Evolutionists make claims about the origin of life, but then refuse to discuss the issue when you press them for an explanation other than it just happened. I was just reviewing Richard Dawkins book, Climbing Mount Improbable, and he plays it both ways. His conclusion, after all is said and done, is that he thinks the first cell contained some non-replicating RNA. But he is not sure...and he cannot explain where the "non-replicating RNA" came from...so he makes claims, but he can't explain it. But, he does address the issue - and, if I remember correctly, he is considered a leader in the evolutionary movement.
If an evolutionist sticks to the subject - i.e. evolution - than there is NO REASON to discuss the ultimate origin of life - it is outside evolution's jurisdiction.
If an evolutionist wishes to discuss the ultimate origin of life then they are no longer talking about just evolution.
An evolutionist could just as easily believe that God created and is responsible for evolution and there would be no conflict.
Simple enough?