An honest answer for a newbie, please.

I have lost count of the number of times I or others have posted what would qualify as falsifying evidence against evolution.Look. Here's a fossilised Apatosaur turd. Find a single blade of grass in it.

Forgiven - to the best of my knowledge, we do not currently have anything more for abiogenesis than hypotheses. These hypotheses are being tested in repeatable, falsifiable etc. ways. When we have a well-supported model, we will have a theory. And it will, indeed be scientific, because it will have been tested, and those tests will be repeatable.You jump to abiogenesis from macroevolution because we've demonstrated that evolution is scientific by the above definition. Unless you'd like to tell us why it's not?