“I disagree that random energy focused on random atoms and/or molecules alone is sufficient to overcome a system’s statistical inclination toward disorder (entropy) and thereby create order. This is especially unconvincing given the volumes, areas, and energies comparative in each.”
Sunlight isn’t random energy though. Combined with planetary revolution and rotation, it’s quite regular and predictable, evidenced by its ability to create predictable weather cycles and day/night cycles. Once you have ordered, organized cycles like that, it is no leap to see how other processes would naturally tend to synchronize and result in a pretty stable, ordered system.
You are indeed entitled to your hypothesis and I salute you for it.
As I understand the evolutionary theory requires a spasmodic soup of chemicals, impacts, and other chaotic processes in order to justify the coaxing of life from the primordial ooze, such a situation is in direct contradiction to the stable predicatable, and regular cycle to which you reference.
Now I will admit that neither you nor I can properly test our Hypothoses, as it is a statistical impossibility to prove a negative in a singular opportunity situation with no repeated experiments. As such both you and I must continue to observe and support our hypothoses based upon the available system, hoping for additional credible evidence that is supportive of whichever is being proposed.
Evolution, Creation, and other cosmologic theories, not being able to disapprove another (though I personally think the lack of turtles in space does tend to disprove the whole turtles all the way down theory), for this reason cannot become Laws but must remain theories.
Thus I arrive back at my original post related to the Law of Entropy quite dishelved, thus providing further prove that a closed system will tend toward thermodynamic equilibrium and disorder.