I found much of your post uninterpretable. No responses are attempted for those portions.

Quote
Quote
Science alone will never say anything more, and one needs to turn to trustworthy methods of investigating history if one is to learn more.
Putting aside your implication that science is not trustworthy, what are the trustworthy methods of investigating history.
They include examining artifacts and documents from the past. They include comparing narratives from different sources.
Quote
Quote
Meanwhile, ID is free to continue investigating, turning its focus to historic methods.

Which you conveniently fail to provide.
I conveniently omitted to look into the future and see your request, if that's what you mean.

Quote
Quote
Alternatively, ID can attempt to go on the offensive and scientifically demonstrate the others are impossible (I do not say this hasn't already been done, so nobody start.)
I thought they were already on the offensive. (In Texas, In Kansas, In Dover....)
But my parenthetical vision of the future, well this time I didn't omit. I knocked that one out of the park.
Quote
Quote
If so, do there exist testable hypotheses for what could have happened aboigenesiswise? I mean the whole thing - not increments. Increments only count if they add up to life.
Certainly there are hypotheses that make attempts to explain the process from chemicals to life. However, they are not completely fleshed out. They have to be modified as evidence and experimentation are accounted for.
In other words, increments.

There exists hope of an incomplete group of incompatible baby-steps, which still do not add up to anything remotely resembling life. No news there. We all knew that.
Quote
Quote
And not to wander too far astray, but I do have some questions about this model of yours which, if I understand correctly, is based on the idea that on a molecular level, matter is pre-designed to assemble life when given the opportunity.

Is there any evidence for this self-assembling property? Is is still active and available for testing, or has it discontinued? Is there a proposed mechanism by which it operates?
Assuming there were a Designer, the evidence points to a universe designed to operate on its own for the most part. Chemicals combine different ways under different conditions. They seem to do this on their own. Self-replicating molecules have been shown to develop on their own. Simple ones are crystals. More complicated ones are the result of combinations of amino acids which form proteins that, once formed, replicate themselves as long as the raw materials are available.
These things have been observed in labs, so, yes the process still works.

Sorry I asked. Due to an imperfection in the definition of "molecule" it does encompass crystals. That's right - a diamond is one big molecule. A sheet of graphite is also technically a molecule. There's no indication that it's alive, or on the way to becoming so.

A crystal can indeed be a molecule, but it doesn't replicate - it just grows larger and larger. Feel free not to understand the difference.

The "more complicated ones" are the man-made ones. Or man-confiscated (from life). How well do they perform? I'll let AIG field this issue. These are not natural, not capable of performing in a natural setting, and the experiments indicate they will not lead to life, even in the lab. I don't see them overturning the law of biogenesis.

Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson