My intention with this thread is to incite a discussion as to the origin of living organisms on this planet. I do not want a discussion about the validity of the theory of evolution. This thread is not about evolution or natural selection, it's about before that. In the beginning.

I propose that we focus on what I think are the three main hypotheses, abiogenesis, exogenesis, and intelligent design. (It started here, it started out there, or God started it.)
Of course, other and related theories are acceptable topics for discussion.

As to my own views, I lean towards an abiogenesis of some sort. I like the RNA-world theory (Maybe PNA though, I've got a lot of reading to do), but I'm not knowledgeable enough to properly understand the theory. Heck, I'm not even sure I know enough to start this thread!
I think that exogenesis is very plausible, but if it is accepted then the origin of life on an alien "earth" must be explained. It seems to me that the life most likely to survive on this planet must have originated locally.
As to intelligent design, well, I don't believe in [any] God.

This thread was created as somewhat of a response to the thread Evolution, fact or Fiction? because it seems that some people are unaware of the distinction between evolution and origin. I'll repeat that this thread is not about evolution, natural selection, or anything that comes after the origin of the first "living" thing on this planet. If you have comments about what happened after the beginning of life on earth, I'm sure they will be welcome in that thread more so than in this one.

Hopefully this is enough of an initial post to start a discussion while I do some more research.

For quick reference, here are some basic definitions, gleaned from my first destination for basic knowledge, wikipedia. I know that wikipedia is not necessarily an infallible source for information, but it does make an attempt to be somewhat accurate and unbiased. The information there is limited, and therefore should be relatively simple to comprehend.:

Abiogenesis

HTTP://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

Exogenesis/Panspermia

HTTP://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia

Intelligent Design

HTTP://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design

I agree with you, truthfatal.

I'm leaning more towards exogenesis nowadays ...

I assume that simple life already exists in other places. The common objection to exogenesis is that radiation would prevent life from surviving the flight ... although I think that it only prevents life as we know it.

I choose abiogenesis.

Until a considerable amount of time has passed after the universe came to be, the conditions of the universe were not eligible for the existance of living organisms.

Even though living organisms (even amino-acids though hey are not living) were spontaneously created, they would be destroyed in the other instant.

But after this considerable amount of time has passed and planets (this may include any planet from any galaxy) got colder and more stable, we see that conditions appeared for the building blocks of life (rna, amino-acids and so) to be and stay stable.

This is more or less demonstrated by Stanley Miller

Stanley Miller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

As a conclusion we can say that living organisms are formed from non-living matter in the appropriate conditions of colder planets.

one of the first two, more leaning towards abio then exo.

i see it as possible, but not as likely

I tend to apply Occam's Razor and choose abiogenesis as the simpler explanation. I see life as an inevitable/natural expression of complexity, and complexity as consistently increasing over time. The only question (in my mind) is whether or not there has been enough time for earth to achieve the needed complexity without outside input.

Since I don't know what the h*ll I'm talking about, I say "why not?".

On the other hand, intelligent design implies intelligent results. So it's unlikely to have created the weird mess we have.

I don't accept your (wikipedia's) definition of intelligent design, and I probably don't accept a lot of other people's definition, and I'll defend neither. But I believe in intelligent design. (-insofar as it relates to origin of life.)

The "intelligent design" solution requires the prerequisite of the existance of a "being" in the first place. So "how did the intelligent designer came to be?" question makes this argument fold onto itself, putting it into an infinite loop.

things like this make exogenesis seem plausible:

Deinococcus radiodurans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I used to believe in the idea of Direct Panspermia, but now I've given up pretending to know everything