Re: Ool - out at first base?

On 12/13/24 9:41 PM, MarkE wrote:

On 14/12/2024 3:06 am, erik simpson wrote:
"MaekE is stuck with his idea that only a zero probability of OOL is necessary to prove the existence of god.  He doesn't understand that god can explain anything, including a high probability of OOL.  He has a real blind spot there, to be charitable."
 Say, for argument's sake, we determined that the origin of life could not be explained by natural causes.
 Then by definition, we must conclude supernatural causes, and haggle over the definition of supernatural.
 Or, would you protest that an unknown natural cause must always remain an option?
 Eric, would you frame this differently?
 

I'll try.  First I'll quote this: ..god
  can explain anything, including a high probability of OOL. OOL is slef evident;  there it is.  "Science" can't tell the defference between god or natural causes, so practically speaking there isn't any difference. God and natural causes for us is a choice.  God's as good choice as any.
Dose that make it clearer?