As I said before, calcuations of probability in systems with that many boundary conditions are not possible at all. The model was not "generous", it had no bearing on reality whatsoever.
Abiogenesis is a hazy area of science, but it certainly hasn't been falsified. In any case, it has nothing to with any other theories of evolution, such as humans and apes evolving from a common ancestor, for example.
And, he shows why the Paleozoic and Mesozoic are the result of giant world-wide catastrophe, not a slow sedimentation over billions of years.
Absolutely ridiculous. Anyone with a full understanding of a high-school level earth science course could understand why. Geologists abandoned catastrophism over 300 years ago because it doesn't explain anything observed in the geological world. The advent of radiometry in the 20th century was the final nail in the coffin of this line of reasoning, lone crackpots aside.
"Geologists abandoned catastrophism over 300 years ago because it doesn't explain anything observed in the geological world."
Incorrect. They abandoned it on philosophical grounds, and have been recovering catastrophism a little at a time ever since.