Abiogenisis deals with "How did life begin?" Evolution covers "What happened next?" A common creationist/ID fallacy is to claim that the theory of evolution is false because it cannot explain the origins of life. And no matter how many times it gets demolished, you people insist on propping it up again. In post 100 of this thread you make the claim, "Evolution purports to tell us how life began but without the crucial evidence." You must therefore be familiar with a theory of evolution with which I am not. To ensure that we are discussing the same topic, would you mind summarizing it for me?
I make no claim. I asked the question: So why, balrog, was the premier pro-evolution web site named "TalkOrigins"? and it remains unanswered.
Bull. See post 100. You most certainly DID make a claim. Regarding your question, however the TalkOrigins website is an archive for the talk.origins newsgroup. If you want a primer on UseNet newsgroups, go here. I'm not going to bore everyone by posting it inline.
The short answer is that you are asking your audience to assign meaning where none exists, then using that to imply something sinister. I expect that "origins" was simply a short-hand reference to Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species. I expect the conversation when something like this:
Guy #1: Dude, we need a newgroup to talk about evolution and stuff.
Guy #2: 'K. What do you want to call it?
Guy #1: How about talk.evolution?
Guy #2: It is going to be just about evolution?
Guy #1: Well, you know, evolution, Origin of Species, Descent of Man, creationism, stuff like that.
Guy #2: If you're not going to be that specific, call it talk.origins and be done with it. Wanna split a pizza?
Here's the full text of The Origin of Species. And here's what ol' Darwin himself had to say about the origin of life, in the last sentence of the last chapter:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.In other words, he never discussed the subject of "abiogenisis" at all. Evolution is what happens after life begins. Attacking evolution because it doesn't deal with abiogenisis is like complaining about Windows XP because it doesn't do your laundry. True, it really doesn't do laundry, but that's just not a valid criticism.