I keep hearing you say I am "ignorant of science," "playing word games", indulging in "non-sequiteurs," attempting to do a big "gotcha," "too lazy to think for myself," too "stupid," etc. But I don't hear any serious attempts to answer my questions. I certainly haven't seen evidence that science can lay down a hypothesis to test how life came about without the agents of intelligence or design.
What gives? Surely the subject is caple of being discussed rationally rather than emotionally. Please give it a try.
I asked you to propose such a hypothesis, but I still haven't seen one.
By "agents of intelligence or design" I suppose you mean God or gods of some sort?
No, it isn't. What makes you think that it is?
Also, this appears to be a non sequitur -- the post you are responding to wasn't talking about abiogenesis, it was responding to your incorrect claim about the nature of the theory of *evolution*, which as you already know is a separate process from abiogenesis.
But I will wait patiently for a suitable hypothesis.
There are many -- the biological literature is full of explorations of this field. For some good introductory material, see:
On the origins of cells: a hypothesis for the evolutionary transitions from abiotic geochemistry to chemoautotrophic prokaryotes, and from prokaryotes to nucleated cellsThe references in the first paper are an excellent place to start if you want to get deeper into the subject.The emergence of life from iron monosulphide bubbles at a submarine hydrothermal redox and pH front
Lies, Damned Lies, Statistics, and Probability of Abiogenesis Calculations.