You're talking about the law, I'm talking about the principle that underpins the law and what the law should be as a result. These are two separate topics.
I am also saying I agree strongly with the law's straight-forward stipulation that abstract material is ineligible. There's no justification for letting someone patent things just because they went to a lot of trouble to find or create something obscure, if it is entirely imaginary (abstract) or part of nature.