It might year at some of the creationists complaints about abiogenesis. For that matter it should help us with our scientific understanding of how life evolved from non-life.
I roll my eyes whenever I hear mention of abiogenesis.
You understand, don't you, that abiogenesis is basically spontaneous generation with a fancy Latin term, right?
Amazing how readily people believe something that science textbooks swore up and down was false, now that it has a snazzy new term. Alright then. We're gonna make a petri dish filled with all the organic chemicals you want and because we zap it with electricity (or whatever) we can kid ourselves into saying "it's alive, it's alive!" like Frankenstein.
1. I'm not sure any abiogenesis has actually ever created actual life. Like ever. I could look it up, but I think it's crap science.
2. Even if it did, it's still incredibly retarded. You know why? Because it relies on a slight-of-hand where the scientist says "And this PROVES that live resulted from random events, and not because of intelligent design." Oh
really? So...
a. Who gathered all these materials for this so called primordial soup? (Scientists)
b. Who mixed them (Scientists)
c. Who made sure temperature and other factors were perfect? (Again, scientists)
Rather than prove generation is spontaneous, what they have actually proven then is that it is possible to create life by
design (though in this case with scientists rather than an immortal creator).
So much like Wukong trying to leave Buddha's hand. You're so proud of doing nothing.