"however, as the theist posits a creator, there is a logical source to creation."

Because someone suggests something doesn't make it a hypothesis, let alone a theory. If you can't test it, it's a myth and nothing to do with science. How do we test the theist's assumption? We can't, as he can't point us to any evidence. This is not science, and never will be.

"for abiogenesis - it is a faith position, as is the assertion ,that science is closing in on the "problem".",/i>

Aren't Christians supposed to be honest? This statement is so ludicrously wrong and misrepresentative of my position it is nothing less than a downright lie. Science is not faith. End of. It is a system of philosophy and enquiry. This is exactly what I mean about about a sort of aggression that knows no rules or bounds, there's a nasty subtext of attempting to diminish someone through misrepresentation.


"then you have the cheek to mock believers for having faith.

More barefaced lies. I'm expressing concern over the literalist, extremist elements of Christianity who pursue a rather threatening tone when promoting (but not actually debating) their dogma. People who don't interpret, but take the bible literally.

I have no problem at all with most people of faith, in fact I love the diversity of faiths in the world, and we can learn from them if even if we don't subscribe to them. What bothers me is the extremist elements who exclude all but their own faiths from being taught, and equate faith with science as they are unable to comprehend (or face) a world that makes them question their faith closely.

Creationists, any number of violent faith-based organisations etc. are all of the same ilk.