> is not a good argument for abiogenisis.
The polio case, yes. Going from chemistry to a relatively complex virus in one step is more than a hell of a stretch for the natural world. But the poitn was that it showed that no magic or "life force" or "breath of God" was needed to turn glop into life
> The more complexity, the less likely it is that it would be a spontaneous thing.
Yes, that's why I also mentioend the Urey and Fox experiments, whech went from basic chemicals (methane, CO2 and whatnot) and produced *argueably* protoife without the scientists going in and meddlign on the molecular/genetic level. They showed the life could fairly easily form of it's own accord, depnding of course on what you considered the threshold for "alive."