that doesn't automatically mean all the answers have been explained
Are you familiar with the term "straw man fallacy"?
If it was good enough to bug Chuck it's good enough for me
Darwin lived 150 years ago. Most of the progress in the origin of life has happened in the past 2 decades.
Until we solve this issue it is not possible to make any absolute statement.
Yes it is possible to say absolutely beyond all reasonable doubt that every living thing evolved from a common ancestor over millions of years. That fact is not in any way dependent on an explanation of the origin of life.
To know what the biochemical charge was (yes cofty scientists absolutely use this term)
Scientists use a lot of terms but if you want to know something you have to ask the question in a way that makes sense. You can't just throw some random sciencey words and phrases around and pretend you have said something.
I'm all ears on how the origin of life started. Happy to listen to anything anyone has to say. But alas no one has said much,
So you want somebody to explain abiogenesis in one post do you? I have a series of almost 40 threads on the evidence for evolution and I haven't scratched the surface yet.
I offered to discuss the evidence with you. All I asked was that you take 2 or 3 minutes to list a few bullet points setting out what you understand about the topic so far. From that starting point I can help you without wasting time on basics that you already know.
I offered to recommend some excellent books that will describe the latest progress but you have ignored my offer. You clearly have no genuine interest.
I will start a new thread on origin of life in the near future.