Please read this carefully . . . and then think about it!! . . . tell me that there is no creative force. Call it what you will, but there is no denying it, statistically! (And statistics are what science is made of!)

“Proteins are what you get when you string amino acids together. . . [and] there may be as many as a million types of protein in the human body. . . . To make them you need to assemble [some or many of the 20 “essential”] amino acids in a particular order, in much the same way that you assemble letters in a particular order to spell a word. To spell collagen, the name of a common type of protein, you need to arrange eight letters in the right order. But to make collagen you need to arrange 1,055 amino acids in precisely the right sequence.

"But—and here’s an obvious but crucial point—you don’t make it. It makes itself, spontaneously, without direction, and this is where the unlikelihoods come in. The chances of a 1,055 sequence molecule spontaneously self-assembling are [mathematically] nil.” Visualize a Las Vegas slot machine large enough to accommodate 1,055 little wheels with 20 symbols on each wheel. How long do you suppose you’d have to pull the handle for those symbols to come up in the right order?

"If you reduce the spinning wheels to 200, the odds against all 200 coming up in the right sequence is 1 in 10 with 260 zeroes behind it—itself larger than the number of all atoms in the universe. And that’s for 200, not 1,055.
Bill Bryson (from A Short History of Just About Everything)

And this I, too support, though it is philosophic, not mathematic, and, therefore, unlike the above, at least arguable (if not by me.)

“The basic objection [to Darwinism is] that it confers miraculous powers on inappropriate agents. In essence it is an attempt to super-naturalize nature, to endow unthinking processes with more-than-human powers—including the power of creating thinkers . . . . I find it impossible to share this faith that supra-human achievements can be encompassed by sub-human means and sub-rational mechanisms.”
Richard Spilsbury