1.) science isnt about "credibility" its about verifiable duplicatable results using the scientific method.


2.) you dont do yourself any favors when u dont acutually engage a topic with personal insight and instead rely on the reputations of others.


3.) as i have stated before my position is a diffetent CONCLUSION based on the whole of the scientific record.


4.) your charecterization that the evidence is "incomplete" is misleading because you imply incomplete but trending in your favor. As i have previously stated cirrent scientific lae is ANTITHETICAL to the spontaneous generation of energy or abiogenesis. If you deny those two basic FACTS then it is u sir who looses credibility.

---