Exactly. And just to add, I always kinda laugh when I hear people say things like, "Well, the Catholic church believes in this..." (or that.) As if that proves something, other than what you just said, and what many of us know about certain churches who seem to look to man more than they look to God.
I also chuckle at how the church body which believes in stigmata, healing relics, and weeping statues is always upheld as the exemplar of how to balance science and theology.
Actually, those few scientists considering extraterrestrial sources are doing so not because of mathematical impossibilities of abiogenesis but because of increases evidence of the likelihood of extraterrestrial life itself.
"Hey, there's something vaguely possible over here! Everyone come stab in the dark!
And if you doubt it for a second, you lose your funding!!!!"
1. Well, let's ignore that the flood timeline took place while other Humans lived elsewhere and somehow were untouched by the flood. The multiplicity factor of human reproduction and our recorded historical documents don't lend well to a population our size today springing forth from 2 people 4,000 years ago. What of the genetic factors? How do 2 people of fair skin create people of darker skin, hair colors, eye colors, bone structures, hair densities, and on and on and on? How did they diverse into thousands of different languages in fewer years than there are languages? How did they get from Turkey to South America? How did Noah live to be over 900 years old? Why is there no evidence of a world wide catastrophic flood? I could go on and on.
So do you believe we live in a geocentric universe, or a heliocentric universe? Those are your only two options.
Oh, and bear in mind that publicly doubting the heliocentric theory means you're going to lose your funding. Also remember that most of the time evidence in favor of a geocentric universe is not going to be taken seriously enough even to shoot it down.
Hey, there's this remote possibility that someone could start collecting hard data at some point, and come up with a bulletproof third theory of elliptical orbits... but you know, we kind of like the people who have to come rearrange the museum displays every two years because we jumbled all the facts to fit the heliocentric narrative again, so let's not pursue that particular avenue.
2. Of course I know those odds too. That was actually taken into account with my first point. The life zone is a pretty delicate location and set of circumstances but we've already identified dozens in the life zone with several thousands more candidates and an extrapolated estimate of up to 500 million just in our galaxy.
The Miller-Urey experiment conclusively showed that Earth's (conjectured) early atmosphere could have produced amino acids.
This supposedly led to the formation of life.
That's like saying six consecutive meteor strikes on the same bed of clay could conceivably form a single brick... so the Great Wall of China was therefore built spontaneously.
Only I'm pretty sure my analogy is actually understating the complexity of the matter.