Your mind says so. But science doesn't.
This is error number two (1. is untruthfulness): That is, by your own logic, creationists presume science to do what it doesn't purport to do. And when science fails to provide the answers you seek, you assume it has failed.
Science doesn't do the supernatural, by its own straightforward admission, and it declines abiogenesis as a part of evolution theory.
Really though, the fact that evoltuionists try so hard to distance themselves from abiogenesis, does not look good for evolutionists. It really does come across looking as a copout. Now I know that they will deny that they are doing that (copping out) but it would only help them if they came up with a better answer than, "Evolution has nothing to do with abiogenesis". Asking about the *origins* is really a logical step. If you keep going back to the simplist forms, eventually you get to the first one and it only makes sense to ask where that came from. I don't see that that is an unreasonable question to ask.
BTW, your last statement makes it sound like science considers abiogenesis to be a supernatural event. I don't know if you intended that or not.