The Probabilistic Implications of Fine-Tuning and Abiogenesis

Some atheist on a recent thread concerning the fine-tuning argument for God asserted that Creationists are ignorant to the statistical likelihood of abiogenesis. My google search indicates that statement to be false.

According to current scientific understanding, the statistical probability of abiogenesis is extremely low, often calculated in the range of 10^-30 to 10^-36, meaning the odds of a single event leading to life from non-living matter are incredibly small.

Probabilities in the range of 10^-30 to 10^-36 are often considered statistically impossible or effectively zero in practical terms. While not strictly impossible (since probability is not absolute certainty), such tiny probabilities indicate events so rare that they are unlikely to ever occur within the lifespan of the universe.

For perspective:

• The number of atoms in the observable universe is estimated to be around 10^{80}
• If an event has a probability of 10^-30 to 10^-36, it would be like randomly selecting a specific atom from trillions of universes the size of ours.

In fields like physics, statistics, and information theory, probabilities below 10^-30 to 10^-36 are often dismissed as negligible, making such events practically indistinguishable from impossibility.

On the other hand, the likelihood for all the constants to be they way they are in fine tuning is much lower.

According to current scientific understanding, the statistical probability of all the fine-tuning constants being precisely as they are to allow life as we know it is considered extremely small, often expressed as a number on the order of 10^-100 or even smaller, essentially signifying a near-impossible probability if the values were randomly chosen within their possible ranges.

And, in case you are wondering, yes, science heavily relies on statistical reasoning to analyze data, test hypotheses, and determine the reliability of results.

Conclusion: Scientific understanding has both abiogenesis and random fine tuning in the ranges of being impossible. This alone justifies belief in a creator.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

To say life came from non-life and/or that the fine-tuning constants just happened to be the way they are, or an appeal to multi-verses to get around the science ALL require "extraordinary evidence" that is just not there.

because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, (Romans 1:19-20)