Reply #57: But that's not what was bieng said by the ID'ers/creationists.

[Random_Australian]

And the idea that life arose from simpler chemicals is a matter of extrapolating from known data, that is, knowing F = gm1m2 / r^2, we can say "the earth has not been going around the sun on a square path until 5 minutes before humans started looking". It's not an earth-round hypothesis.

A hypothesis is something that is used to explain data that cannot be exaplained by current theories and laws. It's not something used to account for history.

(Note: I am talking about the scientific meaning of these words, colloquially these mean quite different things)

Similarly, when it comes to what the idea that we ought to think life could not arise from chemicals, it's plain bullshit. We have no data, at all, that points to anything else so it is plainly irrational to believe anything else. Sheesh.

And FWIW, no-one is claiming to have found the exact biochemical pathway. Sheesh.