Science rejects Abiogenesis

The issue (aka) evolution seems to me to be rather how can we communicate "statistical significance" on discussion of evidence presented pro or con but because statistical techniques are themselves at part of the dispute of the most sophisticated views it is rarely possible even to recognize in a correlation if the skwed from nomality (symmetry) is an artifact or not and using only words to do the reasoning makes discussing this equationally a bit more difficult. Moving the significance a point futher can often be much harder than proposing the thesis.

Look, why not use I Bernard Cohen's "sprit" of discussing 'spirit' of Newton which had by theMaster adjectives elastic and electric. Cohen seems to have argued that the elastic is downplayed (my guess by Michelson Morely (but looking at the controversy between one of the them and Einstein) it is not certain that the diffent discussion of "Laws" can rather not be discussed al la me, that seems to have been said; so try Newton to whom I would prefer to defer than my "ego". But still in response to this history no one seems to have found anything in the vainty of Faraday's seeking which at least Maxwell and to an extent the contemporary Wolfram appreciates.