So in fact your argument is completely empty, in that it is not only hypothetical but that it can never be anything other than hypothetical. There are numerous examples of pathways for the evolution of irreducible complexity (depending of course on which flavour of IC is doing the rounds this month). Where is even a hypothetical barrier to their evolution?
IMO
well, yes. That seems to pretty much sum up your argument. In your opinion it couldn't happen, and that should be good enough for everybody.
Notice anything? The true positive is to prove it, not disprove it.
How lovely and disingenuous, what about all the evidence which does suggest such systems are evolveable, such as the many extant examples of systems which represent rudimentary forms of more complex systems in other organisms? Or the experiments where amino acids have arisen from a simulated prebiotic atmosphere organic or self replicating nucleotides have been generated? You are the one making a claim, if it is a claim which has no evidence to support it then we know how much credence we should give it.
TTFN,
WK