well, apparently carbon IS easy to make.
Our entire core is made of iron--which is harder to make than carbon. (core for earth, that is).
And I'm not positive, but I'd say there is more iron in the core of our earth than their is carbon on the surface.
and how else to you interpret the state "much less relevant until they explain carbon".
and, just so you know--how did God make life?
all abiogenesis means is that life came from from non-life. And seeing as how god made man from dust (which is non life--especially if the dust is soil, which is what seems to be implied by statements like from dust you came, to dust you go (or whatever that cliche is).
As far as I can tell--God made life from non-life, and considering that he is all powerful, why can't, or couldn't he?
You have this idea in your head that science is anti-god. you've got the wrong philosophical base for that. science is methodological naturalism. ontological naturalism is the philosophy that says there is no god, period. the former doesn't care either way.
so, that means that science is doing this--finding out how the world works, regardless if God is behind the laws and theories or not. science does not have an official position on god. got it? get it? good. now quit whining about the atheistic conspiracy of science and how it tries to stamp out god.
All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences