Not according to evolutionists.
That you have confused this very basic premise shows that you likely don't have the scientific backing to understand evolution enough to discredit it.
No disrespect intended, but I believe that YOU have confused a basic premise. It's not just at the beginning point (the first cell) that evolution fails. It fails ALL THE WAY THROUGH the development of life. Invoking a divine escape to explain the origin of the first cell does not get away from the problem of the transformations and sudden appearances of new orders at pulses all through the history of life. Even if evolutionists conceded that the first cell had to be created, they'd still be in an impossible position explaining the rest of the story.
Darwin, to be fair, made some valid observations based on adaptive radiation. But he mistakenly generalized beyond the evidence. And if evolution had no philosophical implications, his error would have been rejected by later generations of scientists.
Your Ph.D in Chemistry does not make you an expert in matters of Biology
Actually, Biology has been a hobby of mine all through my career, Anthropology in particular. And I do have the training to understand other people's work. But, let us stipulate for the sake of argument, that I know nothing of Biology. But I do know chemistry, which is the foundation of biology. And the chemistry of macroevolution cannot work.
Of course they are. Darwin did want to include it but knew he would be laughed at if he tried so he settled for half a loaf. His buddy Huxley only denied that it was part of evolution some 10 years after Pasteur disproved spontaneous generation. Evolution is materialism and materialism needs to deny God.