Is "Goddidit" an already presumed option in evc debate topics?

An offtopic question from
Abiogenesis
Message 60 by jar
So, jar was stating that abiogenesis was THE only option for the first life to come by. I replied to jar saying that first life could have always come by a supernatural act of creation.
The problem is that I knew that he already knew that, and already knew what his next reply would be like (above^). Which was, that presuming god did the first life would give science no new information or anything to work on.
I knew that already, but just wanted to point out that there is always the possibility of the supernatural.So, I (or anyone else) shouldn't need to make that remark that god is the second option when dealing with issues like this just to go over this futile conversation over again and sometimes dragging the whole topic off point.So... To stop these useless reminders, is "goddidit" always an already presumed option when discussing evolution related topics?I know I probably misrepresented jar in some ways, so an apology in advance PS.
(I'm sensing a lot of pink unicorn replies)Edited by Neutralmind, : No reason given.Edited by Neutralmind, : No reason given.

It's just that if someone says "goddidit" or "godcouldhavedoneit" in some evolution related thread it many times drags the whole topic off point.
That's why I think it should be always be considered as a "possible option" even in science threads.Now as a possible option I don't mean that after writing a lengthy post explaining in detail about for example, the possible mechanics of abiogenesis, you should write somewhere on the end with small print "or god could have done it..." My real point is that there are a lot of newcomers to this forum who don't understand why goddidit is not a valid point for scientific discussion. I think a topic should be stickied somewhere here that says "God did it is always an option but does not belong in scientific discussion because..."And if only to spare us from repeating this dialogue:New guy: God could have also done it!
Old guy: That's nonsense/That offers no information on how he did it/So why did he make it look like it fits this evidence?/Define God/ saghknlmn could have also done it!/ Flying Spaghetti Monster could have also done it!
New guy: This forum is so biased!/Still it doesn't mean He didn't do it./To test our faith/I see god as loving, passionate.../No reply/ There is no basis to assume that the Flying Spaghetti Monster did it when there is lots of evidence to assume God did it.Also, newcomers should be informed of Razd's "Enjoy" signature as it's creating a lot of annoyance between the newbies Edited by Neutralmind, : No reason given.