Quote:

Death is simply a different definition for what you call 'disorganized'.

No, death is exactly what the science of Biology calls 'disorganized'.

A high degree of biological order is one of the fundamental characteristics of all living things. In other words 'organization' is one of the reasons why you know something is alive. Other characteristics include sensitivity to environment, movement, reproduction, metabolism and growth.

So his understanding of the organizational factor of living creatures is correct.

I find the whole article interesting, with a slightly new twist to some older arguments. It seems to parallel the whole concept of the origin of matter, since matter itself cannot come from non-matter, but only changes form.

I thought your first definition of a law was interesting because you had stated that if a scientific law were proven false, then "all science based upon that law would collapse" That was an interesting statement.

Of course scientists would challenge whether or not there was such a thing as "the law of biogenesis", of course Pastuer did prove that flies didnt spawn from rotting meat, but that in no way proved that abiogenesis was impossible..or at least not in as strong a way as the law of gravity.(I know that they call it a law)

But if I accepted that there was such a thing as an immutable law of biogenesis, what science would "collapse" if it were proven wrong? I am not questioning your basic theory(because I also believe in God) however I am trying to see what the connection between your original definition of a law and the possibility of biogenesis being proven wrong. I just think you might want to reorganize some of the thinking in your paper because the logic doesnt seem to work out.(for me anyway)

Also entropy is also a factor, but you really didnt seem to build on it much. But it was written well, and of course I always am happy to see another creationist

Quote:

No, you misunderstood in which way 'chance' would be involved. The very first life can not have been a complete cat or dog or koala or elephant, because that would indeed be too complex to get simply be chance. It started very small and evolved and evolved and it still evolving up to this day, every second counts. In fact, everything between the seconds count too

Very small, eh? Interesting. Your probably aware that the smallest cell is still much more complicated than a space shuttle? And that the smallest little machines inside these cells are still far beyond the understanding of even our most brilliant microbiologists?

If it were so easy for these life forms to organize themselves and then become alive, why isnt happening today? Why dont we see abiogenesis popping up all around us?