Random or systematic is what makes the difference

@LeopoldBloom depending on your belief of what God or a Creator is. But that aside. How are proteins made. With DNA. And how is DNA replicated. With proteins. So which came first?

@Axeroberts Molecules self-replicated by accident as the primordial ocean allowed for it during that epoch. The ones that self-replicated better out-competed the other ones, with the results we have today.

If you're proposing goddidit as a scientific explanation, you do have to provide a theoretical mechanism. I've never heard any explanation for that, however. It's just goddidit. It has nothing to do with my belief in God or lack thereof. You're saying that God created living out of non-living matter, correct? So how did he do that?

@LeopoldBloom I was leaving God out of it but can't believe this whole universe that also spawned life came out of nowhere. That makes less sense than a creation. And by scientific means I am saying. As we delve deeper into each of the systems involved in the cell we realize it is not just the physical processes but the how and why that we know nothing about.

@Axeroberts It didn't come out of nowhere. That's just a straw man promoted by theists. But proposing a deity raises other questions, like what that deity's origin is, how it originated the design of the universe before creating it, and what mechanism it used to create it. These questions are never addressed at all by theists. In contrast, there are several scientific theories of the universe's origin that have been proposed, and none of them say it came from "nowhere" or "nothing."

"How" is definitely addressed by science. "Why" of course is not as there is no requirement that existence have any goal or purpose other than the ones we arbitrarily assign to it.

@LeopoldBloom I keep saying I am not talking about religion. I am talking about the mechanism. The science. And systematic is not random. So random does not work here.

@Axeroberts That's what I'm asking about. What mechanism did the deity employ to create the universe? If the design for the universe existed in his mind before he created it, where did it come from since he didn't have teachers or parents?

@LeopoldBloom no one knows. But our reality exists. And its depth is endless in every direction.

@Axeroberts You don't have to prove anything, but if you're going to propose goddidit as a scientific theory, you could at least speculate as to a mechanism. Just saying "reality exists" doesn't help as we both agree on that. What we disagree on is how it got here.

@LeopoldBloom you just don't get me.

@Axeroberts You clearly don't get me, either.

But if your religion or faith or relationship or whatever you call it works for you, that's great.

@LeopoldBloom I am talking about the mechanism. Stop talking about religion. The physical means of how life started was not random. Random is the opposite of systematic. You are so insecure that it automatically means some religious God you can't take it out of our conversation.

@Axeroberts There's no evidence that life began through a conscious act of a deity. And no, it wasn't "random." It followed the laws that govern the interaction of matter and energy, same as every other process.

Again, if you are talking about a mechanism, explain how a disembodied intellect can affect material reality. Psychokinesis perhaps?

@LeopoldBloom my point you have made perfectly. It wasn't random. There are laws of nature that make it orderly and systematic. We just don't know how these laws were put in place

@Axeroberts Those laws are based on the inherent structure of matter. For example, the simplest possible structure is a tetrahedron. There's no other way to arrange four points into a three-dimensional structure, and if you have fewer than four points, it's not three-dimensional.

We're also looking at the result of what worked. A hypothetical alternate universe with a different gravitational constant would either be a solid mass of dense matter or a diffuse cloud.

To give another example, your ancestry is the end result of thousands upon thousands of matings. The chance of arriving at your specific genetic profile through sheer chance is astronomical. So would you say that each of those matings of your parents, grandparents, and so on was consciously planned by some deity?

@LeopoldBloom that doesn't explain how these properties came into existence. Yes once in existence that's what they do. You are right there

@Axeroberts They are inherent qualities of matter and energy. If you can hand-wave the obvious question of God's origin with "he was always here," then I can assert the same with regard to matter and energy.

@LeopoldBloom you keep bringing up God. 🤔. And where did these inherent qualities come from. Yes the laws of nature explain how it works but not where the laws come from. You are arguing to argue. And even when I agree you still argue 🙄

@Axeroberts Let's assume that God created the universe based on preexisting laws. That means God is subject to those laws; the laws of nature would have to predate him. So we're back to "where did the laws come from" because God in this case is merely an intermediary.

The other option would be if the laws of nature arose through some unknown process within the mind of God, and could have been anything God wanted. But if God's desires have no antecedent, then they're no different from saying that they came from nothing, because the concept in God's mind that led to them came from nowhere. If you say it came from God's imagination acting on preexisting qualities, we're back to the first option.

Either way, introducing God is a needless complication, an unnecessary step.

@LeopoldBloom then why do you keep introducing God to this conversation

@Axeroberts OK, if we're in agreement that the universe originated from purely natural causes, then there's no need to continue. It's just that you keep asking "where did these laws come from," so I assumed you were making a theistic argument.

@LeopoldBloom I am making a logical argument. The difficulty is when a person believes it was created but by physical means and not magic. If you know what I am saying

@Axeroberts If you're going to propose magic as the cause, that's not a logical argument.

@LeopoldBloom you don't even read what I write do you. 🤣🤣

@Axeroberts You haven't said anything substantive yet, so there's no argument to respond to.