Does Death Pose Challenge To Abiogenesis

The entire problem with your argument exists within this single statement: Your basic premise, that once-living deceased entities have all of the requirements for life in place,is simply false, ergo your conclusion is false.Once-living organisms die because the requirements for life are no longer in place.For example: when a person is shot in the head, one of the requirements for the continued life of the organism (a functioning brain to regulate the other organs of the body) is no longer "in place."Death obviously happens for innumerable reasons, but they all boil down to the same thing: the set of necessary factors to allow an organism to continue to regulate its own metabolism are no longer in place to one degree or another. This is true whether the result of an injury that damages an organ that regulates other organs or produces a chemical required for the rest of the organism, or the simple result of aggregate destabilization in chemical processes due to any number of other factors.All forms of life have specific ranges of tolerance for the availability of energy, replacement compounds for self-repair or reproduction, and basic environmental tolerances such as heat or the absence of a predator ripping it apart. Death occurs when those tolerances are either not met or are exceeded beyond their maximum.Death, basically by definition, means that the requirements for life are no longer present.Your premise states that, when an organism dies, all of the requirements for life are still present. This is false. Therefore your conclusion that the extant prerequisites of life should then live again if abiogenesis is possible is false.