Normally when talking in layman's terms we would describe enantionmers as being the same molecule but a mirror image just like a left and right hand.
You can use technical terms, you don't need to use "laymans" terms.
In fact, if you're laying out a scientific position, "layman's terms" are the exact opposite of what you should be doing. If you want to discuss homochirality, just say it.
They have all the same properties and when formed in the lab the left and right hand form a racemic mixture which is 50% of each enantiomer or stereo isomer.
So far so good.....
Soai showed that an auto catalyst was involved in order for a majority of left handed molecules only were formed in nature.
No, that's not what the Saoi reaction shows.
The L-enantiomer in nature is not a slight surplus it's a huge majority. This is called a homochiral mixture.
That is not what homochiral means.
Cofty said all this means there is no magic involved. This statement is strawman and has no substance.
That is not what a strawman is.
Cofty said he can prove God does not exist. How has he proved proved this to me?
Define "God" in such a way that it can be proved or disproved.
I am not saying it's magic, I am saying an auto catalyst is evidence of guidance.
You misuse the word "evidence". You've shown no chain of linkage, not employed the null hypotheses, not shown causation or correlation.
Nobody has proven my chemistry is wrong. Where is the evidence Viv?
You've not done any chemistry. You've incorrectly posted what Soai reaction is, what it shows, incorrectly used the word "homochiral", incorrectly added the words "only in nature" where it doesn't belong, not shown a shred of evidence for your claims and misunderstood what a strawman it.