What evidence have you considered to the contrary? Have you ever turned the chessboard around to look at this from the other side of the table? Most people I've spoken to who have strong feelings about this topic have only ever looked at it from one side properly.

The GP is skeptical that one can go from A, a chance interaction between two systems, through a continuous uninterrupted, robust, repeatable chain of unguided interactions, and arrive at Z, the placenta. An organ whose function and elegance is unrivalled by anything we as a species have made with logic and thought. And why should he not be skeptical, everything we've practically achieved in terms of technological progress has been the product of mind and intelligence, any claims to be able to do the same thing without that should be scrutinised very closely.

> unguided interactions

I detect a creationist.

> An organ whose function and elegance is unrivalled by anything we as a species have made with logic and thought.

Before modern medicine, it and the rest of this elegant system had a roughly ~2-3 in 100 chance of killing the mother in any particular pregnancy.