Lying for Darwin on the Origin of Life

On Question Evolution Day, I had some greenish soup that I called "Darwin's warm little pond." Darwin speculated to a hooker —

"That was Joseph Hooker, Cowboy Bob. Pay attention!"

Oh, right. He thought maybe life came from a warm little pond. Some evolutionists think it is the likely scenario for the OoL, other have far different ideas. One of the big lies from Darwin's disciples is that abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution, but that is repeatedly shown to be false.

Made at Redkid

What is probably the main reason OoL is disassociated from evolution is that it cannot happen by itself, and defies many facts of science. What is probably the main reason naturalists distance themselves from the abiogenesis problem is that the logical conclusion is our Creator made it happen. (Ironically, one term for the OoL is chemical evolution.) Instead, many evolutionists want everyone to spot them that insurmountable problem so they can commence to dealing from the bottom of the deck to build other evolutionary stories. Similarly, the bricks at BLM riots had to be furnished, and neither made nor threw themselves.

EDIT 24 February 2022, from the "See, I told you so! department." A few hours after this was posted on Fakebook, these hatetheists helped prove one of my points, as I expected:

Used under federal Fair Use provisions for educational purposes
They're still gnawing on that bone. The stories seem like some folks have been chawin' on peyote buttons, but hey, they're scientists, so whatever speculations they have must be science. It is a fact that some of the most basic building blocks of life have been found to occur in nature, but they are a mighty long way from being organized into something useful like cells and all that good stuff.

In [Darwin's] religion, Nature makes itself— no Designer needed. Naturally, his disciples took his program further and started naturalistic doctrines about the origin of life, the origin of planets, the origin of stars, and the origin of the universe, all making itself without intelligence or direction.

Nobody has witnessed any of these things happen. Today, the Origin-of-Life (OOL) field is active, confident, and dogmatic. Scientific papers appear regularly about the origin of life, but they are all based on lies. It gets tiring to have to repeat this. Chemistry forbids it, thermodynamics forbids it, probability forbids it, and reason forbids it. In the Origin of Lie cult, the “building blocks of lie” are suggestions that an amino acid here, or a nucleobase there, or a clay mineral over yonder might help “shed light” on the origin of life. It’s all smoke and mirrors.

Before I give you the link to read the full article, I need to say that the Intelligent Design cheerleading in it leaves me cold. While creationists use intelligent design arguments and examples, the ID movement does not go far enough, and leaves the Creator out. Famous atheist Antony Flew became convinced that there was some sort of creator, but apparently went to his grave without knowing Jesus Christ, the Creator. If that's the case, he was just as lost as a Deist as when he was an atheist.

Okay, the main article is definitely worth reading, and is found at "Darwin and the Origin of Lie." Also, I am asking you to read (or listen to the audio by my favorite reader) "One Step Closer to Life?"