LOL, not me. I'm still a new guy around here, so no new thread making for me. Besides, I've been stepping out of my usual "more lurking, less posting" approach, since I found this forum.
With our ability to do everything listed as a premise to this exercise, why would we continue to desire their service? We would appear all knowing and all powerful, right? So then why would we continue to care about their subservience? If we did need their service, why didn't we keep them with us?
On topic: To address this point, I'll offer the following thoughts.
The best case scenario to support your statistic would be the that the probability is based on the simplest of cells that we have knowledge of. There is nothing to indicate that those are the "original" to have been formed...
Are you looking for meaningful thought-out responses? I can only assume not. If you're going to quote statistical evidence, please cite your sources. Otherwise, it gives the impression that you may be cherry-picking information from less than credible sources. Is that what you're doing?
I understand you never said it was scientific, but you consistently refer to it in such a manner that implies it is; "the theory".
I can't help but mention the obvious, it's very curious a biologist would refer to creationism as "the theory".
Personally, I find higher fundamental importance in that they are, as you said, myths. Any relationships the myths share within any kind of order, whether chronological, coincidental or even heirachical, only tends to discredit their claims of divine inspiration. And isn't that what it's really...
:) Did Adam "parachute in", or is he a direct reflection of influence from Heliopolitan myth? There is a very interesting corollary to be found between Adam and the Egyptian god "Atum". I guess that's really for a different thread though, isn't it. lol
How simple is that? Too simple. I understand your desire to use that extremely oversimplified analogy, because it supports your beliefs. But, it isn't logical and makes no sense.
No offense, but it sounds as though you are attempting to use the concept that "it sounds better" to add credulity to the idea that man has a creator. What about logic and rational thought? Personally, any theory founded in logic and structured with rational thought is anything but "empty"...
To quote a friend... "Call me crazy, but when my "president to be" is taking his oath of office, I want him to swear that he will uphold the duties of the office with or without god's help."
Is this meant as an analogy or just a scenario for discussion? If your intent is strictly to offer a scenario to spur discussion, no issue. However, if your intent is to lay out an analogy to religion, it's fundamentally flawed. In order to make your scenario analogous to religion, the self...