Abiogenesis is a hypothesis, not a theory. It isn't accepted as true, in the scientific cummunity, because it doesn't have adequate levels of evidence to be considered true.
Now you know.
So how do you explain how life started, then?
If you say, "I don't know" then this leaves room that it could have been God. So it's nonsensical to say that there is no God.
1) what if I say "I don't care??" :-) In an academic sense of course I do care, but knowing the answer will not, I think, substantively change my day-to-day life. Unless cool scientific advances come from the answer...
2) The fact that every question on how things work that has ever had a satisfactory answer has come from science, and not from a supernatural being, lends credence to putting a trust that sciene will eventually come up with an answer to any question that science *can* answer. Saying "I don't know" is part of the scientific process. While it's technically true that "I don't know" leaves room that it could have been *a* god, it could have been ANY god. Add to that the fact that with every answer science gives its track record improves, while further worsening the track record of the supernatural. Given all that, it's nonsensical to say that "Well, since I don't know, then god!"