If the Universe is conscious and intentionally created mankind, then evolution is actually I.D.

Let's begin! On the probability of lifeforms, my opponent only states this:"Not only is life being spontaneously created possible, but it has been partially successfully done in the Miller-Urey experiment. Recreating the conditions of Earth billions of years ago, scientists Stanley Miller and Harold Urey created amino acids. .. and molecule(s). .. required to make a living thing. " Yes. Their experiment and others showed that small essential molecules could have been created in primitive Earth conditions, using the material that was available at the time [1]. However, their experiment has raised some questions because it is now believed that molecular ingredients introduced in the experiment were not as abundant as they indicated; secondly, the experiment required incredible amounts of electrical energy (lightning), which most scientists now agree was not supplied at the frequency that the Miller-Urey experiment required [2]. Nevertheless, as Prof. Emeritus Russell Doolittle of Biochemistry at UC San Diego points out, "Almost all investigators in the field concede that the spontaneous manufacture of small molecules - amino acids, nitrogen bases, sugars - is not a major problem. .. they would have formed in primitive earth conditions. Putting these small molecules together into larger units does present a formidable problem, however. .. .This is certainly the the most challenging problem in understanding [life's origins] [3]". The small molecules necessary for life would have been easily created in primitive conditions; it's the larger biomacromolecules essential to DNA replication and protein construction that present a significant problem, as was shown in ROUND 2. Their creation in the first protocell(s) would have required hundreds of billions (if not trillions) of failed attempts just to get it right. Additionally, what I failed to post in ROUND 2 was that, not only do these amino acids have to fall in the right sequence to constitute a viable protein (which Doolittle's analogy showed to be "very improbable") but the first protocell(s) would have required the spontaneous creation of several hundreds of catalyst and proteins to read the polynucleotide template and to produce adequate concentrations of other proteins to sustain the cell and provide it with reproductive capacties. Doolittle's analogy now gets muliplied at the very least several hundred times over, all in the space of a few micrometers (the size of a cell). Furthermore Doolittle states this isn't counting more improbable odds that deal with "bioenergectics and the membrane encapusulation of systems" within the first cell(s) [4]. But Doolittle remains a believer. My opponent almost completely ignores the fine-tuning argument of the universe, mentioning it only once by referring to the possibility of other "universes", many of which apparently will not have the right conditions for biological life or even stars like our sun. Nevermind that most scientists now agree that our universe occupies a very narrow place, by having just the right conditions for life, where matter can congregate to form stars and planets, where the liquid medium of water is possible, and where molecular chemistry exist because the proton and electron are unique stable particles. My opponent obviously believes in universes without biological life - absent of consciousness! I do not! The reason I do not is because I believe consciousness is a fundamental property of any universe - just as fundamental as energy and space! Even more, not only do I believe that our universe is possessed of an all-pervading consciousness, but I believe its consciousness is so developed, so intricate and so possessed of tangible memories that it can be categorized as "super-intelligent". The Sentient UniverseOften what humans overlook is that we are perfect examples of mind over matter. Our brains incase a conscious mind that can exert force over our bodies. At will we can manipulate our hands to effect the world around us. We can move our bodies wherever we please and do with them whatever we want, limited only by what is physically permitted, which is governed by the laws of physics and chemistry. We are little universes unto ourselves, interacting with the larger, external universe. But what are we? We are matter interacting with a mechanical Field - a Field that gives rise to the forces of gravity, of electricity, of magnetism, and of the nuclear forces. We are the field - or more specifically, the forces - interacting with particulates of matter! Yet we are conscious. We are aware. We are aware of the going-ons in our environment. When photons of light strike the retina at the back of our eye, it sends an electronic message to the brain, which provides but a few pixels to a larger image. When something touches our skin, or when the temperature noticeably shifts, a chemical signal is sent to our brain (an electronic signal really) which provides us with information about our environment, so that we can interact with it and take action if needed. These messages which make us "aware" are associated with changes to the electronic (electric) force or with alterations to the underlying mechanical field. What then is consciousness? Awareness provided through interaction with the environment. What then is interaction? The engagement of matter with physical forces. The interaction of matter with forces is accompanied with awareness - or consciousness. The two phenomena (forces and consciousness) always accompany each other. To be aware of something is to have that object exert a force on you. Implication: The magnitude of one should be proprotional to (some aspect) of the magnitude of the other, at any point in the universe. Additionally (and significantly) a conscious entity is the mechanical field adjusting to movement of matter. [1][2] . http://www.chem.duke.edu...[3][4] "Probability and the Origin of Life. "