[BMCDA]

I have to contradict you here because this is not really an ipse dixit game.
As I said in a previous post (and Dimensio as well) science deals with evidence. Because the origin of life took place such a long time ago and left so few traces it is very hard to reconstruct the exact OOL event.
A common claim by creationists is that the OOL couldn't have happened naturally, so all scientists have to do to counter this claim is to show a possible pathway of how life could have started (this doesn't have to be the actual process).

So no matter what creationists claim, if we have more conclusive data on abiogenesis all that will be presented in science class will be how life could have originated and not that it must have occurred that way.

The problem with creationism/ID on the other hand is not that it is false but that it is not falsifiable. The creator of CRE/ID isn't constrained in any way whereas naturalistic processes are.

[stands2reason]

It's the same thread, and already the short-term amnesia's kicking in.