I certainly do not have to do that. The odds are calculated on combinations irrespective of the actual chemical process and are descriptive of a truly random, undirected chemical reaction. Those numbers then eliminate that particular environment and practically all those similar. What it does not eliminate are the just-so stories produced to attempt to "overcome" the odds. I have no illusion of convincing the Darwininians of anything, they are beyond that, but sensible people will recognize that the numbers presented give us an indication of something. Living things produce chemical compounds that cannot be formed by random, undirected chemical processes. The test for you, if you have a chemical reaction synthesizing the compounds inferred that is plausibly achievable without intelligent interference, is to produce it.
Nonsense, you are just making the fundamental assumption that reproducing discrete life forms flang into existence from piles of raw material unaided by any intermediate steps, and hoping no one notices. I could make the exact same argument about homo sapiens arising from homo erectus.