You don't. But some prominent people have for some unfathomable reason an emotional desire to deny God's existence and they attempt to use science to do so. When this happens religious people get their backs up.
Because biologists can't -- as scientists -- declare a fact that they can't demonstrate.
Right. But but they can as human beings, and we should put being human ahead of being a scientist, policeman, CEO etc. It doesn't mean we don't do our jobs it just means we keep a perspective as to what's important.
Since when does "science consider the generation of life from non-life to be impossible"?
Patrick, I've been posting this for the last three months.
Oh, you mean this:
biogenesis: The principle that a living organism can only arise from other living organisms similar to itself (i.e. that like gives rise to like) and can never originate from nonliving material. Compare spontaneous generation.That's Pasteur's work. He demonstrated that mold and stuff doesn't spring from nothing (he sealed jars of food and it didn't get moldy). He disproved the previously held belief of "spontaneous generation," by showing that food had to be exposed to air, and thus spores, in order to get moldy. This is entirely unrelated to the ultimate origin of life. There's an obvious similarity of words, which is unfortunate, as it sometimes causes confusion. The ultimate origin of life is, as yet, an unsolved problem. Pasteur didn't in any way prove that it's impossible to have happened by natural means.
He probably has not had time to read it. You have to realize how much time this placemarkering stuff takes! Let's make it easy for him and post it right here:
Biogenesis
The principle that a living organism can only arise from other living organisms similar to itself (i.e. that like gives rise to like) and can never originate from nonliving material. Compare spontaneous generation.
A Dictionary of Biology, Oxford University Press, © Market House Books Ltd 2000 Book information