man can design. This suggests that cellular information and supporting hardware are the result of design by a being with intelligence that greatly exceeds that of a man. It would be even more impossible to provide cellular information by gradual, random step-by-step processes in order to provide cellular life than for a computer. Yet, a biologist will refuse to acknowledge this train of thought, because it invalidates naturalism. To the biologist, evidence is not the issue. If any evidence appears to work against naturalism, it is rejected without analysis. This attitude represents fake science. Biologists become the true pseudoscientists when they act like this. They place their personally preferred, God-denying philosophy ahead of the observations of modern technology. Man has elaborate tools available to fabricate the components of a computer. However, there are no tools available to convert a design for a living cell into actual living cells. Once living cells appear, they can make copies of themselves by replication. Tools are no longer needed. Tools for cellular fabrication would be extremely complicated. There is no basis to expect required tools to appear spontaneously in nature. This suggests that the Designer also had to have the ability to move individual atoms and molecules into precisely defined, dynamic relationships with each other in order to make the first living cells. I.e., the Designer needs to have the ability to work outside of natural law at will to make the first cells. What do you call an extremely intelligent being who has the ability to work outside of nature at will, doing so as He places atoms and molecules into predetermined arrangements in order to make something according to a design? You call Him God. Excerpt from https://www.trbap.org/OOL.pdf
Then God whatever it is supposed to be, is not "an information-controlled system / intelligent being", unless it too was designed by another intelligent being, which in turn would require another intelligent... kinda like an ad infinitum infinite regress sorta thing If you're being sensible, you call it imaginary yeah, way to go student lol. Now if you'll excuse me after I butted in, I have an appointment with reality.
There's no doubt nature is mind boggling fantastic. A creator? Imo very likely. Evolution: There probably maybe is a creator, but life also evolves, humans get smarter, so do animals. Creatures adapt to their environments. Bible prophesies: I take with a pinch of salt, the bible keeps getting modified, words and meanings changed, bits added, bits subtracted, stuff like Adam & Eve, Noahs ark, just nonsense. Stories embellished, Sampson with hair which gave him strength, pffffff! As mentioned, humans from cradle to grave are bs artists and bible and christianity is part and parcel of human bs. All this Revelation book nonsense, last book in the bible, cleverly engineered to put the shits up anyone not already cajoled into stupid fucking religion. If there is a God, think of him as a gardener, using skills to nurture, not to vandalise his plot of fruit and veges. Where does evil come from? Maybe from the same source of where good comes from, the more we take power, grow our power, the more arrogant and self pride, "pride comes before destruction (fall)".
Good Biblical observation Mickey, evil comes from the one who invented evil because of his pride -- satan --- created by God but then he wanted to be like God
Yes, but ok, lets assume a satan, he's still roaming about, still free. As for humans, we have a bit of good in us and a bit of evil. Maybe the evil in us comes from breaking universal laws, not from satan. Lets assume pride (haughtiness) is part of a universal law, when we go down that path, like playing with/abusing electricity, we get a shock.
Church ministers/priests, start off with good intentions, as they grow in power, that allows temptation or an opening for a breaking of universal laws, then it opens up for evil. Evil is not so much from satan, evil is from breaking universal laws. If humans were able to limit the power of other humans, maybe then we would have more peace. When millionaires and leaders get too powerful, usually it ends badly for everyone because they create an inflated opinion of themselves.
Yes, the "universal law" is God's law. And, God hates pride so much that it has consequences like you say. Ole Nebuchadnezzar found that out very quickly. Your Biblical background as a child is starting to show. Be careful or Overnight will begin to worry about the "evilmouse" again.