Still no answer as to why scientists make the claim that life originated from non-living matter without backing it up.
I did answer your question. Your premise is incorrect. You are implying that Scientists claim that it is a settled fact that life originated from non-living. Science doesn't claim that. It is a hypothesis. And Science admits that it is hypothesis and admits that it could be incorrect.
There has been research and evidence that indicates that the hypothesis is plausible, however there is not enough available evidence as of yet to call it a proven theory or fact.
That's where Science and Religion are different. If Science can't prove a claim, the claim is not considered factual.
Religion claims that a God exists, yet, instead of acknowledging that there is no evidence to support the claim, religion holds that God is an undeniable fact without presenting any verifiable evidence.
Don't you see the difference here?
How do you prove something that you have no evidence for? You go and try to find if the evidence is out there.
That's what Scientists do. They make claims, then instead of just accepting the claim as true, they go and find evidence to support the claim. Once they find the evidence, the claim becomes Theory.
What Theists do is as follows: They make claims, then tell everyone else that their claim is fact without any supporting evidence and say that if you do not believe their claim without evidence, something bad will happen to you.