Why do you think science is "unable" to explain these things? There is a huge difference between "unable" and "hasn't yet". I mean, how long did it take us to figure out genetics? Prior to that we didn't really know how evolution worked to make change over time. We knew that it did, and we knew quite a bit about how, but genetics gave us a very important window into that process that made the theory even more satisfying than before.What Science is not able to explain is the process that made us into living intelligent beings,created out of unintelligent unliving matter.
It is from that foundation,on not knowing the answers to these questions,that they proceed to explain to us ,how this process might have taken place.
Therefore,when your foundation is based on stating that you do not have the answer to these questions,but may possibly have them some day,invalidates any conclusions you may arrive at.
If the foundation is built on sand,the house will come down.
So why do you think that this question of the beginning of life cannot be answered scientifically? Is there some kind of brick wall blocking science from finding it? If so, what is it? If not, isn't it just a matter of time?
Now the rest of this is strange. Nobody is saying that we know how life began and then making all kinds of arguments about other things from that hypothesis. Instead, we know that everything happens by natural causes. The start of life should be no different. Unless you can point to some reason why the start of life cannot possibly be a natural event, what exactly is your problem?
And if you mention Genesis I'll punch a baby seal in the face because the stupid will have broken this camel's back.
Stick to reality for this one, please.