Abiogenesis ("Chemical Evolution"): Did Life come from Non-Life by Pure Chance.

[Bucky Ball]

---

Alleged Spontaneous Abiogenesis is like the earlier theory of "Spontaneous Generation", now discredited. The odds against it are so extra-ordinary and far-fetched, it's perfectly rational to believe that this did not happen through Pure Chance but rather through Intelligent Design.

"‘Spontaneous generation’ was a mainstream scientific doctrine for a very long time, until proven wrong by Francesco Redi and Louis Pasteur. Even then it died a slow and painful death. Spontaneous generation basically proposed that given the right conditions and precursors, life would arise all by itself ‘spontaneously’. There were various recipes for this well-established ‘fact’ of science. For example, 17th Century Flemish chemist Jan Baptiste van Helmont wrote, ‘If a soiled shirt is placed in the opening of a vessel containing grains of wheat, the reaction of the leaven in the shirt with fumes from the wheat will, after approximately 21 days, transform the wheat into mice.’ It was also thought that meat left to rot would spontaneously give rise to maggots and flies. The self-evident fact that rotting meat would before long swarm with maggots and flies established the belief in spontaneous generation of maggots and flies from rotting meat. Redi proposed an eminently simple experiment to test the hypothesis: let’s cover the meat with some fine material and see what happens! Well of course no maggots or flies swarmed on the meat as it rotted because no flies could get to the meat to lay their eggs and thus produce the maggots and flies that were so well known. And so Redi overthrew long-established scientific doctrine and replaced it with a new doctrine, ‘Life comes from life’—what became known as the ‘law of biogenesis’."
From: https://creation.com/abiogenesis

---

bla bla bla ... more ignorant bullshit

Actually, when you begin to study probability, you may learn if you pay attention, that extraordinarily improbable single events happen all the time. 
I can cause one right now, if I toss 32 sets of dice on my desk, the exact configuration will have the probability of less than 1/googleplex. 

Edit later : BTW that is why you have no proof of any miracle. No matter how improbable you say it is, and for ANY event you claim is highly improbable, you can never determine the improbability of it OR set up the tests to prove ALL the possible natural explanations are ruled out. .

Spontaneous generation is not what abiogenesis even studies. (Thanks for yet again demonstrating you have no clue what you're doing here). 
All Pasteur did was demonstrate that under the conditions he set up, in a very short (relative) period of time, life did not arise. 
Are you SO totally ignorant you thing science works like that ? His sample size was ONE. Do you even get what the "p" number comes out as if you plug that into a regression analysis or a multiple regression analysis ? It's meaningless.

"Abiogenesis is concerned with the original evolution of life or living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances. To construct any convincing theory of abiogenesis, we must take into account the condition of the Earth about 4 billion years ago".

Abiogenesis has made great strides in the past few years and indeed some Nobel winners are involved in it., and one of the recognized experts is below.





If you dispute that abiogenesis is possible, tell us EXACTLY which reactions at which time on Earth were not possible, and very specifically, dispute in detail Dr, Szostak's points and his
possible reactions. Be sure to address the entire series of his talks.

And please stop posting these absurd ignorant posts.