And it takes 5 million coordinated water molecules to work together to turn into a floating solid called a snowflake. Isn't the creation of a snowflake impossible?
Very funny
Your brain is a bit more miraculous than a snowflake. Or is it?
I always marvel at how atheists gloss over the miracle of creation so vulgarly (not saying you). When atheists argue I see them beaming with arrogance because of their absolute certainty that they have a clear explanation for the origin of life, they are in an authoritative position to offer answers to help the ignorant find truth, or they are closer to answers than us "god of the gap" fans. Of course they are no different from the rest of us because of this:
The Argumentative Theory of Reasoning ... maintains that there is an asymmetry between the production of arguments, which involves an intrinsic bias in favour of the opinions or decisions of the arguer whatever their soundness, and the evaluation of arguments, which aims at differentiating good arguments from bad ones and thereby genuine information from misinformation. This asymmetry is often obscured in a debate situation (or in a situation where a debate is anticipated). People who have an opinion to defend don't really evaluate the arguments of their interlocutors in search for genuine information but rather consider them from the start as counter-arguments to be rebuked.
Let's not discount just how miraculous life is and the odds against it. In his book
The 5TH Miracle theoretical physicist, cosmologist, astrophysicist Paul Davies scratches the surface of a miraculous "accident"
There is a more fundamental reason why the random self assembly of proteins seems a nonstarter. This has to do not with the formation of the chemical bonds as such, but with the particular order in which the amino acids link together. Proteins do not consist of any old peptide chains; they are very specific amino acid sequences that have specialized chemical properties needed for life. However, the number of alternative permutations available to a mixture of amino acids is SUPERastronomical. A small protein may typically contain a hundred amino acids of twenty varieties. There are about 10 to the 130 different arrangements of the amino acids in a molecule of this length. Hitting the right one by accident would be no mean feat.
Getting useful configuration of amino acids from the squillions of useless combinations on offer can be thought of as a mammoth information-retreival problem, like trying to track down a site on the Internet without a search engine. ...,The highly special information content of a protein represented by its very specific amino-acid sequence implies a big decrease in entropy when the molecule forms. Again, the mere uncontrolled injection of energy wont accomplish the ordered result needed. To return to the bricklaying, making a protein simply by injecting energy is rather like exploding a stick of dynamite under a pile of bricks and expecting it to form a house
The 5th Miracle is an awe inspiring book that I actually was lead to by atheist Lee Smolin.
Armchair atheists debase the miracle of life when they give their gaseous, haphazard explanations for life.
There are at least ten billion billion stars in the observable universe. That number, as gigantic as it seems, is trivially small when compared with the odds against the random assembly of even a single protein molecule.
How does a community of molecules arise to begin with? Darwinian evolution can operate only if life preexists its processes. Darwinism offers no explanation for life's first steps. To qualify as a living system, the information within that system must be meaningful to the system - contextually meaningful. The information must be specified. Where does the context itself come from? Biological complexity is information based complexity. There is yet to be an account for the origin of biological information.
Is it all random? Is it possible to prove randomness? Please do so if it is.
Charles Darwin wrote that he was overwhelmed by...,
the extreme difficulty or rather the impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capacity for looking far backwards and far futurity, as the result of blind chance or necessity. When this reflecting, I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve to be called a Theist.
Obviously, Darwin was a complicated man. But he grappled with the idea of an intelligence behind creation.
So, we have brilliant men like Darwin, unsure of life's origin and atheists like Johnson who are certain there is no divine intelligence behind life. In a sense men like Newton, Einstein, and Darwin who had a very religious- like reverence for nature are the antithesis of the current lot of militant atheists who are bigoted enemies of religious people in general - all because they're certain there is no "god" (or whatever you want to call it).
Yeah, right.