So, what are you saying? That prior to Pasteur, everyone was an evolutionist, and believed that life arose from non-life? Is that really what Pasteur was trying to disprove? If that were true, then you are saying that Pasteur was anti-evolution, and the whole world prior to him was pro-evolution. Do you believe that? Or are you just babbling? (Oh, again I forgot to whom I'm speaking.)
What I am saying is that in one post you said that we can use science to extrapolate to things we do not know and 19 minutes later you said that Pasteur's experiment - the only scientifically acceptable test made of abiogenesis - does not count.
Clearly you are doing something which is totally wrong, you are ascribing to science something which as of now, science says is not true. Now you can make all the assumptions you like, you can claim that this or that is possible, but what you cannot do is say that extrapolating from what science tell us, abiogenesis is possible. The only scientific extrapolation that can be made from our present scientific knowledge is that abiogenesis is not possible.