Boss
Take a Memo:
Such melodrama, shortstop. Hey, by your skewed, twisted "fundie logic", we have to dismiss that weird theory of gravity because we cannot observe it.Now, it is true that nobody has actually observed first hand the genesis of life from non-living material (i.e., abiogenesis). However, just because something is unobserved certainly does not automatically imply that it cannot, or did not happen.
Now wait just a damn minute... how can YOU lay claim to the "supernatural magic" of spontaneous generation, with no observable science whatsoever, but I can't do the same? Sounds like you kind of have a double standard thing going here.
Fact of the matter is, until we observe it happen, we can't claim that it's valid scientifically. I don't really care how many theories you post, or how many various opinions about abiogenesis. I can present just as many theories and opinions regarding creationism.
And no... The Law of Biogenesis is NOT a phrase coined by the religious, it is a well-established and sound scientific principle which is the basis for all of biology and has NEVER been refuted.
Really, shortstop, try and get past your 5th grade education level in the sciences.
And sorry, but your fundamentalist religious beliefs replete with magical spirit realms aren't a counter to the physical sciences.
So yes, you can present all the nonsensical claims to ID'iot creationism you wish. However, we in the rational world (to exclude you supernaturalists), understand that ID'iot creationism is nothing more than a religious claim and totally lacking support.
BTW, your nonsensical "law of biogenesis" that you stole from your fundamentalist creation ministries is a laughable joke that only you spirit realm'ists take seriously.
We can observe the effects of gravity. It's how we know the universe is made up of 96% of something we don't understand... Dark energy and dark matter. Science doesn't dismiss anything, science continues to ask questions and explore possibilities. Something you don't seem to want to do.
Intelligent design lacks just as much support as abiogenesis at this point. None exists for either, in terms of hard scientific evidence and observation. The Law of Biogenesis is not something created by religious nuts or any person other than Louis Pasteur. This is basic 5th Grade Science. It's stunning that an actual adult person is arguing to the contrary.
Now... Allow me to explain something here... The Law of Biogenesis is currently the principle of biology science agrees is a "fact" of science. This does not mean that it is empirical, unassailable, unchallengeable or irrefutable. Throughout science is a history of laws and principles rendered obsolete by later findings of science... because science keeps asking questions, it never stops. Therefore, we can say that it's possible one day, scientists will make a discovery which renders the Law of Biogenesis obsolete. As it currently stands, that has not happened.
There are ONLY theories to support the idea of Abiogenesis. And there are actually about 127 of those, many of which have been debunked. I think there are like a dozen or so theories currently in process of serious scientific study, but so far nothing has been revolutionary. One of the theories, interestingly enough, proposes that moisture held in the clays of early earth reacted chemically with other elements to spark life. It's fascinating to me how the biblical story has "gawd" spitting into dust to make man.
Merry Christmas, by the way!