Oh, I don't 'do' science, I only read other persons' comments. I can barely comprehend the concepts most scientists are working with.
I just read stuff like this and wonder about the implications of it and if there is any countervailing evidence:
We do not understand even the general features of the origin of the genetic code . . . [it] is the most baffling aspect of the problem of the origins of life.
(Leslie Orgel, New Scientist, 15 April 1982, 151)
The problem for biology is to reach a simple beginning . . . Most of the biochemical complexity of life was present already at the time the oldest surface rocks of Earth were formed. Thus we have no clue, even from evidence which penetrates very far back in time, as to how the information standard of life was set up in the first place, and so the evolutionary theory lacks a proper foundation.
(Sir Fred Hoyle & Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution From Space, 1981, 8)
Thus there is a paradox. Both nucleic acids and proteins are required to function before selection can act at present, and yet the origin of this association is too improbable to have occurred without selection.
(T. Dobzhansky et al, Evolution, 1977, 359)
The gap between a rich organic environment with all the necessary precursors . . . and the simplest organized life, remains immense . . . It is difficult to visualize the steps by which they may have originated, because the various processes which occur in them are interdependent; none can function without the others.
(J. Butler, The Life Process, 1970, 185,188-189)
All the quotes that you've provided deal with the origin of life not evolution. Evolution simply states that once life is in place, variations in that life will be selected and will reproduce preferentially. This is the explanation for all of the varied forms of life that exist today.