Primordial soup theory of abiogenesis is more likely to be true than (Insert competing theory here).

I also agree the proponents of evolution do indeed overlook this speculative science due to the very statement that it poses hypotheses that cannot be tested. ****** I will first give a logical argument for Intelligent Design as a whole vs. a Primordial concept. < Evolutionand abiogenisis sees what is and tries to work backwards from the available data, make hypotheses based on that data, makes quite a few assumptions and then tests each of those hypotheses to attempt a conclusive concept. Assumptions would be = (more are made but these are the focus for this debate) 1) All Natural Laws have always existed as they are today. 2) Nothing outside of the Natural Realm has inserted itself into the process. The Primordial soup model utilizes the Evolutionary model and asserts a similar process for proto-life. The same assumptions are necessary for the model to be asserted. It also ignores anything that comes before it in the same way the Evolutionary Model ignores the necessity of a proto scenario. It is a reverse hypothesis with little to no data to assert founded on assumptions just "commonly" held true. The humorous portion is that abiogenesis does not and cannot postulate changes within the laws of physics. It must assume the governing physics today existed, otherwise it would further render the hypothesis impossible to test for any certainty. < ID sees what is and starts from the beginning utilizing reason and logic, available data, makes hypotheses that can be tested based on that data, utilizing as few assumptions as possible. ID accepts the mainstream scientific theory of the Big Bang. 1)It poses that everything natural cannot generate itself. This has proven as zero matter is constantly and currently spontaneously generated anywhere around us "ex nihlo". If you have seen flying spaghetti monsters pop into existence around you please let me know…. 2)It also puts forward the fact that once everything was generated into existence, things popping into existence out of absolute "nothing" ceased popping into existence. 3)Due to 1 & 2 the Laws of Physics can be shown to have changed in the past. 4)Due to 1 & 2 it is shown that a slow period of change was at one time completely and absolutely unnecessary for generation. 5)It poses that physics are NOT Static. This is also postulated (not Big Bang Alone) due to the alpha constant in other galaxies is shown to be very different resulting with different systems of physics within our own universe not to mention other possible universes/spatial dimensions. . http://www.dailygalaxy.com... 6)It poses that due to the mathematical possibility of a 4th spatial dimension (from anna and kata)… a secondary law of physics may at any time superimpose itself within the Natural Realm. . http://www.google.com... 7)In light of the claim of so many 4th dimensional beings interacted via religions, UFO's etc… that defy the known laws of Physics, it poses another layer of existence that envelopes our own. 8)The leading competitive model, Primordialism, can only assert the possible "concept" of proto matter slowly changing. It takes for granted that the laws of physics were constant and that everything functioned as it always has. It also has very little data to support the concept and anything that would be asserted by the model would always be speculative as nothing could be posed as certain to have happened EVEN if the laws of physics have indeed remained static through those events. 9)Christianity and other Historic claims are made for a "sudden Start" to life. You can see the ID's deductive reasoning is superior to primordialism in any form. Due to: 1)Generation of all matter then generation of no matter ex nihlo with zero need for slow successive changes. 2)Due to the generation of all matter; Physics having changed at least once in the known universe. 3)Physics being localized to this Galaxy and open to change within the universe. 4)Mathematics postulating a 4th Spatial Dimension 5)Overwhelming number of Historic Claims of interaction with beings and places adjacent to our own. 6)Primordialism of low certainty. 7)Christianity claims a succession of single short term events for the generation of life. Conclusion: Intelligent design would be superior for a belief system above the "goo" concepts. Primordialism is speculative at best but the layout for ID's model of abiogenisis asserts only facts that are clear and present to all. ******* To address my opponent's scientific evidence of any of the "goo" theories, I will just state that even the scientists put forth the evidence in no way claim these evidences as factual supports of abiogenisis but rather speculative reasoning. Many competing scientists have already drawn those concepts into doubt and the scientists themselves have stated they may not be accurately representing these proto-life concepts due to the unknown state of the conditions at the time of proto-life. Even if a test tube generates a quasi proto-life evolutionary scenario, it would only represent a "possibility" and never a certainty. By sheer reasoning and logic if the generation of the universe needed only a single spontaneous event then given all of the facts above the most plausible scenario is a "sudden start" model to life.