In the study, Tomonori Totani, a professor of astrophysics at the University of Tokyo, modeled the microscopic world of molecules across the epic scale of the entire universe to see if abiogenesis is a likely candidate for the origin of life. He was essentially looking at whether there were enough stars with habitable planets in the universe at the time to allow complexity to arise. His results, published Feb. 3 in the journal Nature, show the betting odds for life emerging are not good, at least for the observable universe.
“I hoped to find at least one realistic path of abiogenesis, to explain abiogenesis by words of science,” Totani told Live Science. “Sometimes people claim that abiogenesis probability is incredibly low and that the origin of life cannot be understood by science. I, as a scientist, dreamed to find a scientific explanation of why we are here.”Tim Childers, “Is life a gamble? Scientist models universe to find out” at Space.com
Paper. (open access)
What’s astonishing is that he is thinking about odds at all. Odds means probability and probability means an aspect of reality—we are used to Darwinists burbling on about, essentially, magic.
One might ask why he thinks that “science” must find a random origin for life. Who decided that life originated randomly? What if it did not? Is science still committed to finding a random origin?
See also: Welcome to “RNA world,” the five-star hotel of origin-of-life theories