Hate Mail - The Impotence Of Idle Speculation To Answer These Questions The Idiocy Of Claiming To Use Lab Science To Refute Intelligent Design

If you had gone on and listened to more of Richard Lewontin's lucid, simple discussion of just some of the known physical requirements for cells to divide, you would have heard him say just one of the things that accounted for the difference in timing of cellular division was the need for the cell to make and/ or accumulate specific molecules in sufficient numbers to allow for cellular division to happen.  In order for an organism or cell to make another like it it would certainly require at least twice the number of molecules, twice the amount of the material necessary to make one of them. Reproduction by cellular division requires an accumulation of such material in sufficient quantity to make 1x2 of the original organism.

For something to accumulate to cause something to happen within an organism, to make it divide in the way everyone I've ever heard imagines the first organism of life on Earth reproduced there would have to be some location in which that accumulation would have had to happen.  If it was just in some soup the liklihood of that happening is, first, undefinable, second, unlikely to have happened.  I am trying to think of any kind of biological reproduction that happens outside of a containing membrane and can't think of any organisms that would describe, including viruses which I believe must have originally evolved inside of organisms.  If someone knows of something that reproduces outside of any containing membrane, I'd love to learn about it. 

I believe even the proposed methods of prions "reproducing" happens within modern cells, "modern" in that meaning going back billions of years in the history of life on Earth, certainly going back before any resolvable fossils of them are available.  Again, if I'm wrong about that, give me your credible citations. 

I would really like it if you guys could come up with actual examples to refute my belief with.  I don't think theorizing some indefinable different kind of organism than one we know is progress, there is a. no way to know if any such organism existed at the time life began on Earth, b. there is no way of knowing any constructed "organism" that can be made in a lab today had anything to do with the actual first organism on Earth, c. any "organism" made in a lab today IS THE PRODUCT OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN AND IT COULD NOT BE USED TO PROVE THAT INTELLIGENT DESIGN IS ANYTHING BUT ESSENTIAL TO MAKING IT.  Though the absence of intelligence can be used to make the claim that it does prove that intelligent design was not used to make it or the original organism which arose before there was human intelligence. It's one of the stupidest faith holdings of atheists in large numbers.