[Dataman]

Dataman, can you think of how we might apply the scientific method to "flesh" this out?

The first step in the scientific method is observation. How does one observe spontaneous generation? Spontaneous combustion can be reproduced for observation but not spontaneous generation.

The second step in the SM is hypothesis. In the case of the origin of life, the hypothesis (step 2) precedes the observation (step 1). Of course the prediction step (step 3) would tell us that something that naturally happened once is likely to happen again. If not, it should be able to be reproduced under controlled conditions. So much for step 3. Step 4, testing, is also out of the question since spontaneous generation is beyond testing.

So just what exactly is scientific about abiogenesis?

[unspun]

The second step in the SM is hypothesis. In the case of the origin of life, the hypothesis (step 2) precedes the observation (step 1). Of course the prediction step (step 3) would tell us that something that naturally happened once is likely to happen again. If not, it should be able to be reproduced under controlled conditions. So much for step 3. Step 4, testing, is also out of the question since spontaneous generation is beyond testing.

Funny that you should bring that up, Dataman. If I recall right I remember way back into grade school, being taught that the SM begins with hypothesis! I argued that didn't make sense and it has to begin with observation, or else how would anyone know how come up with a hypothesis! (Now, I'd say observation, or in some cases imagination yet founded upon the extension of science, reason, or forensics, kind of a virtual observation.) Do you suppose the it is merely a coincidence that evolution spontaneously appears at the stage of hypothesis?

So just what exactly is scientific about abiogenesis?

Um... nothing?