I have sat back quietly and watched this whole thread play out the way it has and have been incredibly interested in it, much as i have been with every thread over the last 2 years (I always feel inadequate when it comes to posting on this forum as it seems many other posters are much more qualified and have much more experience on all of the subjects at hand).
As it stands i am very confused as to what your position actually is on this. You say abiogenesis cannot be true. Okay, I'll go with that. What alternative can you put forward to show that it didn't happen? What is/are the other possible explanation(s)?
I'm not saying that if you did not have an alternative this would be proof of abiogenesis, it would be foolish of me to do so.
Consider this, and think long and hard about it because it has been explained to you before in this thread many, many times. At some point in the past there was no life on this earth. No life. At all. Not a button of life. The earth had just been created in our solar system and was incredibly hot. Life could not have been around then. The earth then eventually cooled and at some point from that time until now life "appeared" and populated the earth.
How did that life come about if not from abiogenesis?
The law of biogenesis is all well and good. It is observable and repeatable. This law cannot explain that for some reason in the past there was no life and now there is life. You can rehash all the arguments as much as you want but in the far past the earth was incredibly hot and had a hostile environment that was unable to support life. I don't care what the law of biogenesis says, this is a fact.