>Sorry, you are the only one playing semantic games by conflating 1800s “spontaneous generation” with current ideas on abiogenisis.
They are not the same in any way.
I just quoted you the history that showed that the concepts were the same, it’s the term that was dropped because it was thoroughly debunked by Pasture.
>A good many working scientists would beg to differ, and I agree with them.
And yet not a single reference to any of them shows up in wikipedia. Which means they haven’t produced any results of note, just more wild theories without evidence to support the Dogma.
You quoted nothing which "showed that the concepts were the same", because they are not.
You are fantasizing if you think otherwise.
JohnnyBoy: "And yet not a single reference to any of them shows up in wikipedia."
You're kidding, right?
This is the link I recommended in post #100 above, on the subject of abiogenesis.
Check it out.
You'll find at the bottom, 327 references and a bibliography of 57 works, the oldest being Darwin from 1871 and the newest Ian Johnston from October, 2017.