What do you think should I do that?
I don't think you should, I think you
are doing that.
You go from ...
Pasteur showed that even minute bacteria did not assemble in sterelized water protected from contamination.
... which is a reasonable description of the gist of the experiments, to claiming that this disproves an abiogenetic origin of life. If the abiogenetic theory in question was based around life arising in 'sterelized water protected from contamination' then you would have made a cogent point, as none of them are you are making an unsupportable conflation between the form of spontaneous generation Pasteur's experiments addressed and naturalistic theories of origins.
The only basis for this conflation is the semantic overlap where the word abiogenesis has been used both to describe spontaneous generation and modern naturalistic theories of the origin of life. Without making an actual argument showing that these two precepts are identical in more than sharing a name or by showing how Pasteur's experiments have anything to do with modern scientific studies of abiogenesis (in terms of naturalistic theories of life's origins) you are simply making a bald assertion with absolutely no supporting evidence.
TTFN,
WK
P.S. Please learn how to use the markups for quotes, it would make your posts much easier to follow, if you click on the 'peek' button just below this post on the right hand side you will see how.