Parthenogenesis is an observed fact.
It is "A form of reproduction in which an unfertilized egg develops into a new individual, occurring commonly among insects and certain other arthropods."
What you mean is 'abiogenesis' which is not observed and is not a fact, just like evolution.
And you really shouldn't be impressed no matter who believes in evolution. You should study it yourself. And that means getting opposing views... from the opponents, not from the adherents.
Anyway...
Here's a real scientist who went from Darwinist to YEC because he actually *looked* at the data.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/1173
You are correct. Slip up.
I'm not going to change my mind based on who signs such a document. By "impressed," I mean to consider it newsworthy: If the leader of Oman says the U.S. shouldn't exist, I'm not impressed. If the leader of close ally, and up-and-coming superpower India, says so, I'm impressed. But it certainly won't change my opinion of the U.S.
Um, where do you get that he's a young earther??? Doesn't even suggest that anywhere in your link.
The extended quote suggests that John Sanford, however clever he may be otherwise, is quite the Drama Queen. He goes on about about challenging, in great fear and trepidation, the “The Primary Axiom” that evolution is nothing but random mutation plus natural selection! Geeeeze! How silly is that?! Not even Darwin believed this supposed "Primary Axiom". Hardly anybody does. I suppose there have been a few (actually VERY few) "hyper selectionists" who have come close. Well, actually I can't think of even a single scientist who thinks that natural selection is absolutely the ONLY evolutionary mechanism.
This is the guy who disagrees with Behe and Dembski.
Provide proof that he's YEC.