The problem for you is that, under the natural (i.e. non-laboratory, and therefore non-controlled) circumstances posited by the "early earth amino acid to proteins" scenario, the system operates under equilibrium conditions. Hence, in this scenario, Le Chatelier's DOES prevent this condensation reaction from occurring. And yes, evolutionists have tried all kinds of arguments - directing clays, thermal vents, etc. - to gett around this, but none have shown any experimental promise. I haven't even addressed the kinetics of the system, for the simple fact that you actually have to have an appreciable reaction before kinetics have any importance. BTW, the Le Chatelier's argument is only one of many empirical arguments that doom the traditional evolutionist theories about the naturalistic formation of life in an early earth scenario. We've not even discussed the effects of hard UV on amino acids (no oxygen = no ozone), or the problems with the racemicity of the product AAs.
You need to study your chemistry. In order for Le Chatelier's Principle to work, you have to have reactivity. And then you have to look at the stability and reactivity of the products involved. Le Chatilier's Principle does not prevent a reaction from occuring. It has nothing to do with it. If you were a chemist you would understand why. You are also wrongly working on the assumption that amino acid condensation/hydrolysis is the only pathway in such a system as our early Earth. I wasn't aware that chemistry operated differently in the lab than in the natural environment. It is foolish to think of an environment as diverse as one would find on a planet would be restricted to one set of chemical circumstances. The variety of conditions is incredibly diverse.
And yes, evolutionists have tried all kinds of arguments - directing clays, thermal vents, etc. - to gett around this, but none have shown any experimental promise. I haven't even addressed the kinetics of the system, for the simple fact that you actually have to have an appreciable reaction before kinetics have any importance. BTW, the Le Chatelier's argument is only one of many empirical arguments that doom the traditional evolutionist theories about the naturalistic formation of life in an early earth scenario. We've not even discussed the effects of hard UV on amino acids (no oxygen = no ozone), or the problems with the racemicity of the product AAs.
And you don't understand evolution. None of what you discuss above has anything to do with it. That's abiogenesis and is a differnt field of study completely. There is a lot of interesting work being done there, but it is not evolution.