If a man told you that he walked out his front door, and heard a bird, chirpping at random, a concert perfect rendition of Beethovens Fifth, which would you judge more likely? That it DID happen? Or that he was most likely a nut? I think most would view the guy as a nut, even if it IS statistically possible (though remote). Meanwhile, you expect me to believe that a DNA molecule (let alone all the further development and biodiversity) which is far more complex than any musical score... happened by pure random chance and accident. IMO, you're the nut who thought he heard the bird chirp the song by random chance.
But as for myself... I prefer not to make any judgement about which is the truth until proven, nor to discard any idea until disproven. After all... maybe the bird DID chirp the tune and you really heard it.
That is a fallacious argument, you are trying to anectotalize an absurd situation and apply it to millions of years and millions of years of slow evolution.
This says much more about abiogenesis than evolution.
You are making the erroneous assumption that the first self replicator was a DNA string as complex as we find today. This is unwarranted as DNA is not necessary, RNA makes a fine replicator and the initial molecule of RNA did not need to be of modern length.
It is much more likely for a 10 nucleotide ditty to be whistled than is a lengthy 670 billion nucleotide concerto. All this ditty (phrase) needs do is replicate with some dissonance (a few sour horns or wood winds) and some recapitulation thrown in to eventually result in a rather lengthy symphony.