no exceptions
Except for the fact that in some cases there are exceptions such as certain effects at the quantum level that defy relitavistic physics, or the fact that the laws of physics completely breakdown in a singularity, just to point out 2 examples.
Evolution is against the Law of Biogenesis! Evolutionists tell us that living things came from nonliving matter.
The theory of evolution doesn't make any claims regarding the origins of life. If you knew anything about evolutionary theory you would know that. But instead you choose to ignore the facts in favor of false assertions and outright lies.
They also tell us that one kind of animal gave rise to a different kind of animal.
Not in the manner you facitiously describe, The theory of evolution neither describes nor claims that one animal will give birth to a completely different animal, but rather that many aggragate changes over a long period of time and many generations will give rise to a species that is genetically distinct to it's ancestor species.
Evolution doesn't happen over the course of a single generation, but rather many generations each experiencing unique natural and enviromental selective pressures that will evntually give rise to a species that is no longer genetically compatible with it's antecedent species.
Further, evolutionists tell us that this happened over and over again to produce all the millions of animals which have ever existed
Care to give some examples of these animals that evolution supposedly says existed that never did? You can't, because evolution describes a process and makes no inherent claims of existence of any particular species.
But that would break the law!
Only when you ascribe to it claims and properties that are not found in the theory itself. The theory of evolution you have described is a blatant and outright lie meant to misrepresent and decieve.
The Law of Biogenesis is real, and accepted as true by all scientists. Evolution cannot be true, because it is against this law
And it has nothing to do with the theory of evolution since evolutionary theory is not concerned with the origins of life, but rather how selection pressures act on life that already exists.
To have a law there must be a law-giver.
No, there does not. Laws, in the scientific sense, are observations that describe constant on consistent phenomena. What they are not are inviolable and immutable edicts handed down from on high by some transcendent intelligence.
If your so-called "law-giver" existed then the laws of science would never have to have be observed and defined by men because they would have been made known by you "law-giver". You seem to think that "laws" in the legal sense are the same thing as "laws" in the scientific sense, they are not and not amout of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "Yes they are, Yes they are!" will ever make it so.
Who gave us the Law of Biogenesis?
Like I said, No One. Scientific "laws" are observations and codifications of consistent phenomena and reactions.
That Law-Giver could only be God.Emphasis Mine.
"Could only be God."? How so? Have you thoroughly and completely investigated every single possibility, and then wheighed all that evidence to arrive at an answer? Or did you just jump straight to "My God did it." because that's what you want to be true?
Further more, if it "could only have been god", what makes you certain that it was your "god" rather than Zeus, Odin, Jupiter, Allah, YHWH, Brahmin, Ahura Mazda, Angra Mainyu, Eru Illuvatar, Dyaus Pita, Lugh, Hermes Trismegistus, The Twelve Heavenly Generals, Marduk, Atum, Ptah, Kamui, Izanagi and Izanami, Umbombu, Unkulunkulu, Vishvakarman, Coatlique, Huitzilopochtli, Tezcatlipoca, Quetzalcoatl, Viracocha, Ra, Mithrais, Horus, Hapexamendios, Inanna, Sol Invictus, El-Gabal, and Henry Rollins (Praise Henry) just to name a few?
Of course you didn't look into any of them, you discared them, along with the scientific definition of a "law" in favor of idea that of dubious merit that you think will somehow magically validate your assertions.