[Dimensio]

So, what created the first form of "life". What force animated that first form of life? You can't argue chemical interaction (even with the incidence of energy forms such as lightning - there is far too much documented evidence that life cannot be created that way). So what happened?

You are attempting to argue that if no other answer is currently known with available knowledge, then intelligent intervention is the logical conclusion. This is not a logical argument. You are arguing from incredulity: "I don't know what did it, so it MUST have been created!" Secondly, you are not only ignoring the extensive research in the field of abiogenesis, but you are also boiling down one rather old hypothesis into an overgeneralized strawman and attacking it from a position of ignorance.

[MortMan]

Incorrect. I was replying to the proposition that ID proponents should be unable to discuss their theories (not specifically the scientific definition of this word) because they couldn't say "what created the creator". I was illustrating the inanity of that position by counter-proposing that evolutionists should be disallowed from discussing their theories (again, not specifically the scientific definition) because they cannot answer what created the first spark of life.

I do not hold enough personal knowledge to sway many to one side or the other, but I do know enough to identify a ludicrous argument, illustrating same by putting forward an oppositional ludicrous argument.

As far as arguing from incredulity, I was refuting an incredulous argument by proposing an opposite (but equally incredulous) argument. It is neither ignorant nor incorrect to use the weak form of an opponent's argument (in a debate) to illustrate the absurdity of that argument.

Have a great day.