I am watching a documentary on National Geographic's "Naked Science" which explores how life began on Earth. There is an array of scientists who are exploring various hypotheses of how life began in a "gooey center" of a comet who's otherwise solid mass was radiated by solar radiation and turned into a mash of enzymes and proteins that became life.
The interesting thing about all of this is that the narrator made reference to how societies in the past believed that frogs and other forms of life magically appeared from the mud rather than making note of what we know today. We know that microscopic eggs that are fertilized are the origin of these frogs from the mud.
Yet the various experiments that they are showing during the show are little more than the understanding that these ancient people believed in. The scientists keep talking about the ELEMENTS OF LIFE - amino acids and proteins. They want us to believe that this highly complex animal ecosystem that we live in evolved to the point that we are today AND the origin of all of these systems were crafted by happenstance in the appropriate "space vehicle" that floated through the vacuum of space.
If religious belief is to be rejected because of the reliance on the "logical leap" of faith rather than displaying the ability of reproduction within a laboratory environment then certainly the theories that they are operating on should also be rejected.
I will yield that they will make the claim that these are "working theories" of which they continue their testing in order to come to a more accurate set of conclusions. By comparison they might say - religious dogma has no similar pursuit of knowledge but instead seek to cut off all investigation because "God did it".
As it stands today - the scientist can no more answer the question "How did life begin?" any more than a person who follows one of the world's major religions who believe that "God did it"