[Dimensio]

Without abiogenesis the philosophical underpinnings of evolution fall away. It doesn't make sense to say everthing happened from strictly natural causes except for the origin of life. If you allow God or intelligent design or ET or anything else other than natural and random processes to generate the origin of life, then you might as well allow those same forces in the development of higher forms of life. I

Dataman makes the same argument. It isn't any more intellectually honest when you make it, though.

Your entire argument boils down to "If we allow for miracles, then evolution might be false". If we allow for miracles, all of science suddenly comes into question, because we cannot trust that the functioning of the universe is consistent without occasional outside intervention. However, the fact remains that ultimately, the study of evolution is not dependent on any one particular means by which life came to exist. I have repeatedly asked how proving that it is impossible for "life" to emerge from "non-life" would prove, without doubt, that evolution is false and I have not received a single rational answer. The best that was offered was Dataman's attempt to turn "maybe" into "definitely" with sloppy semantic sleight of hand.

[DannyTN]

Well I'm sure Dataman and I both consider evolution to be a lot less science and a lot more speculation, based less on observable facts than most science and a lot more on biased and faulty interpretation of evidence.