LittleNipper wrote:The truth in science is only fully proven if one can duplicate an experiment over and over getting the very same results. Values and opinions of what such outcomes might actually mean are still just assumptions unless one can observe the event. No scientist has ever created life from inert substances. Yet, it is widly accepted by a vast majority of scientists that such is indeed a "fact." This is of course not a fact. It has never been observed, and yet without God, what other explanation can there be for them. If Hutton did not believe in a literal 6 day creation, he was not embracing God at all --- any more than satan could give the world to Jesus Christ --- if Jesus would fall down & worship him. The world isn't satan's to give, and a scientist's theories are not fact. There is no safety in numbers. For broad is the way which leads to destruction and many go in there at. Not a comforting thought to someone so devoted to one's own work agreeing with that of everyone else.
That's only partially correct.
Do you mind if I ask what your background is in the subject? Do you do research and experimentation in a related field by profession? Challenging decades of consensus among professionals in a field you don't have background in is a little brash, even if it might seem morally justifiable since it's challenging religious concepts.
Also could you point to any instance where a scientist has called abiogenesis "fact", let alone the sweeping generalization that most or many do ("vast majority")?
We have created organic matter from inorganic, but we should be cautious in asserting the type of logic (or anything related) that says just because it hasn't been done yet therefore it's impossible and God did it. We may be closer than you might think to creating "life". A self-replicating peptide chain with a spark under the right conditions can constitute life, but I don't know of any labs that have attempted to recreate (or how it'd be done) a perfectly sterile environment with intense heat, methane gas, sparks (yes methane is explosive) and vacuous lack of pressure needed to recreate how the earth likely was 3.5 billion years ago. Let alone the non-stop volcanic activity, the fusion of water vapor from helium and hydrogen (helium fused into oxygen), and its condensation taking place and raining over it all. The fact we haven't recreated those conditions you'll have to forgive the poor scientists on it, they are trying their best and working with what they can.
As for not creating any life at all, I don't pretend to know the actual laboratory limitations and how the experiment would need to be set up. What I do know is viruses are considering "living" by some even though they don't breathe, don't have any homeostasis, but do reproduce complicated genetic material. The first life wouldn't need to have self-regulatory abilities, maybe not even a cell or bacteria wall. It wouldn't have to reproduce by binary fission or meiosis, these are rules for today's organisms because they won out millions of times over by becoming increasingly more efficient fighting for limited resources. A self-replicating peptide chain, fueled by a spark is the simplest example, but nature may have surprised us and come up with life even simpler than that at the start. Bacteria multiply rapidly, but the first self-replicating chains may have reproduced much slower (almost unnoticably). DNA is enormously complex and in all living organisms that have survived to today, but the first single-celled organisms did not have them.
Unfortunatley any organic materials (which we have created in laboratories from inorganic materials) are food to bacteria of which there are billions in every room and in the air, so the experiment would need to be perfectly sterile, and may require examinating under powerful microscopes that are also sterile in sterile rooms. This isn't impossible either, but there are probably hundreds of considerations you or I don't understand even if they were identified by those who know what they're talking about.
There's literally hundreds of books that go into further detail than we'd be able to understand on this, but at least trying on one of them might prove helpful. You might find this geniunely fascinating if you haven't begun researching it already.