You're just wrong. And I defy you to prove otherwise.
Evolution is about the origin of species, a completely different concept than the origin of life.
Nope. When you go back to square one, you've got to deal with the non-living/living problem, haven't you? The logic of pure, materialistic evolution absolutely must all the way back to raw, non-living components, somehow assembling themselves into living matter. Were it not to assume this, then there would be no dismissal of ID as "non-science."
Of course, the real "proof," if you will, is in the fact that people have been and continue trying very hard to replicate the origins of life, "in a test tube," as it were. Why would they do that, if they didn't already think that's how it happened in the first place?
An honest "we don't know" would be refreshing, as would an honest "we think it happened this way." But the "doesn't address the beginning of life" argument is a cop-out.