Replies

"I don't know how it started , but it started." <-----That's your version of science.

Actually, that's just his personal explanation. A more "scientific" response would be "we have insufficient data to adequately formulate a theory on the ultimate origin of life -- though we do have a few competing hypothesis. Nonetheless, that life exists now and that physical evidence indicates that at one time this planet could not sustain life at all (and moreover, at one time this planet did not even exist) is sufficient cause to believe that there was a process by which the first life forms appeared on earth, even if we cannot yet explain that process."

That or "Evolution has nothing t do with how life started." That would be like saying "Gravity has nothing to do with mass."

No, it would be like saying "Gravity has nothing to do how mass (and energy, since matter and energy are ultimately the same thing) ultimately came into existence", which is accurate.