The lack of evidence for that notion effectively refutes it.
You are mistaken. There is a great deal of evidence for abiogenesis. The genetic and biochemical evidence is rather complex, but in short the nature of the most primitive types of cells is what one would expect if those cells had arisen through biochemical abiogenesis via natural means. For one example, they are chemoautotrophs which rely on FeS products within their proteins. Even today, the Krebs cycle, which our mitochondria use to produce the energy we live on, is based entirely on acid reactants which would have been highly useful in mineral-based anabolic life -- the kind predicted by abiogenesis. And so on. Opportunism by the earliest forms of replicating chemicals would constrain the types of life that could result from an abiogenetic process -- and life as we know it matches those constraints in countless ways, which is strongly supporting evidence for abiogenesis.
Basically it is as provable as Creationism.
*cough*. If that helps you feel better, go for it.