The creation of amino acids from a knockoff of "primeval soup" refers to the Miller-Urey experiments in the 60's. They used an oxygen-reducing atmosphere made up of methane, ammonia and hydrogen to achieve the desired result. It is generally accepted within the scientific community that the Earth's early atmosphere did not have these characteriestics.
Abiogenesis is a greater leap than faith in God. Even the simplest organism capable of sustaining an independent existence is incredibly complex. The simplest known organisms, prokaryote bacteria, are miniturized factories more complex than the Space Shuttle. Add to this the fact that DNA, RNA and proteins are mutually interdependent and it is more difficult to believe in self-organization from inanimate building blocks.
The holes in the theory of evolution are growing larger and more inexplicable coincident with advances in microbiology, chemistry and physics. While evolutionists like to lump all creationists into the "young Earth" camp, the origins of the universe and the origins of life are far more complex and scientific evidence uncovered in recent years is increasingly pointing to intelligent design.
Who are the people in the scientific community that are stating the the early Earth atmosphere was not made up of methane, amonia and hydrogren?
Hydrogen is the most abumdant element in the universe, so derived molecules such as methane and amonia would be expected.
Funny, every astronomy book that I just looked at this morning stated exactly the opposite of your claim.
Is your statement another example of what the today's article was about?
As the very first week of any beginning science course emphasizes, scientific theories cannot be "proved": that's not the way it works. They can only be disproved. I have to believe Darwin was aware of this and therefor never made the statement attributed to him.
As far as transitional types are concerned, the record is full of them, including the famous moth which got darker as the air got dirtier.